Metagame np: Stage 6 - The Boys Are Back

[Steakburgers]

I also think one thing we should keep in mind is also the difference between a "centralising threat" e.g. Sneasel / gallade and a "threat that needs to be prepared for". Something like Malamar is a perfect example. By no means broken, Malamar has found a comfy home in A rank in NU. However, its not one of those mons that are naturally countered. You need to run specific coverage on one of your mons (e.g. siganl beam) or prevent it from superpowering to get boosts (e.g. ghosts, haze, Quagsire). Malamar can be considered centralising because it forces you to run a counter of some sort without being ridiculously weak to it. But, its counters are accessable to normal teams. This is preparing for a top threat, not something that's centralising and broken.

tl;dr be careful with what is a top tier Mon that requires some centralisation,(see Malamar/Samurott) and a Mon that is centralising because its broken (Sneasel / Gallade)

Great post man. Malamar is pretty scary if you arent running u-turn or sig beam or unaware quag, but luckily, 2 of those 3 things are pretty common
I dunno so much about signal beam, but if I have a team without u-turn on it, I delete it and start over
As someone said in the nu room, some of our best psychics are leaving by usage
So I don't think we'll have to worry too much, especially if we get shiftry

 

[Aasgier]

Well, if you ask me, I think Knock Off is a bigger problem than Sneasel and Gallade, not to mention that it is what makes Sneasel broken in the first place.
Gallade becomes also much easier to counter with Knock Off out of the way (Psychic-types suddenly wall it), Malamar is less of a problem since it has a slightly harder time defeating Ghosts, Sawk - another thing that is a huge problem for balance-takes a huge nerf...

I think suspecting Knock Off might be the better choice. Sneasel and Gallade are both (partially) considered broken because of their access to this move, and even then it is stupidly spammable on everything else. "Leftover moveslot? Does it have Knock Off? Yes? Problem solved!"

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Knock Off isn't uncompetitive like Swagger. It doesn't rely on luck. I don't understand why Knock Off being suspected is taken seriously. Knock Off is an amazing move, but it certainly doesn't warrant a ban in my opinion. Yes, Gallade and Sneasel having Knock Off is a big part of what makes them potentially broken, but so is their ability to run a Swords Dance set. Does that mean we should ban Swords Dance? No

 

[Aasgier]

I never stated Knock Off was uncompetitive, let alone that it relies on luck. I only said it was stupidly spammable, up to the point that there is very little reason not to run it on anything with a half-decent attack stat, whether it is Sneasel, Sawk, Zangoose, Sandslash, Gallade and like everything else that gets it.

This is even more true for Neverused, since most teams don't have a mega in this tier (Audino only being viable on some variants of Balance and Stall, and even then it often prefers Lefties and Regenerator).

 

[HJAD]

I never stated Knock Off was uncompetitive, let alone that it relies on luck. I only said it was stupidly spammable, up to the point that there is very little reason not to run it on anything with a half-decent attack stat, whether it is Sneasel, Sawk, Zangoose, Sandslash, Gallade and like everything else that gets it.

This is even more true for Neverused, since most teams don't have a mega in this tier (Audino only being viable on some variants of Balance and Stall, and even then it often prefers Lefties and Regenerator).

Couldn't the exact same be said about the likes of Thunderbolt, Earthquake, and Close Combat? All of which are stupidly good moves, which provide excellent coverage, and little reason not to use them on any capable mon?

I personally think that Knock Off has a stigma attached to it. Everyone who associates anything bad with Gen 6 immediately associates it with Knock Off, and the Power Creep. It's not a broken move in the slightest, and its just a coverage move you need to account for. In the same way Energy Ball on Mesprit is a coverage move you have to consider, Knock Off on Sawk is now something you have to consider, you can now mindlessly bring in your Ghost / Psychic type without risking being hit by Knock Off.

Also, Gallade would still be as broken with, or without, Knock Off. It has such a wide plethora of movepools- taking one move away from it is like taking one haribo out of a bag of many. He'll just take another one, and stomp the tier even more. If anything, it would make Gallade MORE broken, since we don't have Knock Off on Sneas to check it.

 

[Orphic]

Gonna post my thoughts here for the first time in a while, I've been trying to gather my thoughts a lot about the meta before saying anything rash.

I'd like to point out that I feel like we can agree that on their own, Sneasel or Gallade, are both manageable/scary on a scale of managebleness if you will. Sneasel has checks, but will grab a kill or two, but can be handled. Same with Gallade, less checks, but has other flaws that mean yeah it's scary, but also manageable. I feel like take one away, much like with the Typhlosion + MRupt meta but to a larger extent, and the other will be more manageable. It's only the huge wealth of strong pokemon right now that's making people scream suspect. When team preview pops up and your opponent has both Gallade and Sneasel and maybe a Sawk too, it's scary, there's no way to handle that without packing your team with checks, or bringing a mirror match up, therefore individually, Sneasel and Gallade do not centralise the tier, but as a pair, they do, massively. I would support, therefore, a suspect of both at the same time. I feel like Gallade's fighting/psychic/dark movesets cover the whole tier, and you cannot switch things reliably into it, but Sneasel is just the pesky fast revenge killer and wallbreaker Gallade needs to be broken, so yeah, get rid of both, or one, that's what needs to happen for a healthier meta right now.

I'm gonna address what's being said about Knock Off, because some of it makes me quite frustrated with the mind sets of players. A move that is spammable, is not a problem. Since gen 1, Earthquake, as HJAD said, has been a move that most offensive pokemon can use, and spam to their best interests. In gen 4, we got Scald, did we think it was a problem? No, game freak gives us these options because we're supposed to use them, not just ban everything that's slightly problematic. Scald is something people have joked about banning a lot, but in reality, it's just something you account for in teambuilding and during battles, the same with Knock Off. Simple, ghosts aren't solid fighting checks anymore, hence, the meta has evolved a lot; see; Golurk usage since gen 5 has plummeted. My opinion is if you don't like Knock Off, tough. I'm not one to sit here and scream ban at every move that causes me trouble, same with mons, but I am sick of Gallade+Sneasel+4 fillers on every high ladder team and so that is something that makes me want to ban them.

I also think this applies to what HJAD has been arguing about Malamar, threats are meant to be prepared for. You cannot enter a game with a load of E rank mons and bitch when you get flattened by a Kangaskhan, you know? Things change, Knock Off is a part of the game now, and you must account for it, the same way you account for all the other moves and mons in the meta, because you don't want to get flattened every game.

 

[Shuckleking87]

Couldn't the exact same be said about the likes of Thunderbolt, Earthquake, and Close Combat? All of which are stupidly good moves, which provide excellent coverage, and little reason not to use them on any capable mon?

No obviously not, first off there are pokes that have immunities to all of those moves, so if you do spam them you can give free switches. For knock off you dont necessarily have to predict, as at the very least the opponent loses its item.

I'm gonna address what's being said about Knock Off, because some of it makes me quite frustrated with the mind sets of players. A move that is spammable, is not a problem. Since gen 1, Earthquake, as HJAD said, has been a move that most offensive pokemon can use, and spam to their best interests. In gen 4, we got Scald, did we think it was a problem? No, game freak gives us these options because we're supposed to use them, not just ban everything that's slightly problematic. Scald is something people have joked about banning a lot, but in reality, it's just something you account for in teambuilding and during battles, the same with Knock Off. Simple, ghosts aren't solid fighting checks anymore, hence, the meta has evolved a lot; see; Golurk usage since gen 5 has plummeted. My opinion is if you don't like Knock Off, tough. I'm not one to sit here and scream ban at every move that causes me trouble, same with mons, but I am sick of Gallade+Sneasel+4 fillers on every high ladder team and so that is something that makes me want to ban them.

Please let me know who said that a spammable move is a problem, which is what you are implying. Aasgier was saying that there is no reason for a poke that has a good attack stat to not have knock off. Yea for sure, alot of the reason why these pokes run knock off is that it's a strong (usually 130 base power) move that fits well with the coverage that poke needs to hit ghost and sometimes psychic types. and I mean I could easlily tell you, if you dont like Gallade and Sneasel in NU, well tough. Youcanuseit2. That really makes no sense to tell someone "thats not right to think to have a knock off ban" when you propose a ban of your own, and sneasel would not be banworthy if it werent for knock off because your switch ins dont have to worry about losing leftovers.

I dont agree with a knock off ban, but I certainly understand where Aasgier is coming from.

 

[Aasgier]

Actually, you can make a team with E-rank mons only and be perfectly safe from Kang (Quilladin!).

Couldn't the exact same be said about the likes of Thunderbolt, Earthquake, and Close Combat? All of which are stupidly good moves, which provide excellent coverage, and little reason not to use them on any capable mon?

I personally think that Knock Off has a stigma attached to it. Everyone who associates anything bad with Gen 6 immediately associates it with Knock Off, and the Power Creep. It's not a broken move in the slightest, and its just a coverage move you need to account for. In the same way Energy Ball on Mesprit is a coverage move you have to consider, Knock Off on Sawk is now something you have to consider, you can now mindlessly bring in your Ghost / Psychic type without risking being hit by Knock Off.

Also, Gallade would still be as broken with, or without, Knock Off. It has such a wide plethora of movepools- taking one move away from it is like taking one haribo out of a bag of many. He'll just take another one, and stomp the tier even more. If anything, it would make Gallade MORE broken, since we don't have Knock Off on Sneas to check it.

Thunderbolt, Earthquake and Close Combat do not remove my item, and even if they would... something like Golurk or Haunter could switch into two of those moves without taking damage at all (because you know, immunities), and thus keeping their items. Nothing is outright immune to Knock Off - so everything can have its item taken away. Knock Off being used against something with an item is also a fair bit more powerful than all other moves without downsides like a miss chance or increasing your vulnerability to priority, especially Extremespeed. The sole exception being Earthquake, but I don't see EQ on things that don't get STAB on it all that often anymore, except Grass-types and Ice-types if they happen to learn it (Fighting-types have no reason to with Knock Off and Stone Edge in their movepool), but that is pretty similar to how Water-types run Ice Beam and Ground-types run Stone Edge or Rock Blast - it counters their weaknesses or at least helps mitigating them. Knock Off is different, and literally every mon that can learn it and has an actual attack stat (and even some that don't) carry it.
Scald is a better example of something that is ridiculously annoying, but at least Water Absorb and Storm Drain exist, as well as Water Veil, helping to mitigate its secondary effect.
Knock Off doesn't have anything that is immune to it.

Also, Gallade without Knock Off means it is much easier to counter, especially with bulky Psychics. It can't 2HKO stuff like Musharna anymore and things like Xatu are an even bigger threat to it as they can now reliably switch in. Night Slash is a whole lot weaker after all (and doesn't take away Leftovers at best and Eviolite at worst).

Also, the fact that Colbur Berry is extremely common on Psychics shows how centralizing Knock Off is - it is a suboptimal item ran to counter a specific move. I have never seen that really happen before except in Doubles and lure sets before. Partly this is because of Sneasel and Gallade, but it is also partly because of Knock Off being centralizing.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Aasgier The reason that I mentioned Swagger in relation to Knock Off is that, as far as I know, Swagger is the only move to have ever been banned by Smogon. The reason for it's ban was that no matter what pokemon used it, it was relying purely on luck, and therefore uncompetitive. Since Knock Off doesn't follow this precedence, I don't think it has a reason to be banned. For example, Bulbasaur learns Knock Off, but just because it learns Knock Off doesn't make it broken or uncompetitive. To ban Knock Off and not two or three or whatever mons that are broken that possess Knock Off would imply that everything that learns Knock Off is broken.

Shuckleking87 Not to poke too hard at your post, but Knock Off gets a 1.5 boost when removing an item. Therefore, it's a 97.5 base power move, which is still strong, but not absurd like 130. Also, I believe it was Aasgier, not Orphic, that first implied that Knock Off is a spammable move, and because of that a problem. HJAD further iterated this by comparing Knock Off to other "spammable" moves.

 

[Liarliarpantsonfire]

Nothing is outright immune to Knock Off - so everything can have its item taken away.

Sticky Hold Swalot would beg to differ.

Also stuff like Occa Berry Metagross or Shucatran was commonplace back in gen 4. If people want to run Colbur Xatu just let them. It's not because Knock Off is very common that Colbur doesn't have other applications, it's just a bonus.

 

[QueenOfLuvdiscs]

Sticky Hold just keeps Knock Off at 97.5BP, so like Aasgier said, nothing is immune.

 

[Aasgier]

Still, Swalot can keep its item, so technically he is right because I stated nothing can avoid its item being taken away (which is not correct because Sticky Hold exists). But yes, most Sticky Hold users do not want to switch into either Gallade or Sneasel, being weak to Psycho Cut or just getting 2HKO'd by a Banded Knock Off after hazards... assuming max HP and max Def investment on Swalot.

Aasgier The reason that I mentioned Swagger in relation to Knock Off is that, as far as I know, Swagger is the only move to have ever been banned by Smogon. The reason for it's ban was that no matter what pokemon used it, it was relying purely on luck, and therefore uncompetitive. Since Knock Off doesn't follow this precedence, I don't think it has a reason to be banned. For example, Bulbasaur learns Knock Off, but just because it learns Knock Off doesn't make it broken or uncompetitive. To ban Knock Off and not two or three or whatever mons that are broken that possess Knock Off would imply that everything that learns Knock Off is broken.

Does it? Does a move have to make literally everything that possesses it to become broken to be heavily overpowered/centralizing itself? I disagree. A move that is extremely splashable on all mons that can learn it as long as they have a decent attack stat, is probably banworthy too, even moreso if it happens to push a few mons over the edge.

Sure, it is a controversial decision to make, but I believe it is better than to just ban these two [Sneasel and Gallade] and then suspect another pair of culprits that just happened to be pushed over the edge thanks to their access to this move, or even an obvious teammate's access to this move.


Edit:

Also stuff like Occa Berry Metagross or Shucatran was commonplace back in gen 4. If people want to run Colbur Xatu just let them. It's not because Knock Off is very common that Colbur doesn't have other applications, it's just a bonus.

Sorry if my Gen IV knowledge is insufficient - I did not play back then - but wasn't ShucaTran just a lure set? Same for a few other Berries (Yache Garchomp from Gen V also comes to mind, as well as Colbor Golurk in NU to lure and defeat Skuntank seeking to revenge kill with Sucker Punch or Pursuit).

 

[Finchinator]

I'd like to precursor this by saying that, like most of you, I am not content with the current state of the metagame due to pokemon like Sneasel and Gallade restricting gameplay, teambuilding, etc. With that being said, I strongly disagree with some assertions, points, and overall arguments that have been made on the subject of a prospective Knock Off suspect (I don't have a clue if there will be a Knock Off suspect, a Sneasel suspect, a Gallade suspect, or something else - I'm merely stating my own opinion on the matter).

Don't tell me you were seriously suggesting a knock off suspect..

Next we'll suspect Stealth Rock, Scald, and Pursuit.

I don't want to single you out as your post was not entirely serious or thorough, but it seemed to gain a lot of support and set the tone for the subsequent posts, so responding to it is pretty necessary.

The "suspect Knock Off and then we will end up suspecting [insert move that can be seen as restrictive or controversial in some sense] in the future" line of logic is not valid for a couple reasons. First and foremost, it's a slippery slope. Each move should be treated on a case by case basis - if there is a legitimate case for Knock Off to be suspected or banned, then it should be suspected and potentially banned while if there is not a legitimate case for Knock Off to be suspected or banned, then it should not be suspected. Knock Off being broken or not has no correlation to another move like Stealth Rock, Scald, or Pursuit (the three you listed) being a potential suspect in the future. The above probably sounds obvious as these moves don't effect each other much, but the conclusion I'm drawing off of this is: if the tier leaders deem it appropriate to suspect or ban a move due to it being consistently detrimental to the state of the metagame (I'm not saying this is the case - this is all hypothetical) instead of taking a traditional route and banning various users of the move, like Gallade and Sneasel for Knock Off, then it is perfectly valid for them to suspect the move. If the suspecting of a move is valid and there is no correlation between one move's brokenness and another move's brokenness, then saying that the suspecting of one move will lead to another move being suspected in the future isn't logical - it is just an excuse to label this all as unprecedented so that something you oppose will not be done without actually providing an argument as for why it shouldn't happen.

The only one suspect worthy in that case would be Musharna. Come to think of it, a triple suspect of a Fighting/Psychic/Dark core is not necessarily a bad idea. This same core has been centralizing the tier for the past two generations and kicking out 3 close to broken mons at once would without question be healthy for the tier. Like you simply can't look back at the Spiritomb and Shiftry meta's and say they were good. More often than not it was Dark-type (preferably with Pursuit) + Gurdurr/Sawk + random 4 team members.

Before I tackle this post, I'd like the state that we make tiering decisions based off of what will make the current metagame the best, not off of fears of a hypothetical future metagame that could have pokemon arise as broken if a pokemon that checks them gets banned. If we acted in this fashion and employed this philosophy, then we would be too scared to ban anything and the tier would never reach a balance or improve in general. Deej Dy's post preceding this one (before last post on page 10) asks what would happen if Psychic types became broken if Sneasel got banned and the answer is plain and simple: we would suspect the potentially broken Psychic type(s) like we would any other pokemon if we encountered this problem; however, we do not know that this would occur and we cannot let a hypothetical theory cast doubt over how we deal with the tier in the present (essentially, I am echoing what Choice Banned said, but in more depth as he also said that we should deal with things as they become problematic).

Now that I've covered what provoked this post, I'll respond directly to the proposal within it. You have no way of knowing that Musharna would suddenly become broken if Sneasel was banned - there is no NU metagame that lacks Sneasel currently and you have no way to know what it would be like besides theorizing that it would (theorymon is never a valid backing for an argument and shouldn't be used in discussions of the current metagame for the most part). A triple suspect of Fighting + Psychic + Dark is far from necessary in the current metagame as pokemon like Sneasel or Gallade themselves are what is problematic, not a core of this sort or anything along those lines. If banning a pokemon (or move) will fix the problem the current metagame is facing, then that should be done - not a complex, unnecessarily limiting, and unwarranted alternative like the one you are proposing.

Knock Off isn't uncompetitive like Swagger. It doesn't rely on luck. I don't understand why Knock Off being suspected is taken seriously. Knock Off is an amazing move, but it certainly doesn't warrant a ban in my opinion. Yes, Gallade and Sneasel having Knock Off is a big part of what makes them potentially broken, but so is their ability to run a Swords Dance set. Does that mean we should ban Swords Dance? No

I find it sort of strange how you put words in our mouths about this Knock Off-Swagger comparison, which was never actually made by the person you were responding to and should never be made as they're totally different moves with different effects, and then proceed to make a comparison between Knock Off and Swords Dance which disregards and misrepresents the entire argument behind Knock Off while not being valid in itself.

It is true that Gallade and Sneasel both use Knock Off and can both use Swords Dance; however, this doesn't mean that you can equate the two as each move has its merits and effect on gameplay. Knock Off cripples everything it hits bar Mega Audino, regardless of who uses it, and given that the tier is heavy on Psychic types, lacking many things that can withstand Fighting attacks while not minding Knock Off, and the home of various Eviolite users that especially rely upon their item, Knock Off is obviously easy and convenient to abuse. Swords Dance, on the contrary, is used on only a handful of pokemon, all of which occasionally have trouble finding a free turn to set up, are vulnerable to being revenge killed even if they get a free turn to set up, and can be stopped by a counter or something like Unaware Quagsire (SD Sneasel isn't even the best set while SD Gallade is admittedly potent, but CB is also very good and Gallade itself doesn't belong in the tier). I don't want to go too far off on this tangent on why your comparison is lackluster, but it should be evident by now that just because Sneasel and Gallade both carry Swords Dance at times, like Knock Off, doesn't mean the two moves are equatable at all.

Returning to Knock Off itself in the metagame, it makes defensive counterplay always come with an everlasting consequence of being itemless, but this is true for Knock Off in every tier, so there has to be more to it to make an argument for it to be potentially suspected in NU. The 'more to it' is the fact that the tier has an abundance of Psychic types which are primarily used to check Gallade, Sawk, Gurdur, Hariyama, etc. and even if a Psychic type like Musharna can withstand a weaker Knock Off or two well, it will be without an item and forced to spend a turn recovering (not to mention that this can easily lead to a teammate or the fighting type itself eventually breaking through something like Musharna and being seemingly uncountered for the remainder of a game depending on circumstances, but this is admittedly a best case scenarios - it doesn't always work like that and I'm not trying to make a stretch of an argument when there is already a valid argument for Knock Off present). Adding onto this, NU has more Eviolite users, which are especially reliant on their item being in tact, than every other tier (Gurdurr, Rhydon, some Scyther, few Sneasel, Ferroseed, Prinplup, Tangela, some Pawniard, Togetic, Piloswine, Roselia, etc.). I could keep adding onto this and respond to others, but I am not totally sold myself on Knock Off being broken (although I think a suspect would be 100% worthwhile) and, as I said before, this actually happening still depends on a few things, so really I have no clue if a Knock Off suspect will ever happen, but I do know that the arguments opposing it have been lackluster up to this point.

 

[SotheBlacKnight]

Does it? Does a move have to make literally everything that possesses it to become broken to be heavily overpowered/centralizing itself? I disagree. A move that is extremely splashable on all mons that can learn it as long as they have a decent attack stat, is probably banworthy too, even moreso if it happens to push a few mons over the edge.

Sure, it is a controversial decision to make, but I believe it is better than to just ban these two [Sneasel and Gallade] and then suspect another pair of culprits that just happened to be pushed over the edge thanks to their access to this move, or even an obvious teammate's access to this move.

After Sneasel and Gallade there aren't really any stupidly OP Knock-Off users. The next best pokes would be Malamar, Pawniward, Liepard and maybe Kecleon, none of which are broken or will become broken (likely) in any given time. There are other users of Knock-Off, like Sawk, Gurdurr and Archeops, but they are still manageable.
And as most have stated Sneasel and Gallade have many other aspects that make them suspect worthy, like Sneasel's amazing speed tier and Gallade's versatility alongside a very good attack stat.

This is all reminding me of how there was a discussion in 5th gen OU about whether U-turn was broken, it went nowhere and I kind of think this will too. At best I think you might make a small case for a Knock-Offless ladder similar to the 5th gen OU Rockless ladder and the recent UU Scaldless ladder.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Finchinator You are correct in saying that no one compared Knock Off to Swagger before I made my post. And, yes, I do concede that Knock Off, Swagger, and Swords Dance are all quite different moves and shape the metagame differently with their presence or lack of presence. The reason that I mentioned Swagger is because to my knowledge that is the only move to outright be banned by any tier on Smogon, other than Sonicboom and Dragon Rage in Little Cup.

Moves, in my opinion, should only be outright banned if they are uncompetitive or broken on all pokemon that can use it; that's why Swagger was banned. Knock Off itself doesn't make every pokemon that learns it broken. Knock Off can certainly be a contributing factor in whether or not something is suspect-worthy, but that doesn't make the move itself worthy of a suspect.

I mention Swords Dance solely because it's another move/set that both Sneasel and Gallade can utilize. Them possessing that move an potentially being broken doesn't make that move broken. It's a further comparison to Knock Off.

 

[QueenOfLuvdiscs]

Swagger was banned because of prankster users having it alongside t-wave + Foul play, it wouldn't be broken on, using your example, a Bulbasuar, because no Prankster or Foul Play, or even a good speed tier/number of resists.

 

[Aasgier]

After Sneasel and Gallade there aren't really any stupidly OP Knock-Off users. The next best pokes would be Malamar, Pawniward, Liepard and maybe Kecleon, none of which are broken or will become broken (likely) in any given time. There are other users of Knock-Off, like Sawk, Gurdurr and Archeops, but they are still manageable.
And as most have stated Sneasel and Gallade have many other aspects that make them suspect worthy, like Sneasel's amazing speed tier and Gallade's versatility alongside a very good attack stat.

This is all reminding me of how there was a discussion in 5th gen OU about whether U-turn was broken, it went nowhere and I kind of think this will too. At best I think you might make a small case for a Knock-Offless ladder similar to the 5th gen OU Rockless ladder and the recent UU Scaldless ladder.

You are missing Zangoose and Kabutops, as well as Shiftry (if it drops). Also Samurott's mixed set.
Another monstrosity that used to be NU is Pangoro, but I certainly agree Pangoro would have been banned even if it had not gained Knock Off upon transition to ORAS

Finchinator You are correct in saying that no one compared Knock Off to Swagger before I made my post. And, yes, I do concede that Knock Off, Swagger, and Swords Dance are all quite different moves and shape the metagame differently with their presence or lack of presence. The reason that I mentioned Swagger is because to my knowledge that is the only move to outright be banned by any tier on Smogon, other than Sonicboom and Dragon Rage in Little Cup.

Moves, in my opinion, should only be outright banned if they are uncompetitive or broken on all pokemon that can use it; that's why Swagger was banned. Knock Off itself doesn't make every pokemon that learns it broken. Knock Off can certainly be a contributing factor in whether or not something is suspect-worthy, but that doesn't make the move itself worthy of a suspect.

I mention Swords Dance solely because it's another move/set that both Sneasel and Gallade can utilize. Them possessing that move an potentially being broken doesn't make that move broken. It's a further comparison to Knock Off.

Swagger wasn't banned because Bulbasaur could use it, or even something as fast as Electrode. It was mostly because of its conjunction in combination with other moves and abilities, like Prankster and Thunder Wave, as well as Foul Play. Bulbasaur has none of these, rendering your example stupid.

Swords Dance is also different, because Sneasel and Gallade are pretty frail - setting up means they might take a powerful attack to the face if not getting outright killed. Or just as bad - a revengekiller coming in on a predicted Swords Dance, immidiately scaring you out. Knock Off has less reward than a Swords Dance might reap, but there is also little to no risk involved since there's very little that can actually punish the use of Knock Off (except maybe a Granbull switch-in when there are a lot of hazards on the field)

 

[tehy]

a large part of swagger's ban was that it turns everything into a tossup, i.e. purely the luck factor.

prankster and foul play definitely made it a lot worse, but personally, that's just because people started using it like crazy.

i'm not saying i would've voted to ban swagger on the basis of a bulbasaur, but i sure as shit would've voted to ban it on Venusaur, because it's just mindless hax-cancer

 

[marilli]

I'd like to precursor this by saying that, like most of you, I am not content with the current state of the metagame due to pokemon like Sneasel and Gallade restricting gameplay, teambuilding, etc. With that being said, I strongly disagree with some assertions, points, and overall arguments that have been made on the subject of a potential Knock Off suspect.

I want to touch both sides of the argument in a comprehensive post because there are disgusting amounts of strawmanning going on. Not picking on anyone but just as an example, "Knock Off doesn't rely on luck, therefore, it shouldn't be suspected." Yes, the first part of your argument is correct: knock off does not rely on luck. But that's not the reason why we would ever suspect knock off for. Hopefully this post helps weed out all these terrible arguments, for or against.

be careful with what is a top tier Mon that requires some centralization, and a Mon that is centralising because its broken

Let's start with this. Yes, this is in fact a great philosophy. We should just ban the broken mons, and keep the top tier mons. In reality, this isn't so easy. How can you distinguish between just a top tier mon, and a broken mon? Unless we're talking in terms of like, something blatantly broken, it's literally "just like, your opinion, man". The reality is that the distinction between the two can be very minute, which makes this a lot harder to implement. By extension, we should consider looking at this threshold with an open mind and heart ;) I feel that people have already picked a side and is not willing to think twice, but this isn't a helpful way to think about things. Now that we're covered on this, lets look at the discussion going on in this thread, lol.

On validity of a potential Knock Off suspect:
If we end up suspecting knock off or not is a completely different matter - it's irrelevant in this discussion, in fact, but I don't see the need for the allergic reaction of "knock off suspect is stupid." You can disagree with it, yes feel free to state your own opinion instead of circlejerking. But the argument of "we shouldn't ban knock off. why? because that's stupid!" isn't helping your cause. In this theoretical assumption of a Knock Off suspect, you don't want Knock Off banned, do yourself a favor, and put out real arguments because I also hate the 'argument' of (or rather, the fallacy fallacy of) "look, the anti-ban arguments are full of fallacies, they don't have a good reason, so we should ban it." If enough people have a valid reason for believing that a suspect could potentially solve some of the many problems in the tier, then we should by all means consider it a real possibility and it would be completely valid to have a knock off suspect. There are indeed valid reasons and valid counterarguments, so please let's deal with them instead of nitpicking about how your definition of suspectability are different or about simple typos, sigh.

On Spammability and splashability:
First, Knock Off isn't like any other ~100 and above power moves. No recoil, no repercussion, no defense drops, no miss chance, no immunity, and a great side effect. Heck, there aren't many valid resists to knock off in the first place. I don't think comparisons to Earthquake or other moves are not valid at all. On the other hand, Spammability =/= brokenness. I mean, Scyther basically spams U-turn every time, there's a very spammable move if you look at it! The way how if you are out against something that dies to knock, you'll click knock every time and you'll make free progress, if you're out against something that dies / gets crippled by U-turn, you'll click U-turn every time and you'll make free progress. If your opponent doesn't have a spinner, you put SR up, and hey, free progress! Though it is false that Knock Off is just as spammable as any high powered move, the spammability of a move does not imply brokenness. Similarly, just because a move is splashable on a generally any mon that get it, given that it already does well with 3 moves, doesn't mean the move is broken. Thunder Wave is one such move: if you are fully functional with 3 moves, you might as well put it on! And Gen 1 Blizzard is another such example given that almost everything that got it used it. Are they broken? This is just my opinion, man, but they don't seem to be blatently broken, which means there's room for argument.

Why would we ever suspect Knock Off in NU, when no other tier does it?
This reason why Knock Off is stronger than NU than in other tiers is threefold. First, there are bunch of viable Mega Evolutions in higher tiers, but this isn't so in NU. Mega Audino doesn't fit on every team nor does it make every team better (and if it did, it would also be suspect worthy, lol), so a lot of teams have a good reason for not having a mega. Second, there are very little viable Dark-type resists in NU. There are no bulky Dark-types that don't rely on eviolite. There's 1 bulky Fighting-type without Eviolite. Then there's like 3 Fairy types that don't carry Eviolite. That's literally 5 Knock Off switch-ins in the whole tier that don't utterly get crippled by the move. Third, the fighting-type conundrum. As there is literally 1 Pokemon that resist the Close Combat / Knock Off coverage, it makes it insanely hard to check Fighting-types. If you think Gallade is trouble, you should try facing non-choiced Sawk with a balance team: it's equally a nightmare unless you have that 1 Close Combat / Knock Off resist in Granbull. Best you can do otherwise are the Fighting resists that are neutral to Knock like Garbodor, but most Fighting-types have a way to hit those super effectively, even if you're not Gallade. This puts Knock Off in a very unique situation in NU than it is put in any other Smogon usage tier. Personally, having a NU Knock Offless Ladder could be interesting to see.

Shouldn't we just Gallade and Sneasel instead?:
According to the pro-Knock Off suspecter's perspectives, it sounds like the current state of Sawk, Gurdurr, and Malamar are also OP because of Knock Off, on top of Gallade and Sneasel. So why aren't we suspecting all these? Knock Off defensive Mawile isn't broken, Knock Off Carracosta isn't broken, it's that Knock Off on Fighting types have like, 2 real checks. So let's say Knock Off suspect doesn't happen, then Gallade / Sneasel gets banned. Great! But would the same arguments for Knock Off suspect mean that the current state of Knock Off Sawk is suspect worthy on top of all this? I think so. Are we gonna suspect that? Or is the Knock Off suspect a way to circumvent saying we want to suspect Sawk or god forbid, Gurdurr? Knock Off ban may let us keep as much of NU while balancing the tier, but can we really say that when 5+ mons will be a shell of their former selves with a single Knock Off ban? It might as well be better to just suspect Sneasel given that no ones gonna use Sneasel without knock off, lol, especially if you believe Knock Off Sawk / Gurdurr / Malamar are healthy.

Overall, I understand the reasons why someone might want a Knock Off suspect, and I also understand the reasons why someone might not. I simply feel that a lot of reasoning made against Knock Off suspect are questionable. Yet, even if the suspect were to happen, I'm not convinced that Knock Off is really the problem and whether if banning it would make the meta better. Haha I guess I'm just rambling at this point but I just want better discussions, delete my post if u want to, lmao.

 

[Froggyboy]

Is it just me, or was that Knock Off suspect comment a joke?

 

[Liarliarpantsonfire]

Nevermind Gallade/Sneasel/Knock Off for a sec, I want to bring up something else. Malamar. Is it strictly broken? No. In fact it's perfectly beatable for most teams. But I don't want to be forced to run Scyther on every team or have to sack my Specs Magmortar just to get enough damage on this abomination to revenge kill it with something else. Contrary Superpower is nothing more than a cheap exploit that shouldn't even exist. Especially when you can pair it up with STAB Knock Off. Then you have a mon with great all around stats and only two weaknesses, one of which rarely sees the light of day. I mean just look what happened with Serperior and tell me that is okay. Please.

What even switches in on Malamar and beats it 1 vs 1 consistently? Mega Audino, Quag, Scyther... I mean trying to list them just proves my point. And I'm not talking about being impossible to wall like Zangoose or Magmortar or Samurott either. You can revenge kill those after sacking something. Malamar doesn't stop, Malamar steamrolls through your whole team if you don't run something like Colbur Signal Beam Mesprit. I'm not even salty, but there's threats that you need to prepare for on you team and then you have Malamar who basically walks over bulky offense and balance like it's nothing. Like I said it's beatable, but at what cost? It reminds me of Mushy last gen, when your team had a Dark-type or you lost. We'll see what happens to that mon too when Sneasel and Gallade are gone.

 

[Evan.]

Nevermind Gallade/Sneasel/Knock Off for a sec, I want to bring up something else. Malamar. Is it strictly broken? No. In fact it's perfectly beatable for most teams. But I don't want to be forced to run Scyther on every team or have to sack my Specs Magmortar just to get enough damage on this abomination to revenge kill it with something else. Contrary Superpower is nothing more than a cheap exploit that shouldn't even exist. Especially when you can pair it up with STAB Knock Off. Then you have a mon with great all around stats and only two weaknesses, one of which rarely sees the light of day. I mean just look what happened with Serperior and tell me that is okay. Please.

What even switches in on Malamar and beats it 1 vs 1 consistently? Mega Audino, Quag, Scyther... I mean trying to list them just proves my point. And I'm not talking about being impossible to wall like Zangoose or Magmortar or Samurott either. You can revenge kill those after sacking something. Malamar doesn't stop, Malamar steamrolls through your whole team if you don't run something like Colbur Signal Beam Mesprit. I'm not even salty, but there's threats that you need to prepare for on you team and then you have Malamar who basically walks over bulky offense and balance like it's nothing. Like I said it's beatable, but at what cost? It reminds me of Mushy last gen, when your team had a Dark-type or you lost. We'll see what happens to that mon too when Sneasel and Gallade are gone.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/np-stage-4-celebration-feraligatr-banned.3528871/page-17

we had this discussion a while back and i really dont feel like rehashing points. i honestly dont believe that anything has changed since that point in the meta with regards to Malamar, its just a mon that you have to prepare for, not nearly centralizing enough to be brought up for suspect.

 

[Aasgier]

My most succesful teams in Gen v ran Leavanny, Pinsir or Scolipede - I rarely took a Dark-type in NU and did just fine. I'm still known for using Life Orb Leavanny (yet, somehow no one else can get it to work, yet I find Leavanny a great way to condense several roles (Grass-type, Musharna-check, Malamar counter, Sun counter, cleric, etc) into one slot. The fact it counters both Malamar and Sun teams - something no other mon can do - should speak for itself. Usually I just let my opponent set up Sun while I set up hazards to put Victreebell into OHKO range. The only thing I really have to switch out of is Magmortar, but even then many users of Sun waste their Magmortar by attempting to switch it into Leavanny (which it absolutely cannot with SR+Spikes on the field even if it switches into X-Scissor. Knock Off deals 55% after all).

I also agree with Marilli. I've seen mostly jerk arguments against a suspect of Knock Off. Marilli made a few valid points however and I agree with basically everything she said (except... that Gurdurr was never mentioned in the Knock Off suspect discussion at all - it is manageable mostly thanks to its speed - faster special attackers resisting Mach Punch can easily break it even after one or more Bulk Ups, though a SE STAB move is still advised).

About the subject of Malamar, the fact that Malamar is brought up repeatedly is also partly because of Knock Off. Contrary Superpower is good, but with Knock Off out of the way much more manageable (especially since things like Gourgeist can safely tank Night Slashes). I don't agree Malamar should be banned, mind it, or even suspected, but I certainly see why others want it. Same for Gurdurr, though I never mentioned him. He isn't broken even with Knock Off, but most of the reason is his speed. Still, you need to have something that doesn't mind Knock Off while also resisting Drain Punch, which is frustrating at times. Gourgeist can still switch into it and whittle it down with Leech Seed (just don't try to Burn it, lol).
Sawk is a huge bother for balance and I mentioned him a few times. Zangoose is similar. Neither is truly broken, both having a plethora of checks as well as a good number of counters, but they are both - especially combined with Magmortar in the tier - a hell to face for balance.

 

[Aladyyn]

Nevermind Gallade/Sneasel/Knock Off for a sec, I want to bring up something else. Malamar. Is it strictly broken? No. In fact it's perfectly beatable for most teams. But I don't want to be forced to run Scyther on every team or have to sack my Specs Magmortar just to get enough damage on this abomination to revenge kill it with something else. Contrary Superpower is nothing more than a cheap exploit that shouldn't even exist. Especially when you can pair it up with STAB Knock Off. Then you have a mon with great all around stats and only two weaknesses, one of which rarely sees the light of day. I mean just look what happened with Serperior and tell me that is okay. Please.

What even switches in on Malamar and beats it 1 vs 1 consistently? Mega Audino, Quag, Scyther... I mean trying to list them just proves my point. And I'm not talking about being impossible to wall like Zangoose or Magmortar or Samurott either. You can revenge kill those after sacking something. Malamar doesn't stop, Malamar steamrolls through your whole team if you don't run something like Colbur Signal Beam Mesprit. I'm not even salty, but there's threats that you need to prepare for on you team and then you have Malamar who basically walks over bulky offense and balance like it's nothing. Like I said it's beatable, but at what cost? It reminds me of Mushy last gen, when your team had a Dark-type or you lost. We'll see what happens to that mon too when Sneasel and Gallade are gone.

First off, why bring up Specs Magmortar when that set is awful? Also it's incredibly easy to check Malamar, it's just a matter of getting Signal Beam on one of your mons. There's a lot of them and they don't suffer from running it. Also Malamar is far from having "great stats". It has decent bulk but its power is sorely lacking and it needs 2+ turns to get going, giving you a lot of time to answer. I honestly don't see how it could be brought up for suspect when Gallade basically does the same thing but better right now.

 

[Steakburgers]

Has anyone gone down the list of mons for nu? The number of mons you gotta put a line through is staggering because of the combo of gallade+sneasel
I don't think i've ever seen so many mons lose this much usefulness just because of certain mons, unless your name is dragalge
It's pretty disheartening as well, cause alot of the teams you might wanna build, say you want to build a team with eggy, well you're kinda screwed.
Its not really fun to play, and this has been echoed and screamed throughout this thread, but they need to go dude