If you let Blaze Blaziken out of Ubers, then you would have to let Rough Skin Chomp out too, and it would just end up causing a shit-ton of problems. There would be too many bans and too many side-bans, along with a massive amount of tier changes like Flash Fire Heatran is OU, while Flame Body Heatran is UU. It would just be too much of a headache, and the metagame would effectively be too damn complicated with bans and complex bans and tier exceptions. Too much of a headache for all that, just ban the whole Pokemon if one aspect of it is too much to handle for the metagame.
-
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.
On Bans
- Thread starter Scorpio
- Start date
- Status
If you let Blaze Blaziken out of Ubers, then you would have to let Rough Skin Chomp out too, and it would just end up causing a shit-ton of problems. There would be too many bans and too many side-bans, along with a massive amount of tier changes like Flash Fire Heatran is OU, while Flame Body Heatran is UU. It would just be too much of a headache, and the metagame would effectively be too damn complicated with bans and complex bans and tier exceptions. Too much of a headache for all that, just ban the whole Pokemon if one aspect of it is too much to handle for the metagame.
This thread would've been more relevant last round when Drizzle was suspect, and there's nothing currently that really forces this issue. However, if you guys want to debate, this is what I posted 2 months ago:
__________________
There is something tangibly different between Pokemon + Ability ban vs Pokemon + Move / Pokemon + Level bans. More specifically, moves and levels do not affect the identity of the Pokemon as drastically as Abilities.
Think of Magnezone, for instance. A Sturdy Magnezone would have its niche replaced from a Steel Trapper to an overshadowed Electric Powerhouse. Abilities change the identity of the Pokemon so drastically, that a Pokemon would be played differently (ie Protect on Blaziken to grab Speed boosts / Substitute on Garchomp to fish for misses). Some say that this is nerfing, but others see the same Pokemon with different abilities as separate identities altogether.
When it is so blatantly apparent that an Ability have warped the Pokemon's identity to such an extent to brokenness, I do not find it unreasonable to ban the Pokemon + Ability. Banishment from every tiers but Ubers is a harsh outcome, and I believe that certain Pokemon, like Blaze Blaziken and Rough Skin Garchomp are two good Pokemon that can enrich other tiers. Blaziken has a unique combination of Power and Versatility that other Physical / Mixed Fire Pokemon lack (Infernape hits softer; Arcanine, Emboar, and Darmanitan do not have STAB HJK). Garchomp has a distinguished Speed Tier, offensive and defensive characteristics that cannot make the game worse to say the last.
Pokemon + Move / Pokemon + Level, however, does not really change the identity of the Pokemon the way Abilities do. A Sand Veil Garchomp without a Swords Dance, is still played as a Sand Abusing Sweeper, but except now it is worse at its job. If anything should be called nerfing, it would be these types of bans.
To me, Pokemon + Ability ban does not seem such a far-fetched idea as Pokemon + Level / Pokemon + Move. I am not saying that we should do this for determining the tiering process of the lower tiers. Lower tiers are shaped solely out of the usage statistics of the Pokemon in the tiers above, so we don't need to change that. However, as something as big as banning a Pokemon from OU (and by extension all other tiers except ubers), I believe that Pokemon + Ability ban is not such an unreasonable suggestion.
PS - I guess the Pokemon + Ability ban may be considered for other tiers, namely UU (to banish monsters into BL) and LC metagame. However, this is arguably more relevant in OU than in any other tiers.
__________________
Quality rebuttal by XienZo:
here
Specifically:
If you can't refute XienZo's counter-arguments, then it's hard to draw the line between Pokemon + Ability ban vs Pokemon + Move ban.
__________________
There is something tangibly different between Pokemon + Ability ban vs Pokemon + Move / Pokemon + Level bans. More specifically, moves and levels do not affect the identity of the Pokemon as drastically as Abilities.
Think of Magnezone, for instance. A Sturdy Magnezone would have its niche replaced from a Steel Trapper to an overshadowed Electric Powerhouse. Abilities change the identity of the Pokemon so drastically, that a Pokemon would be played differently (ie Protect on Blaziken to grab Speed boosts / Substitute on Garchomp to fish for misses). Some say that this is nerfing, but others see the same Pokemon with different abilities as separate identities altogether.
When it is so blatantly apparent that an Ability have warped the Pokemon's identity to such an extent to brokenness, I do not find it unreasonable to ban the Pokemon + Ability. Banishment from every tiers but Ubers is a harsh outcome, and I believe that certain Pokemon, like Blaze Blaziken and Rough Skin Garchomp are two good Pokemon that can enrich other tiers. Blaziken has a unique combination of Power and Versatility that other Physical / Mixed Fire Pokemon lack (Infernape hits softer; Arcanine, Emboar, and Darmanitan do not have STAB HJK). Garchomp has a distinguished Speed Tier, offensive and defensive characteristics that cannot make the game worse to say the last.
Pokemon + Move / Pokemon + Level, however, does not really change the identity of the Pokemon the way Abilities do. A Sand Veil Garchomp without a Swords Dance, is still played as a Sand Abusing Sweeper, but except now it is worse at its job. If anything should be called nerfing, it would be these types of bans.
To me, Pokemon + Ability ban does not seem such a far-fetched idea as Pokemon + Level / Pokemon + Move. I am not saying that we should do this for determining the tiering process of the lower tiers. Lower tiers are shaped solely out of the usage statistics of the Pokemon in the tiers above, so we don't need to change that. However, as something as big as banning a Pokemon from OU (and by extension all other tiers except ubers), I believe that Pokemon + Ability ban is not such an unreasonable suggestion.
PS - I guess the Pokemon + Ability ban may be considered for other tiers, namely UU (to banish monsters into BL) and LC metagame. However, this is arguably more relevant in OU than in any other tiers.
__________________
Quality rebuttal by XienZo:
here
Specifically:
XienZo said:
If you can't refute XienZo's counter-arguments, then it's hard to draw the line between Pokemon + Ability ban vs Pokemon + Move ban.
Just a random question, why is blaziken without speed boost banned? Just because they don't want to make a combo or complex ban?
Yeah, also because doing that, as previously stated opens up the possibility of more complex ban, making the tier list needlessly complicated.
What is with the poll?
And the even worse subject of the OP?
Complex bans are awful in any shape and form, period. The only reason why we even allowed Aldaron's proposal was because without it, we would have had to ban rain, which would have screwed up a very delicate balance of power between weathers. It was a very rare exception, end of story.
To re-iterate, this thread sucks.
And the even worse subject of the OP?
Complex bans are awful in any shape and form, period. The only reason why we even allowed Aldaron's proposal was because without it, we would have had to ban rain, which would have screwed up a very delicate balance of power between weathers. It was a very rare exception, end of story.
To re-iterate, this thread sucks.
IMO the typing, base stats, movepool, and ability make the pokemon. The base stats, typing, and movepool are largely outside our control. But at this point, many pokemon have 3 different abilities, which makes the idea of pokemon+ability banning seem much more feasible then it did in gen 4 or 3. We need to step out of the 4th gen mindset when it comes to banning.
You're missing the point. Could we technically re-tier every single pokemon once for each ability? Yes. Would it make every tier so massive it would be impossible to cover every threat? Also yes. It's not a 4th gen mindset thing, it's a "there-are-649-pokemon-and-if-you-can't-find-one-besides-Blaziken-or-Garchomp-something's-wrong-with-you" mindset. If anything, the addition of more pokemon makes tiering each one twice (or three times) even less feasible.
@Pocket: It's nice to see a structured argument for both sides in one post.
There's one simple characteristic that separates Pokemon + Ability and Ability + Ability bans from other types of complex bans, such as moves, levels, and stats: Degree of complexity. Allowing complex bans based on abilities opens up about a thousand new possibilities, and if the possibilities are used only when necessary, it's quite simple to know what complex ban would be needed in any given situation. The other possible types of bans open up billions of possibilities, with potentially thousands that could address any given situation. Say we wanted to allow Blaziken into OU by restricting its moves and stats rather than its ability. We could ban Blaziken + Flare Blitz to ruin its best set, making it far more feasible to counter, but we could also ban Blaziken + Hi Jump Kick to get the same effect. So would we randomly choose one of the combinations to ban, or ban both unnecessarily? Neither of those would make much sense; we'd have to ban Blaziken from using Flare Blitz and Hi Jump Kick on the same set? We could do that, but if Blaziken knew Flare Blitz and Hi Jump Kick and no other moves, it wouldn't be broken, either. So next thing you know we wind up having to test every one of the billion possible movesets Blaziken can run, and that's just not feasible. And if we took level and stats into the equation, we'd have to deal with every possible level and every possible EV distribution... and then we die from spending our entire lives for the sake of this one Pokemon.
Comparatively, the matter of Blaziken + Blaze vs. Blaziken + Speed Boost is far more simple. Only two possibilities, one is clearly broken, one is clearly not. That's not to say that this is necessarily the best way to proceed, but equating ability complex bans with move, level, and stat complex bans is just foolish. As long as the two are kept entirely separate, as long as policy is written to establish that accepting ability complex bans does not mean any other sort of complex ban will ever be accepted, no possible harm can come from an ability complex ban, and therefore there is no reason to oppose an ability complex ban while simple bans are made.
Of course, in the wake of Aldaron's Proposal, such policy is desperately needed anyway. Right now, Smogon has a complex ban, and no policy on complex bans which takes that complex ban into account. Without such policy, people will only continue demanding whatever complex bans they wish, and they are right to do so, as their is no currently relevant policy to tell them otherwise. PR has gone weeks without posts, and more than a month since any post has been made discussing anything other than the frivolous matter of the Rotom forms fitting into Species Clause. This is a matter which has needed policy for seven months, and the lack of that policy has caused all of the discussions of complex bans in the meantime, frequently disrupting the community's ability to decide on other matters. If Smogon is to ever get out of this quagmire of confusion over complex bans, we need someone in PR to post a thread there as soon as possible, bringing forth the question of when complex bans are okay to use and when they are not, so that the matter can be discussed, and eventually a poll can be put up, so that the policy can be written and the matter decided for good. At this point, I don't even really care what the policy is, as long as we get something. We need something.
You know what I just noticed? We did the complex ban that SS and drizzle shouldn't be together. So why can't we do the same for sand veil users? It makes sense. That way, garchomp could stay in OU with rough skin and sand veil to COUNTER sandstorm teams. We do the same with drizzle teams by putting SS kingdra on our teams. So why can't we do the same with garchomp? Blaziken is also a good pokemon with blaze because even then, he can still take out ferrothorn and heatran, thus making him an OU usable pokemon. Now onto the fact about these bans. Blaziken wasn't that good of a pokemon in 4th gen. Why? Because it wasn't fast enough to do anything. But then it got a nice ability letting outspeed things. Why haven't we complained about sharpedo then? with Life orb and two very nice STAB moves, it should be considered "Broken" because it has speed boost. At least in the lower tiers. But guess what? We banned Moody too! Even though it was given to a lowly pokemon like bibarel, we still banned it. Glalie got it for crying out loud! These pokemon are RU pokemon! But you know what really ticks me off? Is that we are still aloud to use these pokemon if they don't have this ability. So why did blaziken just get banned then? Hmmmm...? We should just do the same thing we did for moody. Just ban it from him and let players use him. There ARE things that can beat down blaziken. Ever heard of extremespeed multiscale dragonite?
Cuz there is no need to ban sand right now.
I get what you're saying about Garchomp and it's a decent idea, but once you start implementing more and more Ability + Ability bans, it again just opens the floodgates. Where do we draw the line? Should Frosslass be forced to use Cursed Body if paired with Abomnasnow? Could I use Venusaur in UU if it didn't have Chlorophyll? All in all, it just overly complicates things.
Before people ask me "Then why was Drizzle + Swift Swim okay", let me explain. The only way a simple ban could handle how overpowered SS +Drizzle was would be to ban Politoed to Ubers. This would be more than taking away one pokemon, as was the case with Garchomp; it would take away entire teams and strategies. There are things Garchomp can do that no other pokemon can; his 102 base speed is a wonderful benchmark, for example. However, it's silly to argue that removing him took away more strategies and variety than banning DrizzleToed would. The complex ban was a rare exception, not a rule.
As for Blaziken, there is no need for him anywhere with Infernape and Emboar in OU and UU (RU? I don't know) respectively. How many people who are upset over his ban were actually going to use him? If diehard Blaziken lovers really want to use him, he's more than viable in Ubers and they should play some more there.
Combo bans would certainly bring more diversity to the metagame. I'd even go further and say we should have even more complex bans, such as a modified Aldaron's proposal: DD+one Swift Swimmer max. Not only would this prevent teams from putting like 2000 SS users on one team. But it allows users to play mindgames. By carrying Politoed+Kingdra+Ludicolo and making the opponent guess which one's the swift swimmer.
To me, blaziken wasn't that hard to beat. Sure it would sweep my team every now and then. I think we need to be creative with the pokemon we use. If you're a true OU player, then you won't just size up every OU pokemon and see if it could beat blaziken. Get creative. Just because you're playing OU doesn't mean you have to use just OU pokemon! Try something in the lower tiers in OU and see how it works against blaziken. Like unaware Quag for example. boom shaka laka laka boom. You've stopped it's set up sweep. I've been thinking that gigalith might serve as a check. It gets a nice boost from sandstorm with sand force and a 50% special def boost, and it has sturdy to take the high jump kick from blaziken and KO it with earthquake. Who know's? Maybe it CAN take a high jump kick from blaze. It has a monstrous def stat. We just need to be more creative than we normally are in OU.
EDIT: Infernape and Emboar are used differently than blaziken. Infernape acts as a wall breaker while emboar is kind of like aggron. Hit as many things as hard as possible with choice scarf.
EDIT: Infernape and Emboar are used differently than blaziken. Infernape acts as a wall breaker while emboar is kind of like aggron. Hit as many things as hard as possible with choice scarf.
I advocated the same idea during Round 4. Rough Skin Garchomp unfortunately does not exist yet, but it's nonetheless a solution that would prevent evasion from being abused while allowing Garchomp to be used on other teams for whatever purpose they wish.
Froslass similarly abuses evasion; I don't think there's anything wrong with banning Snow Cloak + Snow Warning, either. However, usage tiers are a completely different matter than bans. Venusaur is not banned from UU because of its effectiveness; it is excluded because of its usage in OU. We can easily draw the line and say that we only split off abilities when a ban is called for, rather than splitting things off for every usage statistic. We just need to draw that line.
You say currently, we only make complex bans when an emergency calls for it. But why? As I've explained, if proper, simple policy is made, no harm can come from ability complex bans. So why wait for an emergency when we can improve the metagame right now?
...That said, there were alternatives to banning Drizzle + Swift Swim. As I've said many times over throughout the past seven months, it is the abusers of the combination that should have been addressed. When Blaziken was an overpowered sweeper, especially under sun, we banned Blaziken. When Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops were overpowered sweepers under rain, we should have banned or othewise addressed Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops. Surely, OU would then have more options with the reasonably powerful Swift Swim Pokemon such as Omastar which could then increase the diversity of the metagame.
This is a prime example of the banning process being dependent on the whim of the masses. It's the same situation, but the voters insisted that Garchomp was the problem rather than Sand Veil hax itself.
The reverse was done for Drizzle + Swift Swim. Rather than banning the three prime abusers (or one of the three, thus disrupting the synergy of that core), voters to this day will swear that Gorebyss and Qwilfish would be equally as broken, despite lack of playtesting, and thus attempt to justify the complex ban to keep Drizzle around.
It's these types of things that highlight the need for an official policy on complex bans (or better yet, a period of no suspects so we can FINALLY get around to repealing the ban and booting Drizzle instead). Let's get on it, Policy Review.
Personally, I think it's unfair that we banned blaze blaziken. It's significantly weaker than speed boost, so it would most likely be in UU/BL making it an OU usable pokemon. If we just ban certain abilities instead of just banning the pokemon permanently, then I think some competitive players from other servers might flock towards smogon. I think the main reason PO has so many players is because they don't really ban that many things. My friend had quit smogon a month ago just because they banned blaziken. That's one less person playing and laddering on the server. I'm sure he would come back though, if we brought blaze blaziken into OU. And if you guys are complaining saying "But that's a complex ban" then lets bring SB blaziken back into the OU metagame. Let's see how he fairs, now that there are counters to him. All you need to do is thundurus T-wave it and it's a sitting duck (er... Chicken).
No one cares who leaves and stays, odds are they will end up going to a forum that follows our rules by default anyway lol.
An ability can only be banned if it is broken on every pokemon that has it and every pokemon that may obtain it in the future. Speed Boost Yanmega is not broken, therefore Speed Boost is not the issue.
I'll make this clear. A pokemon is judged based on its optimal performance, not by its use of lesser options.
An ability can only be banned if it is broken on every pokemon that has it and every pokemon that may obtain it in the future. Speed Boost Yanmega is not broken, therefore Speed Boost is not the issue.
I'll make this clear. A pokemon is judged based on its optimal performance, not by its use of lesser options.
But that's just it. Blaziken has a great performance in battle. But there ARE things that counter it. We just need to get creative with our teams. Try using lower tier mons and see how they do against some OU threats. It takes them by surprise and counters them because the OU threats don't know what to do against the lower tier mon.
Enlighten me. There is almost nothing outside Slowbro that can reliably check Blaziken, much less "counter." Do not suggest Sturdy users when the #1 pokemon in the metagame ALWAYS carries an entry hazard.
Gigalith? Base 130 defense and base 135 attack is nothing to scoff at. Plus, it has sand force and is a rock type, giving it a 50% sp def boost. Im sure it can take the high jump kick from blaze and hit back with earthquake. You could run other speed boosters like yanmega and sharpedo, who already outspeed blaziken when neither are +1 in speed. Air slash for yanmega and surf or waterfall for sharky.
EDIT: Oh ya, and unaware quag can get rid of the speed boosts.
EDIT: Oh ya, and unaware quag can get rid of the speed boosts.
Venusaur's OU useage would be divided by ability if we re-tierd everything by ability. Basically every Venusaur runs Chlorophyll, so it would stay OU, but there's no way Overgrow Venusaur would have enough; it would fall to UU for sure. But just becould we could feasibly have a UU Venusaur to play around with doesn't make it a good idea; doing that for every pokemon is just too complex, that's all I'm saying.
Maybe not Emboar, but Blaziken's main role has always been a Mixed Wallbreker, and is outclassed by Infernape. I stand by my statement that Blaze variants aren't that valuable to the metagame.
I never said that complex bans should only be done in emergencies, but they should only be done in special circumstances. Rain teams were a good example, as removing DrizzleToed completely would have destroyed a strategy used by a great many teams. Many people used Garchomp, but he's only one pokemon and could be replaced on a team more easily. Like your suggested, I wouldn't have been opposed to banning Kingdra, Kabutops, or Ludicolo, which would also have balanced out rain teams. In fact, I almost like that idea better.
So after briefly glancing through the last two pages of this thread, all I can see is "free blaziken + garchomp" and "sand veil / snow cloak should be complex banned". Why are you all so hellbent on these things? Why do you think we should make the effort to bastardize the process just so that you can use your pet favorites in OU? Blaziken and Garchomp were deemed broken as a whole. Speed Boost and Sand Veil were not. Why should we ban the combination then, when the whole is the culprit? Blaziken and Garchomp did not have the tremendous influence that rain has on the metagame. They are not worth "saving". And then we get into issues with the lower tiers, which is a very troubling can of worms that we would have great difficulty getting closed up again. And if you say we won't touch the lower tiers you're admitting to only wanting Blaziken and Garchomp unbanned for your own reasons, not for the integrity of the process. We are not catering to fanboys here. The arguments presented for the complex bans are tired and have been done to death, and have been refuted countless times. The fact of the matter is that there is simply no reason to do it.
I'm not really going to get into the Sand Veil / Snow Cloak issue, since the only Pokemon that could give any sway for banning one of the two, Garchomp, is gone.
I'm not really going to get into the Sand Veil / Snow Cloak issue, since the only Pokemon that could give any sway for banning one of the two, Garchomp, is gone.
So blaziken is a threat while speed boost is not? That would mean that you are saying blaziken without speed boost is a dire threat to the metagame. The speed boost is a LIE! Just ban speed boost and from blaziken. It's pretty simple. The fire chicken wouldn't be that much of a threat then, but we could still use him. If blaziken is a wallbreaker, then he doesn't need to have speed boost. He just needs to outspeed walls, which truth be told, they aren't very fast. He would then have a usable role as a wallbreaker.
- Status