Smogon Community - View Single Post

**Hugendugen** · Oct 13th, 2012, 6:36:39 AM

As others have pointed out, the result of these suspect tests will essentially come down to how we approach the notion of what’s desirable in a competitive metagame and hence what needs to be banned. Like I suggested here I think that in principle there are two conditions for something to be banned: one, that it’s broken or two, that it significantly skews the metagame in an overly undesirable direction.

Now whether or not something is broken is a reasonably simple concept to understand. I’d define something as broken if it was able to perform in its role, be it sweeping, defending, or laying hazards, in such a manner that it cannot be stopped without either considerable measures such as niche pokemon or extreme luck; alternatively, having the flexibility to operate 2 or more sets that have completely different checks / counters and can force a win condition of its own in very few turns.

On the other hand, “significantly skews the metagame in an overly undesirable direction” is a far more troubling notion to handle. As opposed to the relative objectivity of something being ‘broken’, this second criterion oozes with subjectivity. Simply defining something as undesirable is in and of itself subjective, but even more so when we need to further distinguish the level to which we’re willing to accept an ‘undesirable’ influence. However, even if this is subjective and difficult to quantify, I still feel that it’s crucial to take into consideration, for the health of the metagame. As I’m sure is the case for most of us ubers players, I’d prefer that we banned as little as possible and as a result, I’d argue that something needs to be extremely undesirable for it to warrant a ban. We shouldn't ban things purely to make the metagame ‘fun’, we should ban things that distinctly make it ‘not fun’.

Obviously none of us can really predict what the suspect tests will show us, but I think it's vital that before we actually start, we establish what it is that we want out of these tests and what it is that we want from the metagame.

Oct 13th, 2012, 6:36:39 AM	#24
Hugendugen akwardly australian Moderator Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 423 no ibo. Mentor	As others have pointed out, the result of these suspect tests will essentially come down to how we approach the notion of what’s desirable in a competitive metagame and hence what needs to be banned. Like I suggested here I think that in principle there are two conditions for something to be banned: one, that it’s broken or two, that it significantly skews the metagame in an overly undesirable direction. Now whether or not something is broken is a reasonably simple concept to understand. I’d define something as broken if it was able to perform in its role, be it sweeping, defending, or laying hazards, in such a manner that it cannot be stopped without either considerable measures such as niche pokemon or extreme luck; alternatively, having the flexibility to operate 2 or more sets that have completely different checks / counters and can force a win condition of its own in very few turns. On the other hand, “significantly skews the metagame in an overly undesirable direction” is a far more troubling notion to handle. As opposed to the relative objectivity of something being ‘broken’, this second criterion oozes with subjectivity. Simply defining something as undesirable is in and of itself subjective, but even more so when we need to further distinguish the level to which we’re willing to accept an ‘undesirable’ influence. However, even if this is subjective and difficult to quantify, I still feel that it’s crucial to take into consideration, for the health of the metagame. As I’m sure is the case for most of us ubers players, I’d prefer that we banned as little as possible and as a result, I’d argue that something needs to be extremely undesirable for it to warrant a ban. We shouldn't ban things purely to make the metagame ‘fun’, we should ban things that distinctly make it ‘not fun’. Obviously none of us can really predict what the suspect tests will show us, but I think it's vital that before we actually start, we establish what it is that we want out of these tests and what it is that we want from the metagame. __________________ Hugen: Larger then huge but smaller then hunormous. \| Dugen: An ugly skank that thinks she's attractive. Last edited by Hugendugen; Oct 13th, 2012 at 6:52:02 AM.