So, i've been reading the arguments of both sides. I'm not really much of an ubers player, but from what i see, one side states that OHKO moves introduce too much luck into the metagame, and the other states that OHKO moves are an ineffective strategy, even in the hands of restalk kyogre, arguably the best abuser that anyone here can think of.
If it's an ineffective strategy, and i have no doubt that it is, and it also introduces too much luck into the metagame, why not just... ban it? Yes yes it's not broken and all that, but to me the point of the clauses have never been about whether something's broken or not, but rather about creating a more enjoyable metagame, which is why they're optional. The only place they're not is on the ladder, which is really just a simplified way of saying that most people on the ladder would put on these clauses, so we might as well stick them on too.
Edit: Nightmare, what defines "out of hand"? Let's say there is an option, any time in the game, to just click a button and have a 10% chance to win, but a 90% chance to lose. It's not really out of hand-you can only lose 10% of the time. Only problem is, it would just rob good players of winning. And the example you gave is perfect-the metagame CAN adjust. I could run, say, restalk celebi with psychic, HP fire, and recover. Or restalk salamence. Or restalk Heracross/kyogre for darkrai. And i haven't even begun to talk about random lum berries.Forcing the metagame to adjust to them would be very stupid, but very possible.
Last edited by tehy; Nov 4th, 2012 at 9:02:52 PM.