Smogon Shoddy Server Statistics - July 2009

[BalancedPower]

Alright but I just don't think it is fair to UU players who want to use P2 but can't because he is more useful in OU then UU.

[lordkira]

Originally Posted by Fat Zuki

A pokemon going OU isn't because it's overpowered for UU, it's its usage in the standard play that makes it there. Just because it doesn't overpower UU doesn't mean it can't go to OU. Yes, P2 might miss the important month to be up in usage and go NU, but it's still going to get usage in OU.

that just reminded me of my old question.
if the criteria to distinguish ou pokemons from uu pokemons is solely based on the usage, why are ou pokemons banned from competing in the uu leagues?

[Zuki]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

that just reminded me of my old question.
if the criteria to distinguish ou pokemons from uu pokemons is solely based on the usage, why are ou pokemons banned from competing in the uu leagues?

That is a good question. The best answer I can come up with is that many OU pokemon (Gyarados) outclass, or do something better than, a pokemon in UU (Feraligatr). But, certain UU pokemon (Porygon2, Roserade) have traits that none of the OU's have. So my answer isn't really stable, but it's the best I think we have for now.

Edit: Unless, of course, somebody can answer it better than I did. ;)

[Huntofthelion]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

that just reminded me of my old question.
if the criteria to distinguish ou pokemons from uu pokemons is solely based on the usage, why are ou pokemons banned from competing in the uu leagues?

OU Pokemon are banned from UU because that's the whole point of UU, Playing without the standards. The borderline list is for things that fell to UU but were proven to strong, and the OU list is the Pokemon used to much to be classified as UU.

[cmurph]

I'm not sure why Porygon-2 usage going up the tiny amount needed to make it OU would have any effect on the metagame whatsoever

[lordkira]

Originally Posted by Fat Zuki

That is a good question. The best answer I can come up with is that many OU pokemon (Gyarados) outclass, or do something better than, a pokemon in UU (Feraligatr). But, certain UU pokemon (Porygon2, Roserade) have traits that none of the OU's have. So my answer isn't really stable, but it's the best I think we have for now.

Edit: Unless, of course, somebody can answer it better than I did. ;)

I understand. However, If the borderline between UU and OU is based purely on the simple factor usage, then it should not matter whether a pokemon outclasses another and such. Rather, we should say the criteria to distinguish between OU and UU pokemons is based on usage AND "effectiveness" in the metagame. I am just confused on this issue lol.

Originally Posted by Fat Huntofthelion

OU Pokemon are banned from UU because that's the whole point of UU, Playing without the standards. The borderline list is for things that fell to UU but were proven to strong, and the OU list is the Pokemon used to much to be classified as UU.

Again, if what you say is true and BL is not as powerful but too powerful for UU while OU pokemons have higher (top 50 obv) usage than pokemons of UU list, then again it is based on usage. If the list was also based on power than I will rest my case but if not but ONLY on the factor "usage" then what you just said doesn't prove anything (sorry not trying to be rude, just trying to clarify as I am the one confused) but go back to my original question.

[Huntofthelion]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

Again, if what you say is true and BL is not as powerful but too powerful for UU while OU pokemons have higher (top 50 obv) usage than pokemons of UU list, then again it is based on usage. If the list was also based on power than I will rest my case but if not but ONLY on the factor "usage" then what you just said doesn't prove anything (sorry not trying to be rude, just trying to clarify as I am the one confused) but go back to my original question.

The pokemon currently in border line were tested in the Underused metagame, and found to be over centralizing and/or broken. It had nothing to do with purse usage, just their capabilities.

[lordkira]

Originally Posted by Fat Huntofthelion

The pokemon currently in border line were tested in the Underused metagame, and found to be over centralizing and/or broken. It had nothing to do with purse usage, just their capabilities.

Then you are saying that the basis used to distinguish OU from UU and vice versa is not only the usage but pokemon's power/effectiveness in the metagame? That's what I am getting from you since you are saying BL pokemons were found to be too powerful/broken in the UU environment.

[Huntofthelion]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

Then you are saying that the basis used to distinguish OU from UU and vice versa is not only the usage but pokemon's power/effectiveness in the metagame? That's what I am getting from you since you are saying BL pokemons were found to be too powerful/broken in the UU environment.

This is what I am saying...

The split between Overused and Underused is directly impacted by usage, it has nothing to do with the OU Pokemon being too powerful.

The classification of Borderline is given to Pokemon that were once in the Underused tier, and so did not merit enough usage to be Overused. They were found to be too powerful for Underused however, and so banned from the tier. Regardless of how many times they get used, they will never fall into the Underused tier unless they are retested.

[lordkira]

Originally Posted by Fat Huntofthelion

This is what I am saying...

The split between Overused and Underused is directly impacted by usage, it has nothing to do with the OU Pokemon being too powerful.

The classification of Borderline is given to Pokemon that were once in the Underused tier, and so did not merit enough usage to be Overused. They were found to be too powerful for Underused however, and so banned from the tier. Regardless of how many times they get used, they will never fall into the Underused tier unless they are retested.

Thus not solely on usage but power as well then.
As you are saying that UU weak compared to that of the OU and OU is much too powerful compared to that of the UU environment.
Bah, if you are saying that already then my bad.

[Huntofthelion]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

Thus not solely on usage but power as well then.
As you are saying that UU weak compared to that of the OU and OU is much too powerful compared to that of the UU environment.

....No I don't recall every saying that.

Overused is based on Usage, BL is based on Power. Power =/= Usage. Dugtrio, as it's currently being shown in UU, is a very underwhelming pokemon. It was only in OU so long because of it's niche of being able to revenge kill and trap pretty well. It had nothing to do with it being a better Pokemon, just it had a cool use that was pretty unuqie.

[lordkira]

Ok then again it goes back to the whole power and usage issue again.
If you are saying BL is SOLELY based on power then why was it "dropped" from OU? If what you say is true and OU and UU are based on usage and BL is based on power then I cnanot even say that going from OU to BL is being dropped as they have totally different criteria. And no I did not ever say power was the same thing as usage. In fact, I was stating my thoughts with that fact in mind.

[Rayne Sylvan]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

Ok then again it goes back to the whole power and usage issue again.
If you are saying BL is SOLELY based on power then why was it "dropped" from OU? If what you say is true and OU and UU are based on usage and BL is based on power then I cnanot even say that going from OU to BL is being dropped as they have totally different criteria. And no I did not ever say power was the same thing as usage. In fact, I was stating my thoughts with that fact in mind.

Step By Step:

1) Usage on the Standard ladder falls below a certain point (1 in 21 teams, I think is the number they use, as it results in about 50 OU Pokemon). The Pokemon no longer qualifies as OU, because its usage is too low.

2) The Pokemon is allowed temporarily into the UU environment. If it proves too powerful, it is nominated as a Suspect.

3) After a certain period of time (I do not know how long) all UU Suspects are banned from UU ladder play on Shoddy.

4) After another interval, a vote is held to determine whether or not any of the Suspects are too powerful for UU play. Those that are voted too strong are moved to the BL tier, and banned from UU play.

Does it make a little more sense now? BL is like Ubers. Nothing more than a banlist for a certain metagame.

[lordkira]

That's what hunt and I have been talking about for a while.
What I am asking is whether the distinction between OU and UU (and BL as I do know it is a ban tier for UU as it was shown to be broken in UU environment) depends on usage AND individual pokemon's performance in the metagame.

[Orcelot005]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

That's what hunt and I have been talking about for a while.
What I am asking is whether the distinction between OU and UU (and BL as I do know it is a ban tier for UU as it was shown to be broken in UU environment) depends on usage AND individual pokemon's performance in the metagame.

The OU Tier is based on usage only, if a pokemon isn't used enough in OU, then it becomes UU. I don't know why you're finding that so hard to understand.

[SHUCKLE MAN]

The OU tier is based solely on usage. If Magikarp got enough usages, it would be OU.

I'm sure you know that, but the point is, whether something is OU or UU/BL depends solely on usage.

Raikou, for example, got put in a ban list called BL, but it is still UnderUsed, as it didn't get enough usage to be OverUsed.

[A.P.]

I find it funny how most of the BLs aren't very good in OU (Raikou and Crobat are okay, maybe Shaymin, but the others have a tough time), whereas top-tier UUs like Roserade and Milotic are good, good enough to risk being sent up ahead of their banned counterparts.

[The Plant]

I apologize if this has been asked or answered before.

As I understand it the current statistcs are taken from all battles on the Smogon ladder. This being done under the assumption that the ladder is an essentially competitive enterprise. I think this presents the problem that many less then capable players are clicking the find tab. Everybody's "test accounts" are also added to the database.

This gives an inaccurate picture of the metagame most people care about. Tiering should be based on relativey high level battling. I think statistics should be available where some standard is applied. Perhaps some statistics where only battles between two players with say a 1450+ (I really don't know where to set the bar) rating could be made availiable to give "better" players a better idea of what they really need to prepare for. It is also possible that some sets are much more prealent among higher rated then the rest (Scizor might be on 50% of "good" teams in theory) which might cast a better light on the metagame's actual balance.

I also don't know if this is possible or not.

[SHUCKLE MAN]

Originally Posted by Fat The Plant

I apologize if this has been asked or answered before.

As I understand it the current statistcs are taken from all battles on the Smogon ladder. This being done under the assumption that the ladder is an essentially competitive enterprise. I think this presents the problem that many less then capable players are clicking the find tab. Everybody's "test accounts" are also added to the database.

This gives an inaccurate picture of the metagame most people care about. Tiering should be based on relativey high level battling. I think statistics should be available where some standard is applied. Perhaps some statistics where only battles between two players with say a 1450+ (I really don't know where to set the bar) rating could be made availiable to give "better" players a better idea of what they really need to prepare for. It is also possible that some sets are much more prealent among higher rated then the rest (Scizor might be on 50% of "good" teams in theory) which might cast a better light on the metagame's actual balance.

I also don't know if this is possible or not.

A lot of people have suggested that. However, who said that 'tiering should be based on relativey high level battling'?

If the tier lists were calculated that way, my teams wouldn't be counted.

[yawn]

Originally Posted by Fat The Plant

I apologize if this has been asked or answered before.

As I understand it the current statistcs are taken from all battles on the Smogon ladder. This being done under the assumption that the ladder is an essentially competitive enterprise. I think this presents the problem that many less then capable players are clicking the find tab. Everybody's "test accounts" are also added to the database.

This gives an inaccurate picture of the metagame most people care about. Tiering should be based on relativey high level battling. I think statistics should be available where some standard is applied. Perhaps some statistics where only battles between two players with say a 1450+ (I really don't know where to set the bar) rating could be made availiable to give "better" players a better idea of what they really need to prepare for. It is also possible that some sets are much more prealent among higher rated then the rest (Scizor might be on 50% of "good" teams in theory) which might cast a better light on the metagame's actual balance.

I also don't know if this is possible or not.

Completely disagree with your rationale (but I'm always in favor of more statistics as long as its for informational rather than conclusory/tiering/gameplay purposes).

You're assuming that "bad" players and test teams intentionally pick substandard or inferior stuff and bloat the stats for those. However, unless their goal is to intentionally lose (perhaps with 2 computers to "fix" the rating of their main account?), I don't think anybody who has spent the time to find, download, and use shoddy is purposefully picking 6 caterpies or w/e for their team. I've seen way more people switch in gengar or salamence into starmie than use pikachu when I play on my test account.

If you want to analyze the "best" team just go look at the winning team from any of the tournaments.

[LoveDensity]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

That's what hunt and I have been talking about for a while.
What I am asking is whether the distinction between OU and UU (and BL as I do know it is a ban tier for UU as it was shown to be broken in UU environment) depends on usage AND individual pokemon's performance in the metagame.

NU is based on usage too.. Pokemon too low in UU usage will be relegated to the lowest tier: NU. The tiering system makes so much sense by dividing it to: Ubers: The strongest, OU: the standards, as standards and usage intertwine a bit. BL: The strong of UU, the weak of OU. UU: standards, NU: The lowest usage

[capefeather]

The distinction between UU, BL and NU is completely irrelevant to standard play. One example I like to throw around to demonstrate this is that Walrein (NU) is used more than Raikou (BL). The lower tiers are distinguished entirely by usage/ban-worthiness in UU play. UU is a very different environment from standard, so Pokémon have different levels of success in UU.

[Ulver]

Originally Posted by Fat lordkira

That's what hunt and I have been talking about for a while.
What I am asking is whether the distinction between OU and UU (and BL as I do know it is a ban tier for UU as it was shown to be broken in UU environment) depends on usage AND individual pokemon's performance in the metagame.

OU vs. UU: Usage.
UU vs. BL: Power.
You just do whatever is applicable, so to speak. If it's used a certain amount, end of story...it's OU. Otherwise the other things apply.

[ARandomDude]

August statistics almost here =O I'm looking forward to Roserade's usage (almost OU iirc) and spikes usage.