Popularity Poll for the Defense of the Titans Project - Page 2

Kidogo · Dec 1st, 2012, 2:53:03 AM

I also think perhaps one offensive pokemon should be allowed without limitations--I know my team, as well as many others, NEEDED a scarfed revenge killer. Obviously, this pokemon needs investment in its offensive stats. I don't know what you think about this, but 5 fully defensive pokes with one revenge-killer seems sufficiently stally to me.

Lady Alex · Dec 1st, 2012, 3:05:12 AM

The only problem I see with that idea is that the focus of some teams may end up "support this pokemon in order to set up for a sweep" rather than focusing on stall.

GatoDelFuego · Dec 1st, 2012, 3:05:32 AM

That's what the rules are defined as--one offensive pokemon per 5 defensive. The only other thing that was added is pokemon that use stat boosting moves were considered offensive.

Lady Alex · Dec 1st, 2012, 3:16:31 AM

I'm aware... I'm saying that if the project continues, I think that it should be taken into consideration, since the point of the project is to promote stall, not to promote having 5 pokemon prepare your offensive pokemon to sweep.

Magma · Dec 1st, 2012, 7:52:09 AM

You had it right jiggz, Choice Scarf would NOT count as an ATTACK-boosting item even though it boosts an OFFENSIVE stat. Only items that boost ATTACKS (Choice Band, Choice Specs, Life Orb, Plates, Charcoal, Sharp Beck, Poison Barb, etc) would be unusable on a Pokemon with offensive EVs. Choice Scarf is not included in this list because it doesn't boost any ATTACKS (bar Electro Ball), just speed. So no worries Kidogo, your Scarfer would still fit the requirements. Sorry for not being clear guys. I'll add a note about Choice Scarf in the original rules to make this easier to understand.

Lady Alex, I agree with you 100%. If the leaders of this project wish to limit everyone to only full-stall teams, then the current rules (with ALL stat-boosting moves banned like you suggested) will get the job done. I was just offering a suggestion to help the users who requested a little more offense and wanted to build semi-stall teams instead. You have to admit, it's a little strange that Tabloo, one of the best defensive teams ever built, is banned from a defensive project because it's not a full-stall team.

Also, there are a hand-full of offensive Pokemon (like Sub Disable Gengar, Air Balloon Heatran, and revenge-killing Choice Scarfers) that aren't exactly your typical tanks, but still play key defensive roles on certain stall teams. The rules I suggested wouldn't restrict team-builders to just one of these type of Pokemon; however, if we want to limit each team to one Scarfer, then we can add an item clause on the 2 offensive mons. And finally, let me wrap things up by saying: my suggestions are not the gospel truth... nor am I leading this project. I'm just offering up ideas that will help define what is stall and what is not.

alexwolf · Dec 1st, 2012, 6:32:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Lady Alex

Wish CM Jirachi is no more stall oriented than Sub CM Jirachi. At the end of the day, they both want to sweep your opponent's team. Disallowing set up moves that increase offensive stats would be an easy fix. Otherwise, we risk people being able to get away with something like "bulky offense."

This is false. SubCM Jirachi is a sweeper while physically defensive Jirachi with Wish and CM is a wall/supporter first and then a sweeper. And this is where the whole point resides i guess. I think that the best way to go for this project is to have a group of people trusted by the community to judge which stat-uppers should be allowed in the project based on which their main role is on the team. For example the main role of Curse Quagsire, Calm Mind Latias, and WishCM Jirachi is walling, and then comes sweeping. But Pokemon such as SubCM Jirachi and SubDD Dragonite are put in a team with the purpose to sweep, but they can also tank some hits when the need arises.

I also saw someone saying that there is the need for more stallbreakers. With the current rules every team is allowed to use one fully offensive Pokemon, stallbreakers included, which is enough to handle opposing stall teams. Hell many stallbreakers such as Taunt Mew or Sableye are not prevented by any rule so you can use them freely so i don't think that there is any issue here.

So, i want to ask, do we all agree that the main problem with the rules was that you coudn't run more than one Pokemon with stat-up moves? And do you agree with the idea to keep the current rules but add the possibility to use a Pokemon that doesn't fit the rules in some special occasions, which will be viewed by members approved by the community?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Magma

Pocket, that was almost word-for-word my original suggestion to alexwolf. But after I thought about it, we have to include EV distribution (and maybe the held-item as well) because that's the only way to separate the CM sweepers (Keldeo, Latios, and Landorus) from the CM stall-breakers (Latias, Jirachi, and Reuniclus.)

You make great points alexwolf, so what if we were to simply things and just allow 2 offensive Pokemon with the limitations I suggested and Pocket's suggestion of banning the moves that increase 2 offensive stats? The new rules could look something like this:

Rules

Gato, I think we need a set of defined rules (rather than have 2 or 3 people say what's stall and what isn't.) The rules I suggested aren't complex at all - they just give the criteria of an offensive mon and put 3 limitations on them. But if most people feel that stall-breakers have no place on stall teams, then I'll gladly delete my post.

Your ideas are good but i don't think that they will work. For example a team consisting of SubDD Dragonite, SubCM Jirachi, and Bulky QD Volcarona would be legit with your rules, but it doesn't take a lot of thought to see that it isn't a stall team. I still believe that allowing only one offensive Pokemon in each team is the way to go, and make exceptions upon reviewing the Pokemon in question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Kidogo

I also think perhaps one offensive pokemon should be allowed without limitations--I know my team, as well as many others, NEEDED a scarfed revenge killer. Obviously, this pokemon needs investment in its offensive stats. I don't know what you think about this, but 5 fully defensive pokes with one revenge-killer seems sufficiently stally to me.

Kidogo one offensive Pokemon is already allowed with the current rules.

Mephisto · Dec 1st, 2012, 7:12:03 PM

While I'm a newcomer/returnee and maybe my opinion is not that worthy, I voted yes because I restarted today and... my team fits this concept AND fits the rules, and while maybe I need to cover one or two things, it's working pretty good. Too bad I started playing before noticing the thread (had 8 battles, with a 6-2 record, if it's acceptable to sign in with it the better, if not, maybe I'll change nickname at PS, won't play till Monday tough as rl is a bitch), but I'll gladly give a +1 to the project as it is true I feel it viable :)

alexwolf · Dec 1st, 2012, 7:41:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Magma

You had it right jiggz, Choice Scarf would NOT count as an ATTACK-boosting item even though it boosts an OFFENSIVE stat. Only items that boost ATTACKS (Choice Band, Choice Specs, Life Orb, Plates, Charcoal, Sharp Beck, Poison Barb, etc) would be unusable on a Pokemon with offensive EVs. Choice Scarf is not included in this list because it doesn't boost any ATTACKS (bar Electro Ball), just speed. So no worries Kidogo, your Scarfer would still fit the requirements. Sorry for not being clear guys. I'll add a note about Choice Scarf in the original rules to make this easier to understand.

Lady Alex, I agree with you 100%. If the leaders of this project wish to limit everyone to only full-stall teams, then the current rules (with ALL stat-boosting moves banned like you suggested) will get the job done. I was just offering a suggestion to help the users who requested a little more offense and wanted to build semi-stall teams instead. You have to admit, it's a little strange that Tabloo, one of the best defensive teams ever built, is banned from a defensive project because it's not a full-stall team.

Also, there are a hand-full of offensive Pokemon (like Sub Disable Gengar, Air Balloon Heatran, and revenge-killing Choice Scarfers) that aren't exactly your typical tanks, but still play key defensive roles on certain stall teams. The rules I suggested wouldn't restrict team-builders to just one of these type of Pokemon; however, if we want to limit each team to one Scarfer, then we can add an item clause on the 2 offensive mons. And finally, let me wrap things up by saying: my suggestions are not the gospel truth... nor am I leading this project. I'm just offering up ideas that will help define what is stall and what is not.

I don't get how you can say that the Project only allows full stall teams from the moment that one offensive mon is already allowed. Tabloo would be allowed as a stall team with the new change i am proposing, as upon reviewing it it would count as a stall team.

Magma · Dec 2nd, 2012, 3:36:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

I also saw someone saying that there is the need for more stallbreakers. With the current rules every team is allowed to use one fully offensive Pokemon, stallbreakers included, which is enough to handle opposing stall teams. Hell many stallbreakers such as Taunt Mew or Sableye are not prevented by any rule so you can use them freely so i don't think that there is any issue here.

I agree, I use Taunt Mandibuzz, Taunt Skarmory, and Magic Coat Jellicent on my stall team and have had little problems against opposing stall teams. However, my team is a full stall team. I think a little more freedom on offense would allow for more semi-stall teams and more diversity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

So, i want to ask, do we all agree that the main problem with the rules was that you coudn't run more than one Pokemon with stat-up moves? And do you agree with the idea to keep the current rules but add the possibility to use a Pokemon that doesn't fit the rules in some special occasions, which will be viewed by members approved by the community?

No, I think the problem with the original rules were if you ran a Pokemon with stat-up moves, then you couldn't use a Scarfer or any other offensive Pokemon with a defensive niche like Sub Disable Gengar.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

Your ideas are good but i don't think that they will work. For example a team consisting of SubDD Dragonite, SubCM Jirachi, and Bulky QD Volcarona would be legit with your rules, but it doesn't take a lot of thought to see that it isn't a stall team. I still believe that allowing only one offensive Pokemon in each team is the way to go, and make exceptions upon reviewing the Pokemon in question.

You misread the rules. A team with Sub DD Dragonite, Sub CM Jirachi, and Bulky QD Volcarona wouldn't be legit for two reasons. First, moves that boost 2 offensive stats are banned, so Sub DD Dragonite and Bulky QD Volcarona are immediately out of the question. Secondly, only 2 offensive Pokemon are allowed, and because all three of the Pokemon you listed have stat-boosting moves, they are all considered offensive - making the team ineligible. Under the rules I suggested, the most offensive a team in the challenge can be is with BU Conkeldurr and CM Reuniclus. If most people find this too offensive for stall, then we can simply add a fourth limitation that says only one offensive mon can have a stat boosting move.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

Kidogo one offensive Pokemon is already allowed with the current rules.

Kidogo was referring to the rules I suggested. He/she thought they banned Scarfers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

I don't get how you can say that the Project only allows full stall teams from the moment that one offensive mon is already allowed. Tabloo would be allowed as a stall team with the new change i am proposing, as upon reviewing it it would count as a stall team.

I was addressing Lady Alex. She suggested that we should ban all stat-up moves which would limit everyone to full stall teams. While this is a great suggestion, I was just giving an example of how it wouldn't be the best suggestion. Also, I don't think that reviewing a team is the best suggestion as well. If we work together, we can come up with a set of rules that define stall.

alexwolf · Dec 2nd, 2012, 3:44:13 PM

Thx for clarifying Magma and sorry for not paying attention to your discusion, which led to this confusion.

And about my question to all of you regarding the rules, i wasn't clear enough, or rather said something else than i wanted to. From what i understand the problem is indeed that people can't use an offensive Pokemon + a Pokemon with a stat up move, which would be possible under the new rule (teams that are very close to the reqs but don't fit them will be reviewed by a team, and they will be allowed of they are considered as stall or semi stall teams). So do you all agree with the new rule i am proposing?

Melee Mewtwo · Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:14:56 PM

I think the project is too young to kill it just yet. We only have a month's worth of playing and with Genesect and possible future revolutionary bans (think what Drizzle being gone would do) it should be kept going.

I do agree though that not letting you run a Cm/Bu user to bust other stall teams or as your win condition without having to drop your Revenge Killer was kind of annoying. I think a Choice Scarfer should just not count as your offensive mon. Even something like CB tar can still fit on a stall team to serve the goal of wall breaking (and trapping). A revenge killer is pretty much mandatory for any team type so it shouldn't be counted as a offensive mon.

EDIT: Then again, since Tabloo doesn't run a Choice Scarfer maybe the rule should just be bumped up to two different Offensive mons. Like you can run Choice/LO plus Scarf, or Scarf plus CM, or CM plus Choice/LO but not two Choice/LO (as in CB/CS).

Deluks917 · Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:17:14 PM

Is it crazy to just allow two "offensive" pokemon. 4 fully defensive Pokemon (almost no offensive EVs and no stat up moves) and 2 aggressive ones is honestly pretty stallish by BW standards? Maybe this is going too far though.

alexwolf · Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:20:14 PM

I have said again that i won't allow two offensive Pokemon, as then the teams become more balanced. A balanced team can still be defensive, but is in no way a stall team.

Melee Mewtwo · Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:26:47 PM

Well that depends on the type of Offensive mons. If you run stuff like Agility or DD then sure but if you run what I talked about in my edit then not really as you basically are just filling two roles even Stall could use: Revenger and Wall Breaker. (or well more like Stall Breaker/Win Condition for CM/BU but the point in the two is to help beat other Stall teams and Bulky Offense)

alexwolf · Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:49:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Melee Mewtwo

Well that depends on the type of Offensive mons. If you run stuff like Agility or DD then sure but if you run what I talked about in my edit then not really as you basically are just filling two roles even Stall could use: Revenger and Wall Breaker. (or well more like Stall Breaker/Win Condition for CM/BU but the point in the two is to help beat other Stall teams and Bulky Offense)

Melee Mewtwo as i said again having a team of people to approve of teams that don't fit the rules seems to be the best course of action. Otherwise no matter what the rule, teams that are not stall team will manage to participate in the project.

For example Tabloo is an example of a team with two offensive Pokemon (offensive under the definitions of the project) that is a stall team. Likewise The Great Southern Trendkill is a team that passes under the rule of two offensive Pokemon max, but is not a stall team.

Melee Mewtwo · Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:58:46 PM

Well the Rain Stall sample in the Ubers stall guide is less stally than The Great Southern Trendkill. TGST just has a Revenge Killler (Jirachi) and a win condion (Gliscor) so, personally, I would call that stall.

EDIT: The sand stall (Tyranitar) team is also less stally with an offensive spin blocker, CM win condition and Choice Scarf Revenge Killer.

alexwolf · Dec 2nd, 2012, 5:09:44 PM

I agree with you, there can definitely be stall teams with two offensive Pokemon, but there can also be balanced teams with only two offensive Pokemon and this is the problem. So people that know their stuff (the team i was talking about) will decide which teams with two offensive Pokemon are stall teams and which are not.

Melee Mewtwo · Dec 2nd, 2012, 5:11:08 PM

I guess that always works since it isn't officially defined on what a Stall team is. (We ought to change that)

BlackLight · Dec 2nd, 2012, 6:03:43 PM

I personally would like to hear from those who don't want to go forward with this project. Currently, more than a quarter of the votes are negative, but I haven't seen any posts as to why not.

Anyhow, I would lose to see this project go forward, for different reasons than most. I play offensive teams, having never really been to fond of stall, and as a result, I've never been quite certain how stall works, and thus have had problems beating it (yes, even in this meta). This project has allowed me to take a look at stall from the player's point of view, and has actually helped me get better. Of course I'm going to want to push this forward!

Magma · Dec 2nd, 2012, 8:12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

For example Tabloo is an example of a team with two offensive Pokemon (offensive under the definitions of the project) that is a stall team. Likewise The Great Southern Trendkill is a team that passes under the rule of two offensive Pokemon max, but is not a stall team.

This is an excellent point alexwolf. It actually brings me to my next question, would you consider "The Great Southern Trendkill" as a stall team if I swapped out Swords Dance Gliscor for a Calm Mind Sigilyph? If so, then we can come to the conclusion that its the TYPE of offensive Pokemon that separates the semi-stall teams from the balanced ones. This is why I suggested that we should put limitations/restrictions on the 2 offensive Pokemon. The rules I posted earlier would ban SD Gliscor because it violates all three limitations; it has a stat-boosting move with EVs in Speed AND Attack, it uses a stat-boosting move that increase TWO offensive stats at once, and it has an attack-boosting item. If "TGST" had CM Sigilyph along with Scarf Jirachi, then it would pass as a semi-stall team in my eyes and under the rules I suggested, just like Tabloo and it's two offensive Pokemon do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Melee Mewtwo

I guess that always works since it isn't officially defined on what a Stall team is. (We ought to change that)

I agree. There are too many smart users on Smogon for us not to be able to define a play-style.

alexwolf · Dec 4th, 2012, 6:42:26 AM

Thx everyone for voicing your opinions and giving me all this useful feedback! The new DT Project will be up shortly with the new rule added!

View Poll Results: Do you want the Defense of the Titans Project to continue?
Yes i would like to see it on December again	74	74.00%
No i don't think it should be continued	26	26.00%
Voters: 100. You may not vote on this poll

Dec 1st, 2012, 2:53:03 AM	#26
Kidogo Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 418	I also think perhaps one offensive pokemon should be allowed without limitations--I know my team, as well as many others, NEEDED a scarfed revenge killer. Obviously, this pokemon needs investment in its offensive stats. I don't know what you think about this, but 5 fully defensive pokes with one revenge-killer seems sufficiently stally to me. __________________ Check out my RMT (Baton) Passport to Victory (Peaked #2)! Want to read a warstory? Try this one: Dragons Dinos, and Donkeys (I mean ponies): an OU Warstory

Dec 1st, 2012, 3:05:12 AM	#27
Lady Alex So, I dashed all over the mansion, and I re-killed them; they were pretty alive when I found them Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 418 Stuck between a Stealth Rock and a hard place	The only problem I see with that idea is that the focus of some teams may end up "support this pokemon in order to set up for a sweep" rather than focusing on stall. __________________

Dec 1st, 2012, 3:05:32 AM	#28
GatoDelFuego U HAVIN A FOKIN GIGGLE THER M8 ILL BASH YE HEAD IN I SWEAR ON ME MUM Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 1,081 The University of Alabama Mentor	That's what the rules are defined as--one offensive pokemon per 5 defensive. The only other thing that was added is pokemon that use stat boosting moves were considered offensive. __________________ Part of the GP team, message me for a check! Sharpen your skills as a GP checker in the GRAMMAR DOJO!

Dec 1st, 2012, 3:16:31 AM	#29
Lady Alex So, I dashed all over the mansion, and I re-killed them; they were pretty alive when I found them Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 418 Stuck between a Stealth Rock and a hard place	I'm aware... I'm saying that if the project continues, I think that it should be taken into consideration, since the point of the project is to promote stall, not to promote having 5 pokemon prepare your offensive pokemon to sweep. __________________

Dec 1st, 2012, 7:52:09 AM	#30
Magma Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 33	You had it right jiggz, Choice Scarf would NOT count as an ATTACK-boosting item even though it boosts an OFFENSIVE stat. Only items that boost ATTACKS (Choice Band, Choice Specs, Life Orb, Plates, Charcoal, Sharp Beck, Poison Barb, etc) would be unusable on a Pokemon with offensive EVs. Choice Scarf is not included in this list because it doesn't boost any ATTACKS (bar Electro Ball), just speed. So no worries Kidogo, your Scarfer would still fit the requirements. Sorry for not being clear guys. I'll add a note about Choice Scarf in the original rules to make this easier to understand. Lady Alex, I agree with you 100%. If the leaders of this project wish to limit everyone to only full-stall teams, then the current rules (with ALL stat-boosting moves banned like you suggested) will get the job done. I was just offering a suggestion to help the users who requested a little more offense and wanted to build semi-stall teams instead. You have to admit, it's a little strange that Tabloo, one of the best defensive teams ever built, is banned from a defensive project because it's not a full-stall team. Also, there are a hand-full of offensive Pokemon (like Sub Disable Gengar, Air Balloon Heatran, and revenge-killing Choice Scarfers) that aren't exactly your typical tanks, but still play key defensive roles on certain stall teams. The rules I suggested wouldn't restrict team-builders to just one of these type of Pokemon; however, if we want to limit each team to one Scarfer, then we can add an item clause on the 2 offensive mons. And finally, let me wrap things up by saying: my suggestions are not the gospel truth... nor am I leading this project. I'm just offering up ideas that will help define what is stall and what is not.

Dec 1st, 2012, 7:12:03 PM	#32
Mephisto Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 6	While I'm a newcomer/returnee and maybe my opinion is not that worthy, I voted yes because I restarted today and... my team fits this concept AND fits the rules, and while maybe I need to cover one or two things, it's working pretty good. Too bad I started playing before noticing the thread (had 8 battles, with a 6-2 record, if it's acceptable to sign in with it the better, if not, maybe I'll change nickname at PS, won't play till Monday tough as rl is a bitch), but I'll gladly give a +1 to the project as it is true I feel it viable :)

Dec 2nd, 2012, 3:44:13 PM	#35
alexwolf King of Conquerors Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,610 Greece	Thx for clarifying Magma and sorry for not paying attention to your discusion, which led to this confusion. And about my question to all of you regarding the rules, i wasn't clear enough, or rather said something else than i wanted to. From what i understand the problem is indeed that people can't use an offensive Pokemon + a Pokemon with a stat up move, which would be possible under the new rule (teams that are very close to the reqs but don't fit them will be reviewed by a team, and they will be allowed of they are considered as stall or semi stall teams). So do you all agree with the new rule i am proposing? __________________ Part of the OU QC team, message me for a check!

Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:14:56 PM	#36
Melee Mewtwo Dat Lugiass Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 639 France	I think the project is too young to kill it just yet. We only have a month's worth of playing and with Genesect and possible future revolutionary bans (think what Drizzle being gone would do) it should be kept going. I do agree though that not letting you run a Cm/Bu user to bust other stall teams or as your win condition without having to drop your Revenge Killer was kind of annoying. I think a Choice Scarfer should just not count as your offensive mon. Even something like CB tar can still fit on a stall team to serve the goal of wall breaking (and trapping). A revenge killer is pretty much mandatory for any team type so it shouldn't be counted as a offensive mon. EDIT: Then again, since Tabloo doesn't run a Choice Scarfer maybe the rule should just be bumped up to two different Offensive mons. Like you can run Choice/LO plus Scarf, or Scarf plus CM, or CM plus Choice/LO but not two Choice/LO (as in CB/CS).

Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:17:14 PM	#37
Deluks917 Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 247	Is it crazy to just allow two "offensive" pokemon. 4 fully defensive Pokemon (almost no offensive EVs and no stat up moves) and 2 aggressive ones is honestly pretty stallish by BW standards? Maybe this is going too far though.

Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:20:14 PM	#38
alexwolf King of Conquerors Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,610 Greece	I have said again that i won't allow two offensive Pokemon, as then the teams become more balanced. A balanced team can still be defensive, but is in no way a stall team. __________________ Part of the OU QC team, message me for a check!

Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:26:47 PM	#39
Melee Mewtwo Dat Lugiass Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 639 France	Well that depends on the type of Offensive mons. If you run stuff like Agility or DD then sure but if you run what I talked about in my edit then not really as you basically are just filling two roles even Stall could use: Revenger and Wall Breaker. (or well more like Stall Breaker/Win Condition for CM/BU but the point in the two is to help beat other Stall teams and Bulky Offense)

Dec 2nd, 2012, 4:58:46 PM	#41
Melee Mewtwo Dat Lugiass Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 639 France	Well the Rain Stall sample in the Ubers stall guide is less stally than The Great Southern Trendkill. TGST just has a Revenge Killler (Jirachi) and a win condion (Gliscor) so, personally, I would call that stall. EDIT: The sand stall (Tyranitar) team is also less stally with an offensive spin blocker, CM win condition and Choice Scarf Revenge Killer.

Dec 2nd, 2012, 5:09:44 PM	#42
alexwolf King of Conquerors Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,610 Greece	I agree with you, there can definitely be stall teams with two offensive Pokemon, but there can also be balanced teams with only two offensive Pokemon and this is the problem. So people that know their stuff (the team i was talking about) will decide which teams with two offensive Pokemon are stall teams and which are not. __________________ Part of the OU QC team, message me for a check!

Dec 2nd, 2012, 5:11:08 PM	#43
Melee Mewtwo Dat Lugiass Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 639 France	I guess that always works since it isn't officially defined on what a Stall team is. (We ought to change that)

Dec 2nd, 2012, 6:03:43 PM	#44
BlackLight Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 291	I personally would like to hear from those who don't want to go forward with this project. Currently, more than a quarter of the votes are negative, but I haven't seen any posts as to why not. Anyhow, I would lose to see this project go forward, for different reasons than most. I play offensive teams, having never really been to fond of stall, and as a result, I've never been quite certain how stall works, and thus have had problems beating it (yes, even in this meta). This project has allowed me to take a look at stall from the player's point of view, and has actually helped me get better. Of course I'm going to want to push this forward!

Dec 4th, 2012, 6:42:26 AM	#46
alexwolf King of Conquerors Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,610 Greece	Thx everyone for voicing your opinions and giving me all this useful feedback! The new DT Project will be up shortly with the new rule added! __________________ Part of the OU QC team, message me for a check!