Garchomp and Sand Veil Discussion

[Hiddenfreezer]

Originally Posted by Fat Feel the Aura

In all seriousness, Garchomp should be unbanned due to having seriopus competition for a teamslot as well as the fact that he isn't too hard to handle without sand veil.

I agree with this. Garchomp isn't quite a superforce per se. And I LOVE the fact that you can abuse the electric resist nice thanks to random thunder wave or thunderbolts, unlike his flying brothers.

Furthermore while testing, the best set by far is subsalac chomp. It combines the natural power of sword dance with a important speed boost to laugh at ScarfSalamence or ScarfLand.



Garchomp (M) @ Salac Berry
Trait: Rough Skin
EVs: 252 Atk / 252 Spd / 4 Def //HP IV 30
Jolly Nature (+Spd, -SAtk)
- Dragon Claw / Dual Chop (Everyone hates enemy subs, but can miss :/)
- Earthquake
- Sword Dance
- Substitute


Another nice thing is that although rough skin has like 0 uses, you can block a rapid spinner if he has really low hp. I think that's a little nice bonus

------------------------------------------------

Is Sand veil broken yes/no. If your check and counter dies to sand veil glis, than something can't be right...

[srk1214]

I was attempting to use Garchomp as a bulky Stealth Rocker and Phazer just to give it a shot, as a change of pace from offensive sets. It worked ok, but was completely outperformed by it's replacement Landorus-T. So yeah... don't use bulky Chomp.

[Ames]

I like the idea of a sub-salac set - that might be just what chomp needs to keep up with the current meta. Unfortunately due to the sheer amount of priority moves flying around it has become significantly more difficult to set up sub-salac pokemon.

[Hiddenfreezer]

Originally Posted by Fat Ames

I like the idea of a sub-salac set - that might be just what chomp needs to keep up with the current meta. Unfortunately due to the sheer amount of priority moves flying around it has become significantly more difficult to set up sub-salac pokemon.

Note that (not sure if that's the most intelligent way) is that I abuse sub salac similar to double dance strategies: Fast enemies, sub, slow enemies sword dance. Combine that with "Jirachi is my biatch!" as you sword dance or sub on the switch, and you have a beast in your hand.

Furthermore, most sweepers dies to priority. Another cool thing is that rough skin punish u-turn/rapid spin, so you can abuse it slightly with sub^^

I mean think about it in an other perspective. Jirachi is used against Lati@s. Now with Chomp, you have a good way to deal with it, which isn't limited to a defensive role!. If I had better teambuildung skills, I would try a chomp/lati@s/zone/antiweathermon/filler/filler team.
Too bad you can't ask on this site for help on this :(

[Seth Vilo]

Originally Posted by Fat IstheCakeReallyaLie

I agree with the part of Pokemon thing for sure, but Sand Veil IS broken. Evs. raising moves/items/abilities are broken, because if I choose, say, Surf on Keldeo instead of Hydro Pump, I'm trading power for less hax.

Just my opinion, though.

I just thought I'd put this here...

From here:

Originally Posted by Fat Quoted from "Characteristics of a Desirable Metagame

Luck
The metagame should allow a reasonable degree of chance to affect all facets of gameplay and game outcomes.

Explanation:
Game players love the excitement, tension, and unpredictability associated with luck factors in games. While Pokemon is not a game of "pure chance", luck is a contributing factor in almost all major gameplay elements. If the metagame seeks to eliminate or unreasonably reduce elements of chance, it would run contrary to part of the basic appeal of Pokemon gameplay. The metagame should have many features that rely on random probability, and allow luck to have a significant role in determining competitive outcomes.

Issues and Concerns:
Should luck be zero sum?
How much luck is "reasonable"? What makes luck "unreasonable"?
Are Skill and Luck mutually exclusive? Or complimentary?
Other Comments:
While some players supposedly despise luck, it is a compelling underlying lure for many players. While this characteristic can be maddeningly hard to quantify and analyze, it's existence as a positive feature of the game should not be ignored.

From Jimera0 here:

Originally Posted by Fat Jimera0

I've already gone over this [the "Luck factor" of a desirable metagame], but I'll do so again. This here clearly, undeniably, with utmost clarity, states that even though some players supposedly claim to despise luck (I'm looking at you Alexwolf) that Smogon officially considers it to be a, I quote "postive feature of the game". It also quite clearly states that we should not seek "to eliminate or unreasonably reduce elements of chance". I don't know about you, but I fully consider that going to the lengths of a complex ban in order to remove a factor that only affects 1% of games or less is "unreasonable".

By our own rules for a desirable metagame, the Sand Veil/Snow Cloak argument should now be over, since banning it would violate our own principles for said desirable metagame.

If I'm out of line in stating this argument is now over (@mods or council people), I would enjoy an explanation of why our backs are being turned against our already established rules. If we can make exceptions to our rules so blatantly like this, why is there such a wall to only banning what is broken, like JUST Sand Veil on Garchomp? The only explanation I've gotten is that it's a "complex ban", or "multiple part" ban, and that we've never banned Pokemon and abilities before cause it's against our rules and principles. This is a rather nasty hypocritical situation we've created.

Again, mods and council people, I'd like an explanation as to why this is acceptable. Forgive me if I sound confrontational, but nothing gets me more furious than blatant hypocrisy, and without an explanation that's all I see going on here.

I'll stop typing before I get myself banned.

[Stone RG]

So, i read every single comment, however none of them after the 2 tourneys, im really looking forward to using Chomp (i couldnt this last weekend) so someone please tell me is chomp is getting down to OU with Sand Veil banned, is it going Uber or (maybe, i have hopes) Sand Veil also being tested.

Guys, also wanna say i wasnt serious about the Sand Veil thing, i know its broken as hell even in something who lacks the traits to abuse it as Gliscor lol.

[GatoDelFuego]

While there has been a lot of discussion about garchomp being back or not, I'd like to know what some of the "experienced" players think of him, as I haven't seen very much input from the smogon council on the issue. Are they just trying to stay out of the debate, or are they trying to let the community "decide" whether garchomp is broken or not?

[Kevin Garrett]

Rough Skin Garchomp has many positive impacts on the metagame. First and foremost, it balances out Genesect by reducing the effectiveness of the Expert Belt set. Genesect was gearing up to be a potential suspect, but with Garchomp around I think it is much more manageable. Not only with the Expert Belt set, but Genesect players can't safely predict a switch out and use U-Turn. In my experience on the ladder, SD Garchomp was the most common set I encountered. It is still probably the best set Garchomp has to offer. Scarf is good, but it leaves an opening to be set up on by your opponent. With Garchomp on a Sun team, there are plenty of things that ruin the typical counters to Garchomp and that puts additional strain on the rest of the team. That being said, there are an abundance of things that beat Garchomp in this metagame. One thing I have noticed is that there are fewer Rain teams as this test has continued, which means you don't see as much Tornadus-T. VoltTurn is a top level strategy and Garchomp is a good addition to help balance it out with its resistances and Rough Skin.

It makes a big difference to be able to play against Garchomp and know your moves will make contact. As someone who abused Sand Veil in BW, I can say having that ability would make it a deal breaker once again. While it is not broken with Rough Skin, it will still be in the top percentage of usage because it is nearly the perfect Pokemon. You would have a hard time coming up with something to fit OU with a better stats distribution and typing than Garchomp. The biggest thing that separated it from other threats in the past was the 20% accuracy reduction. Even after Garchomp was banned in BW, you saw a Pokemon that was best served as a wall turn into a terror in SD Gliscor with Sand Veil. That set won big games for players when they were dead to rights. Hopefully this test will lead to a new policy in the future.

Enjoy the tours this weekend. I'm looking forward to them now that everyone has had a chance to experiment with Garchomp.

[Sol64]

Originally Posted by Fat Kevin Garrett

Smogon Tour will be featuring a suspect test in the BW2 OU metagame this weekend for Garchomp and Sand Veil. Garchomp will be reintroduced to OU with Rough Skin, while Sand Veil will be banned from every Pokemon that has access to the ability. There will be a ladder set up on Pokemon Showdown! for anyone that wants to experiment and develop the metagame leading up to the Tours. The schedule for the tests are listed below:

Well say goodbye to haxy defensive Sandshrew and gliscor.

And also though this may not need any saying but I have to understand as this wasn't really noted out clearly.
You're only banning the ability and not the pokemon as a whole as you did with your 'plain' decision with Blaziken? I understand that Garchomp can be used NOT under sand veil so i'm going to assume this is the case with other pokemon in the same boat. I just wanted to confirm that as that simple misunderstanding can cause such petty things such as this.

Originally Posted by Fat srk1214

I was attempting to use Garchomp as a bulky Stealth Rocker and Phazer just to give it a shot, as a change of pace from offensive sets. It worked ok, but was completely outperformed by it's replacement Landorus-T. So yeah... don't use bulky Chomp.

That was actually used back in the day before Garchomp got banned the first time in 5th gen.

[IstheCakeReallyaLie]

...

---

By our own rules for a desirable metagame, the Sand Veil/Snow Cloak argument should now be over, since banning it would violate our own principles for said desirable metagame.

If I'm out of line in stating this argument is now over (@mods or council people), I would enjoy an explanation of why our backs are being turned against our already established rules. If we can make exceptions to our rules so blatantly like this, why is there such a wall to only banning what is broken, like JUST Sand Veil on Garchomp? The only explanation I've gotten is that it's a "complex ban", or "multiple part" ban, and that we've never banned Pokemon and abilities before cause it's against our rules and principles. This is a rather nasty hypocritical situation we've created.

Again, mods and council people, I'd like an explanation as to why this is acceptable. Forgive me if I sound confrontational, but nothing gets me more furious than blatant hypocrisy, and without an explanation that's all I see going on here.

I'll stop typing before I get myself banned.

I guess I'm trying to say this: if you want to rely on luck, then you can, but forcing your opponent to rely on it is wrong.

[Agent Dell]

Not to offend anyone personally, but nerfing a Pokemon simply by limiting their traits, like what this discussion happens to be doing, is a rather unsettling and unusual way of managing things. Sure, getting rid of Moody was the right thing, considering that anything was worth banning to those who pertained the ability, but anything else in particular doesn't outright deserve it, especially in the means of aiming it at ONE particular Pokemon. It will just complicate things a little too much, if you think about it.

Most of this (and other posts) explains why I don't see the point of having a discussion about this. If you're going to retest Garchomp while banning Sand Veil, then you might as well ban Snow Cloak, while also retesting Blaziken without Speed Boost, Excadrill without Sand Rush, and other banned Pokemon that benefit from their abilities. With this, I think that it would complicate Smogon's approach too much, which is why I don't support this.

[alkinesthetase]

EDIT: post retracted... sigh. see below

original post contents

---

sand veil is not being banned just because it gives us an excuse to bring garchomp back into the tier. sand veil was also banned as the start of a dialogue on the nature of evasion and as an answer to other sand veil abusers, the most prominent one being subsd acrobatics gliscor. it should come as no surprise that the set that infuriates people is subsd... just as garchomp's most successful set was in its original lifetime. i have never had the misfortune of dealing with it, but many see this as potent evidence that sand veil is broken on mons other than garchomp.

in other words, the argument being made is that sand veil is uncompetitive, therefore it should be banned. whether or not this is true is up for discussion (as this thread and others have shown), but the argument is not "we want garchomp back but sand veil makes it too good, so ban sand veil to bring back chomp". rather the argument is "sand veil is uncompetitive and promotes too much luck in our metagame, so ban sand veil", and the side effect is that since garchomp was a very very popular sand veil abuser, it's been unbanned. the council can probably elaborate more or correct me if my view is mistaken, but past posts from the thread leaders seem to support my position

[Jimera0]

Originally Posted by Fat alkinesthetase

sand veil is not being banned just because it gives us an excuse to bring garchomp back into the tier. sand veil was also banned as the start of a dialogue on the nature of evasion and as an answer to other sand veil abusers, the most prominent one being subsd acrobatics gliscor. it should come as no surprise that the set that infuriates people is subsd... just as garchomp's most successful set was in its original lifetime. i have never had the misfortune of dealing with it, but many see this as potent evidence that sand veil is broken on mons other than garchomp.

in other words, the argument being made is that sand veil is uncompetitive, therefore it should be banned. whether or not this is true is up for discussion (as this thread and others have shown), but the argument is not "we want garchomp back but sand veil makes it too good, so ban sand veil to bring back chomp". rather the argument is "sand veil is uncompetitive and promotes too much luck in our metagame, so ban sand veil", and the side effect is that since garchomp was a very very popular sand veil abuser, it's been unbanned. the council can probably elaborate more or correct me if my view is mistaken, but past posts from the thread leaders seem to support my position

While I can't speak directly for the council, I can say that actually that isn't correct. At least, as long as my source is right about it. The main reason for Sand Veil's banning this time around IS to free Garchomp. Basically, their reasoning is that Sand Veil can be banned with minimal impact on the Pokemon that carry it now that they all have alternate abilities released. The net result is that a few Pokemon lose maybe one set (with the exception of poor Cacturne, who I still hope they find a work around for), whereas Garchomp, a very important Pokemon, gets released. Banning Sand Veil in its entirety avoids a complex ban too and all the hubbub those always cause. Essentially, they think the net gain is greater than the net loss. Not mention that I'm sure some of them aren't too sad to see Sand Veil go.

That's why Snow Cloak hasn't been brought up at all in the OP, and why the test is as it is instead of Sand Veil and Garchomp separately.

I know this because I asked directly about it after the whole fiasco at the start of this thread. Honestly, I actually find this reasoning easier to live with than what Alkinesthetase presumed would be correct. As I'm sure you're all aware by now I don't want it to become official policy to prune luck elements in the name of preserving "skill". The counsel's reasoning avoids that whole debate altogether. While it does bring up the issues that Agent Dell brought up above, at least this is still easier for me to swallow. After all, I never really cared that much about Sand Veil itself; I was just worried about the precedent banning it would set.

And that's why I've been mostly absent from this thread for the past few days! Now you know.

EDIT: Well just saying that's what I've been told. If it's not the case, feel free to correct me. I just hope that you'd please elaborate on the actual reasoning then, so we can better understand what we're discussing here.

[JabbaTheGriffin*]

Note: That's not my main reason at all

[DetroitLolcat]

Originally Posted by Fat alkinesthetase

sand veil is not being banned just because it gives us an excuse to bring garchomp back into the tier.

It pretty obviously is. Garchomp was unbanned the second Sand Veil was banned on the Suspect ladder because people want Garchomp back in the metagame to balance out Rain, but don't like losing to Sand Veil missing, so they banned Sand Veil to give Garchomp another stint in OU. If Garchomp didn't exist then Sand Veil would never have been mentioned in a serious Suspect discussion in BW1 OR BW2.

i have never had the misfortune of dealing with it, but many see this as potent evidence that sand veil is broken on mons other than garchomp.

SubSD Gliscor has plenty of counters such as Skarmory, Ferrothorn does well too. Physical walls in general defeat it, and it needs an extraordinary amount of luck for people to sweep with SubSD Acrobatics Gliscor. No serious argument has been made or can be made that SubSD Gliscor is a broken threat in BW1 or especially the current metagame, BW2. SubSD Gliscor probably appeared on 2% of teams. SubSD Garchomp was on about 20%. SubSD Gliscor is not as strong, fast, or bulky as Garchomp and Gliscor also has more problems muscling through walls. Furthermore, Gliscor doesn't get Leftovers recovery because of Flying Gem, so it cannot abuse Sand Veil nearly as well as Garchomp can. Gliscor was never broken with Sand Veil and nobody has made a serious argument that it was.

in other words, the argument being made is that sand veil is uncompetitive, therefore it should be banned.

The definition of "competitive" according to Smogon's Characteristics of a Desirable Pokemon Metagame is that a competitive metagame is one in which players play to win. Competitiveness is not defined by the amount of luck or skill that is permitted to exist in a metagame. The Sand Veil=uncompetitive argument is rather popular, but it's also beyond fallacious. Sand Veil is not an unreasonable amount of luck and does not destroy a metagame. It's a 20% chance to evade attacks on one Pokemon. Sure, it's trolled some people in the past, and if people think that SubSD Garchomp is still broken in BW2 then Garchomp should remain in the Uber tier.



Furthermore, if you believe that Garchomp with Rough Skin but not Sand Veil should be allowed then why isn't there an uproar in the forums for banning Speed Boost to Ubers and bringing back Blaze Blaziken?

[Aldaron*]

Just to clarify, I support suspecting Sand Veil because I think Sand Veil is potentially broken. I do not think Snow Cloak is potentially broken. They do similar, not the same, things. One boosts evasion in Sand, and one boosts evasions in Hail. Sand teams, in general, are far more effective than Hail teams, and this shouldn't be ignored.

So issues about complex banning ability + pokemon combinations and snow cloak as well are unfounded; I'm simply suspecting Sand Veil as a whole.

[LucaroarkZ]

Originally Posted by Fat DetroitLolcat

Furthermore, if you believe that Garchomp with Rough Skin but not Sand Veil should be allowed then why isn't there an uproar in the forums for banning Speed Boost to Ubers and bringing back Blaze Blaziken?

By banning Speed Boost, you essentially make Pokemon such as Ninjask and Sharpedo nonviable just so you can unban something that would most likely not make OU without its game-changing ability. Sand Veil, on the other hand, contributes absolutely nothing positive to this metagame and only allows unskilled players to beat skilled players simply by abusing the fuck out of it. It doesn't matter if the Pokemon in question is Garchomp, Gliscor, or even Cacturne, the principle is the same.

[KurashiDragon]

Originally Posted by Fat LucaroarkZ

By banning Speed Boost, you essentially make Pokemon such as Ninjask and Sharpedo nonviable just so you can unban something that would most likely not make OU without its game-changing ability. Sand Veil, on the other hand, contributes absolutely nothing positive to this metagame and only allows unskilled players to beat skilled players simply by abusing the fuck out of it. It doesn't matter if the Pokemon in question is Garchomp, Gliscor, or even Cacturne, the principle is the same.

The main problem with this argument is that Gliscor and Cacturne aren't Garchomp. Garchomp has an almost perfect stats spread and typing. It can be top 20/10 even without sand veil. However, it's absolutely boss with Sand Veil. It can properly abuse Sand Veil's acc reduction like nothing else. Gliscor can maybe abuse Sand Veil to get in a few hax wins but nothing near the scope of Garchomp. It also has a much better ablity in Poison heal so you barely ever see a Sand Veil Gliscor which further diminishes this argument. From what I've heard Cacturne is great with sand viel but nothing gamebreaking. (I dont play nu) Garchomp is the only pokemon that can properly abuse Sand Veil to the point of being broken at one point and that needs to be a factor into whether or not Sand Veil should be banned.

[ThePhalanx]

Originally Posted by Fat KurashiDragon

From what I've heard Cacturne is great with sand viel but nothing gamebreaking. (I dont play nu)

Sand is quite literally nonexistant in the lower tiers... The only reason people are complaining about it is that, should Sand Veil be banned, Cacturne loses one of its most effective sets (which it can only have through 4th gen). I play NU, and this is what I'm sad about :[ Though it may give an excuse for Golem to see a little more usage.

Now Garchomp, on the other hand, I'm really excited to see. While I wish there would be another way to unban it without banning Sand Veil, I believe Garchomp would be a great addition to the metagame. It's not as broken without Sand Veil hax making your Mamo miss Ice Shard or something similar, and it's quite capable of making top 10 just because of its stats.

[Ninetale3]

I believe that sand veil shouldn't be banned just for the sake of garchomp in ou.

Sand veil is not an ability that can't or shouldn't be abused. 20% can be annoying but isn't broken. So you got beaten by someone using sand veil. That's like what 1 out of the 100 battles that happened. I'm all up for garchomp in ou, but for banning sand veil because someone is too scared to fight a garchomp in its full might is just not worth it.

[Thorhammer]

Originally Posted by Fat GatoDelFuego

I've noticed that most people posting here are saying that "bringing down garchomp would have a positive influence because it would allow you to check the weather teams running around". Just think about how stupid that sounds. Why don't we bring down ExtremeKiller Arceus to deal with all the sun teams?

I won't say my opinion of whether or not garchomp is broken, but if we're reaching into ubers to check something in OU, maybe we should try to get rid of the things from OU before we bring down anything from ubers.

We're not reaching randomly into the banlist. We're looking at things that have a good reason to believe they're not currently broken, which we obviously want to unban if that's the case. If they prevent other, unnecessary bans, that's even better, and is a reason why we must do the unbans first so that they have a chance to prevent those unnecessary bans.

Obviously, the deciding factor is whether or not Garchomp is broken - or rather, the deciding factor is the fact that Garchomp is not broken. But there's no sense in not recognizing the other benefits he brings.

[GatoDelFuego]

I'm not saying that garchomp is broken or not, I'm saying that a vast majority of the arguments that seem to get made here are just talking about things that garchomp can beat (sun, rain, volt-turn). If you want to convince someone that it deserves to be in OU, start talking about what it can't beat.

[KurashiDragon]

Originally Posted by Fat GatoDelFuego

I'm not saying that garchomp is broken or not, I'm saying that a vast majority of the arguments that seem to get made here are just talking about things that garchomp can beat (sun, rain, volt-turn). If you want to convince someone that it deserves to be in OU, start talking about what it can't beat.

It's tough to tell what hasn't already been said. It's not as tough to take down Garchomp as before with more pokemon above 102 Spd, and it's not nearly as haxy as before so it's SubDance set it's nearly as effective as it used to be.

[alkinesthetase]

sigh well it figures that my understanding was off. high time i backed off from these suspect discussion threads in general, it seems. i can't even tell if anyone is confirming i'm right or wrong anymore. has anybody actually established a position on questions like this? does the council even agree on why garchomp is being tested? or are we all stumbling around in the dark trying to figure out what the basis is for this ladder? it's all well and good to test garchomp but the discussion is inevitably going to keep coming back to WHY this test is being done in the first place, because people are concerned/interested about what other mons could end up falling under similar testing. my posts have already been deleted once for mistakes on this matter; i'd rather someone clear it up than make myself look like an idiot repeatedly. yeah, i'm exasperated, because i seem to be making the same mistakes over and over again, and nobody's correcting me. all i'm getting are counter opinions from other members of the general population, which is all well and good and i have nothing against them, but it's not something official that i can quote when i want to make more posts on the matter.

i will be extremely heavy on the disclaimers so i don't make these mistakes again. i was under the impression (ie an impression that may or may not be correct, emphasis on the part where i am not correct) that sand veil was unbanned for reasons besides garchomp. this raises the legitimate question of why garchomp was unbanned as part of this test, one which i actually struggled to answer coherently in my post. it's quite possible to have tested sand veil separately and dealt with garchomp later, in which case there must be some logic to combining them. i am aware that the reason for chomp being unbanned looks very obvious: garchomp was the premier abuser of sand veil and therefore bringing it back without its prized ability might let us explore how "broken" or "uncompetitive" sand veil is (words in quotes are merely ones being tossed around, not my opinions). however i have yet to see an answer that indicates whether or not my impression is correct. it seems that for some, there is simply a desire to bring garchomp back because it's a good influence on OU and that sand veil is a necessary casualty to prevent garchomp from being "broken" or "uncompetitive", something that's another question of ban philosophy altogether. from aldaron's post above it seems like my position is not entirely wrong, but there seem to be ambiguities, and i am not comfortable with making any further declarations until the stand is clear. so once and for all, i will ask the million dollar question, the one i (and others) seem to keep getting wrong:

what is the motivation behind the formation of this suspect ladder? what is the motivation for banning sand veil, what is the motivation for unbanning garchomp, and how are these two motives connected? is one a direct consequence of the other, or are they two distinct things that happen to go well together? and can the answers please be something official, something that we can feel comfortable referencing and referring to as discussion continues?

and @ detroitlolcat: your post was well composed, but i was really really trying to use impartial language as to my position on garchomp, and for good reason: none of those opinions are explicitly mine; your response is sincerely appreciated (not sarcasm!) but misdirected. i'm not arguing for/against garchomp or for/against sand veil; at the moment i don't think i even have an opinion on it and i sure as hell don't have a right to one (not sarcasm). nor do i have an opinion on sand veil gliscor, a pokemon whose subsd set i have never even played against. however you can check in this very thread to see people talking about subsdscor hax. just search this thread for instances of the word "gliscor" and start reading. anyway my point is that what i AM interested in is the philosophy behind the process, which is the main reason i'm even posting in this thread. trying to convince me one way or the other on whether sand veil, chomp, or gliscor are broken/uncompetitive, or what those words mean in the context of this thread, is largely a lost cause, because it's not why i'm here in the first place. yours was a good post regardless

[DaKing]

let garchomp come back its not broken enough to be in ubers and its easy to check if you got the right pokemon to do it. i never saw a good reason to band it (i know it hits like a truck and its speed is beond fast) but like every thing in this game it has a check