Auto weather poll

[MeteorMiss]

Someone suggested in the metagame discussion thread that a poll should be posted regarding if the community "wants" auto weather. Here it is.

To anyone who comes along, this poll is absolutely unofficial and will have no impact on an actual decision.

Personally, I think that auto weather is not broken. Yes, it's a powerful playstyle, but it's not broken. Stall is still viable, despite what some say. You just can't use the same stall team from the BW era. People don't like change. (Admittedly, Tornadus-T hurt stall.)

[BahaWin]

I voted ban drizzle.

OU or not, this metagame isn't funny. Go ban drought too.

Without drizzle and drought the metagame wil be better anyway, SS isn't broken, Hail too. Non-weather metagame : This is the dream.

[thesynchrohero]

I voted ban drizzle, with drizzle there is no reason to run swift swim pokemon in OU,plus what was going through the minds of the people to ban swift swim + drizzle but not chlorophyll + drought

[Bent1ey]

Did you ask a mod permission to open this thread? I think that the question is a bit loopsided to be honest, people who don't care about weather being banned at all aren't really included in this question and have no motivation to actually participate on it. In fact, I think that the way this question is postulated leans blindly in favor to the ban side, if only because those people are mobilized against Drizzle.

A more valid question is probably if Drizzle should be considered as a banning choice inmediately when Gen VI arrives, instead of beating around the bush and banning combinations. Obviously we need to see how the new battle system changes, and which new pokes are introduced, but since many are asking already whether or not there will be a list of banned pokemon from the get to go, a list of suspects sounds like an interesting possibility, even if Drizzle ends up not being banned.

[Hugin]

Drought has fewer abusers. Drizzle had SS, Hurricane, Thunder, Tentacruel, etc. Drought has Chlorophyll and nothing else. The SS ban was an attempt to limit rain, bring it down to the level of the other weathers, without banning it completely. Which, admirable goal, but there's been a lot released that helps rain since then. If we were running the SS test now, would there be any doubt Drizzle would be gone?

I voted to ban Drizzle, but I don't think Drought and Sand are balanced. Removing rain, though, which is so metagame-defining, could change a lot, potentially making the other weathers balanced.

[BlankZero]

Tornadus has already been banned, so why complain? Just keep a Ferrothorn on your team and Rain loses without a Keldeo.

[BdB4445]

As much as people get annoyed about auto weather threads, I'll add my input.

Auto-weather doesn't deserve to stay in OU, in my opinion. Whether you compare the abilities to others like levitate or regenerator or compare a weather playstyle to weatherless. It's very OP.

Consider these points:

• The only cost for weather is switching in or starting with the pokemon. Switch-ins are more risky, but you can change weather midturn and screw up another pokemon's benefits. For something so crucial to gameplay needs a balance to it.
• Auto-weather is permanent until changed by something else. I wouldn't mind it as much if it only lasted 5 or so turns. This is likely the main contribution to swift-swim being banned and individual pokes like keldeo and torn-T being suspected (Edit: just heard that Torn-T is banned now).
• Auto-weather bans more than it's worth. Excadrill is banned, swift swim isn't allowed with drizzle (and typically doesn't work well enough because of drizzle) yet chlorophyll is. Sand-veil is banned, Garchomp was banned, then Keldeo and Tornadus-T were suspected. It is a bad form of balance and makes the metagame lack diversity.

Those are 3 things that I can think of at the moment. I don't have much time considering I have an exam coming up. But I honestly believe that banning auto-weather to ubers only would bring peace back to OU. I would expect a massive adjustment to tiering, but I think Auto-weather is well worth suspect-testing if nearly every pokemon that's tested/banned has a link to permanent weather.

Edit: I'm actually cool with Sandstream and Snow Warning now that I think about it.

[jrrrrrrr]

idk if you all realize this but we've spent 2 YEARS now trying to nerf rain - and many people STILL think it's broken. We've banned dozens of Drizzle abusers and it is still the most overcentralizing dominant force in the metagame.

The only argument I can see against banning Drizzle is "what about Drought?" Well, we can suspect Drought too! We shouldn't have to hold off on banning clearly broken things because it *MIGHT* make something else broken, that is how progress is stalled.

Originally Posted by Fat X5Dragon

I voted keep, it's called OU after all.

So let's unban Genesect, Thundurus and Excadrill. It's called OU after all.

[BahaWin]

Why ban drizzle?

- Because +50% stabb on water-type attack is broken.
- Because lot of rain overcentralize the metagame.
- Because Keldeo is too powerful under the rain.

Drizzle ban, yes.

Why ban drought?

- Because of chlorophyll.
- Venusaur is broken.
- Because without rain, this is the sun.

Why no ban SS?

- Because it is no broken
- 50% on rock type? 2 pokemon : Terrakion and Tyanitar
- Boost attack type? 1 pokemon : Landorus-I
- 50% speed boost? 2 pokemon : Sandslash and Stoutland
- So scary !
- Because the pokemon which is the most broken is Tyranitar.

Why ban hail is useless?

- 1 weather abuser : Kyurem.
- That's all. This weather look for counter other weather, so, without rain and sun, and, in crazy world, sand steam, hail are useless.

[Lord Dakoth]

I don't think that auto-weather itself is broken. Yes, Sand Stream/Sand Veil is broken, and Drizzle/Swift Swim sure is, but I don't think that the weather itself is the problem. Yes, it is kind of overpowered, but I don't think it's completely broken.

Weather has completely changed the way the metagame is played, just like SR did. Before DW was released (and even now) there were plenty of teams that focused on setting up entry hazards and shuffling. Battles were often decided by which side most effectively used entry hazards, and any team not prepared to counter entry hazards would likely lose. It's the same way with weather now - most teams have an auto-weather inducer and are built to counter other weather teams.

I don't think that the "ban weather because it's broken" is entirely valid. However, I think one could still make a strong point for "ban weather because it's not that fun."

[Lee]

our stubborness to preserve weather at all costs totally fucked up this generation and it's nearly over now so I say we just say 'what the hell' and take the plunge - I've never known such a universally slated metagame as BW2OU so it's not as if we have anything to lose, right?

no offense to those tiering contributors who I know have worked tirelessly behind the scenes, but you can't polish a turd.

[Box]

Today I saw a team with every single weather starter plus Kyurem-B. It made me sad.

--
On topic, I don't see how any weather is broken. I run a weatherises HO team and have absolutely no trouble at all beating weather. In fact, Rain teams without Jirachi and Sun teams without Sawsbuck are completely decimated by my team. This, funnily enough, was not planned in the initial stages of creating my team and goes to show that weather is indeed far from centralising as all you need is a well-formed team that is balanced.

Of course this is just my experience. I still think all this whining over weather is silly.

[Eggbert]

Banning auto weather, or at least drizzle + drought and excadrill at once might have made the game worse, or it might make it better. Either way, it's was worth testing for a few weeks. Changes should be tested more quickly instead of being so indecisive and taking forever to make small changes. This way we could quickly find what works and what doesn't. This game could have been alot better a long time ago. Hopefully more can be done to test changes in XY.

As for no weather teams, yes they can work. But why disadvantage yourself by trying to combat chloro saur, sun boosted volcarona or darmanitan, specs rain keldeo, rain dish tentacruel, and hydra-rest vaporeon when you can run a weather to gain similar advantages or counter them?

[MeteorMiss]

Originally Posted by Fat Bent1ey

Did you ask a mod permission to open this thread? I think that the question is a bit loopsided to be honest, people who don't care about weather being banned at all aren't really included in this question and have no motivation to actually participate on it. In fact, I think that the way this question is postulated leans blindly in favor to the ban side, if only because those people are mobilized against Drizzle.

A more valid question is probably if Drizzle should be considered as a banning choice inmediately when Gen VI arrives, instead of beating around the bush and banning combinations. Obviously we need to see how the new battle system changes, and which new pokes are introduced, but since many are asking already whether or not there will be a list of banned pokemon from the get to go, a list of suspects sounds like an interesting possibility, even if Drizzle ends up not being banned.

I am generally against instabanning something unless it is very clearly broken (read: reshiram) at the start of a generation. That's why things like Darkrai, Shaymin-S and Deoxys-A were allowed in the first round of testing in Gen V. Yes, they turned out to be broken, but there was a chance that they would be fine. It's the same with Drizzle - if Gen VI introduces 5 more pokemon as influential as Ferrothorn, Drizzle might not be an issue anymore. I wouldn't be against suspecting it, but we shouldn't put it on the initial banlist.

[Wizarus]

Originally Posted by Fat Lee

our stubborness to preserve weather at all costs totally fucked up this generation and it's nearly over now so I say we just say 'what the hell' and take the plunge - I've never known such a universally slated metagame as BW2OU so it's not as if we have anything to lose, right?

no offense to those tiering contributors who I know have worked tirelessly behind the scenes, but you can't polish a turd.

I have to agree with this. Weather took priority over pretty much everything this generation. Every weatherless strategy not named hyper offense was nerfed by it, and the introduction of powerful and fast pokemon(new and old) that become even more powerful and faster under weather made this generation so offensively inclined, that it was almost unbearable. Bulky pokemon were barely able to switch in and force out once, and teams were running 2 scarfers to keep themselves from being swept.

[BahaWin]

Wait & see... Or bleed...

I think, I expect, I guess the 1st February two ladder : in one hand current OU, on the other hand OU without weather.

One week to make the decision, one month to play, one suspect to choose the destiny of OU.

And in the February stats, we could see two metagame, with weather and without weather.

[alexwolf]

I still don''t get why people think that Drizzle alone is broken, like it is the easiest conclusion to make. Saying '''so many Pokemon were overpowered under Rain so rain is broken'''' is a flawed train of thought. A number of contributing factors broke those Pokemon and not rain alone. So in order to see if Drizzle is broken or not, one should see if it has more positive effects than negatives on the tier, not if some Pokemon become overpowered under it. While OU may lost some Pokemon due to Drizzle, such as Manaphy and Torn-T, many more Pokemon became relevant to OU, which means increased diversity.

So ask yourself if rain brings more positives or negatives in OU, not how many threats were banned partially because of rain, because even more rain abusers are not broken under rain, implying that Drizzle is not an inherently broken ability. The only reason why it should be considered for a ban is because it makes the metagame unhealthy, aka not diverse and skill promoting.

tl;dr pls no more mindless ''we are nerfing rain for two years, ban it already'' posts.

[BKC]

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

ask yourself if rain brings more positives or negatives in OU

It places a ridiculous amount of emphasis on team matchup and creates games where lesser players are beating better players because of it, more often than not.

[Melee Mewtwo]

The tricky part about banning Drizzle is that it isn't just the question of the brokenness of one Pokemon. It's a very wide supporting ability and is much more difficult to properly analyze. It's like trying to decide whether or not Stealth Rock is broken. In any case, I'm not so open to the idea of banning Drizzle, now. It's kinda too late to be considering making such a large change.(Then again, why should we leave a metagame to rot just because a new one may show up before it is finished?)

Personally, I would rather be looking at Deo-D and Custap Berry that make SR + Spikes normal battle conditions.

Originally Posted by Fat jrrrrrrr

idk if you all realize this but we've spent 2 YEARS now trying to nerf rain - and many people STILL think it's broken. We've banned dozens of Drizzle abusers and it is still the most overcentralizing dominant force in the metagame.

The only argument I can see against banning Drizzle is "what about Drought?" Well, we can suspect Drought too! We shouldn't have to hold off on banning clearly broken things because it *MIGHT* make something else broken, that is how progress is stalled.

The only rain abusers we have banned are Manaphy, Tornadus-T and, to some extent, Thundurus. (IIRC it was much more than just Thunder that made it so dangerous) We've spent two years changing our suspect system and banning/unbanning/testing a lot of other stuff. (It's kinda disappointing to see you of all people to bring up "overcentralizing" :P)

Originally Posted by Fat Lee

you can't polish a turd.

Lol

[UltiMario]

Team preview basically forces team match-ups already.

Unless one player has a ton more skill than another you can basically tell what the outcome is going to be before the game starts. Even if we had the Gen IV metagame with team preview it would still allow players to play their cards to a team advantage since you know exactly what you're dealing with before you deal with it.

Drizzle hasn't been broken since the SwSw/Manaphy ban went through, Tornadus and Thundurus got sniped along the way because people still seem to hate anything that's even moderately useful in rain, but it hasn't been broken for years.

Game Freak pulled the trump card. We have entered the era of auto weather. Every single Gen from this point on will be weather wars. This is where it began. This is where the haters just need to get their head out of the gutter and stop trying to force Gen V to be Gen IV. Go back and play Gen IV if you want to do that.

[Bent1ey]

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

I still don''t get why people think that Drizzle alone is broken, like it is the easiest conclusion to make. Saying '''so many Pokemon were overpowered under Rain so rain is broken'''' is a flawed train of thought.

Drizzle is a very powerful effect on its own right, and it is not the fact that many dangerous banned threats have been banned by abusing rain what makes it broken, it's the fact that despite so many loses Drizzle continues to predominate because there are many effects that are boosted in comparision to other weathers.

Originally Posted by Fat alexwolf

So ask yourself if rain brings more positives or negatives in OU, not how many threats were banned partially because of rain, because even more rain abusers are not broken under rain, implying that Drizzle is not an inherently broken ability.

I'm actually all for the positive side of Drizzle, I do believe it brings a balance of sorts -and I don't mean keeping other weathers from dominating, I truly mean admitting bumping certain pokemon up which would be underwhelming otherwise-, but the argument became less and less true as more powerful pokemon were introduced into the tier. I do like this argument and I believe its true to a degree.

But its essentially theorymoning until Drizzle gets actually banned, and post-rain meta gets established. Smogon is not about justifyng theoretical metas by extensive theorymoning, its about testing to achieve actual balance. Until this gets some serious testing I don't see why we should assume Drizzle is bringing that many positive things.

[MeteorMiss]

Originally Posted by Fat UltiMario

Team preview basically forces team match-ups already.

Unless one player has a ton more skill than another you can basically tell what the outcome is going to be before the game starts. Even if we had the Gen IV metagame with team preview it would still allow players to play their cards to a team advantage since you know exactly what you're dealing with before you deal with it.

Drizzle hasn't been broken since the SwSw/Manaphy ban went through, Tornadus and Thundurus got sniped along the way because people still seem to hate anything that's even moderately useful in rain, but it hasn't been broken for years.

Game Freak pulled the trump card. We have entered the era of auto weather. Every single Gen from this point on will be weather wars. This is where it began. This is where the haters just need to get their head out of the gutter and stop trying to force Gen V to be Gen IV. Go back and play Gen IV if you want to do that.

I agree with this. I do think that Tornadus-T was overcentralizing though, since you either had to have a Jirachi or a Zapdos to avoid getting the entire team worn down. Also, I wasn't playing competitively at the time of the Thundurus ban, but rain was only part of the problem, and Prankster didn't help either.

[Deglas]

I'm rather new, but I have to say that weather is fine. All it means is that you have to actually think a bit more when team building. The same apllies to many other things in the metagame. When teambuilding you have to plan for common Pokemon, or you will get swept by them. (Like Terrakion, or Landorus, or Breloom, or Dragonite, or Kyurem-B, or Cloyster, or- well, you get the idea) Yes, you cannot cover every possible Pokemon and strategy perfectly in one team, but that does not mean that common Pokemon and strategies should be banned. It just means that there are hundreds of Pokemon out there, and even more possible 6-Pokemon teams.

[Lord of Bays]

The difference between that, Deglas, is that the player not using weather has to think more, which isn't exactly a problem, but the player using weather has to think less. Nothing should ever be an "I Win" button, it's why we banned Genesect and contributed to why we banned Tornadus-T.

[MeteorMiss]

With regard to the question of "What should be banned", I'd like to redirect everyone to DougJustDoug's Characteristics of a Desirable Metagame thread. This acts as our "constitution" of sorts, as it is the basis off of which we should make our decisions. The "variety" section is the one of particular concern in this debate, along with the "balance" section.

The problem with weather wars is this. From the start, some weathers have advantages over others. (For example, rain has an advantage over sun due to super-effective STAB.) Rain also has a general advantage over sand, but hail has an advantage over rain. The problem is that hail has very few abusers/sweepers, so very few people run hail. This is why rain is the dominant weather. (Sun has plenty of abusers, but its natural weaknesses to Rain and Sand make it far less viable.)

So, the big question is, should we ban drizzle? I don't think we should. While some claim that rain is everywhere or rain is uncounterable, simply look at the usage stats. Politoed had less than 20% usage in december. That's hardly something I consider "overcentralizing". I maintain that the metagame has far more variety than people notice.