|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 | |||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,742
|
As per this thread, we are holding a vote for which banlist we will begin with for Gen V. This poll is to determine which initial banlist we, as a community, will be endorsing for the beginning of Generation V. If Pokemon are banned by way of a banlist, they will remain banned for the duration of whatever Gen V suspect testing process we have. Only after we've determined the tiering of every other suspect in Gen V may the bans in this list be contested and discussed in Policy Review.
The means for that discussion and the means by which Pokemon will be suspect tested are beyond the scope of this poll. For clarification, the first banlist has no Pokemon on it. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Read the following carefully to make sure that your vote counts. Format your votes using the following method. Code:
1st choice for banlist (Most Preferred) 2nd choice for banlist 3rd choice for banlist 4th choice for banlist 5th choice for banlist (Least Preferred) Any random stuff that you want to type should go under your votes.
Code:
3 4 5 2 1 I strongly believe in (...) and I don't think (...). I chose (...) for (...) reason. Last edited by Rising_Dusk; Oct 26th, 2010 at 12:46:56 AM. Reason: Updated |
|||||
|
|
|
|
#2 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,742
|
3
2 1 5 4 This is my vote, which also demonstrates what a proper ballot looks like. I support the existence of a banlist, but I do agree with those that are against it when they say that we should not ban too much. I feel that banlist #3 provides us with the bare minimum that we can get away with where no one will deny that they will eventually be banned in some form for being overpowered. That said, I also feel from personal experience playing BW that the Pokemon listed in banlist #2 are all overpowered in some manner of speaking. After those two options, I feel that the other banlists are too expansive and would hurt the eventual BW metagame we endorse. For that reason, I support no banlist before them. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
just came to say hello
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
1
3 2 5 4
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,016
|
5
2 3 4 1 |
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
#TimeForChange
![]() ![]() ![]()
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,233
|
1
3 5 2 4
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
The greatest oak was once a little nut that held its ground
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,032
Came by a fork in the road, and went straight
|
5
2 4 3 1 These are my thoughts. I think 5 is solid and bans any Pokemon that have historically been overpowered. If we want, we can always go back and choose suspects from ubers to test in OU, but banning the strongest Pokemon in the game seems like a logical move to develop a good OU metagame to start Generation 5.
__________________
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,299
|
2
3 1 5 4 I am confident enough that all of the 680+ legends will be quickly relegated to uber whatever we end up deciding, including Lugia. Wobbuffet I am very unsure on, I definitely would like to see it having a real test, and Darkrai, I am pretty sure will be uber, but I am not so dead certain I see no value in testing it. Have a nice day.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Aegisthus
![]() ![]() ![]()
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,750
|
2
3 5 4 1
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Kid just rages for a while
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,850
you get sloppy drunk, i stay whiskey neat
|
2
4 5 3 1
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 464
Location
|
2
5 3 4 1 |
|
|
|
|
#11 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,592
|
2
3 1 5 4 |
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Like a Pope
![]()
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,352
The Lonely Tyrant Did Walk Alone...
|
4
5 2 3 1 I seriously cannot believe only one list has Deoxys banned, and it's only one of them. >_>;
__________________
Credits to Fatecrashers for the sexy avatar I wear! Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,185
kiss my ass, this is a holy site.
|
2
5 1 3 4 wobbuffet shouldn't even be considered for a ban at this point 9.9
__________________
9.9 dan likes to ramble <@Fatecrashers> im really gay <@Fatecrashers> and i might fart rainbows |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 584
kazakhstan
|
2
5 4 3 1 |
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
I did my best, I have no regrets!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,261
Vancouver, BC
|
1
3 2 5 4 I wish instead of #2 and #5 we had an option that was without both Lugia and Darkrai rather than either/or so I could have put that second instead. |
|
|
|
|
#16 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
5
2 4 1 3 Banlists 5 and 2 are my preference, since I feel they aren't overly-extensive and they ban Pokemon that I am almost positive will be banned at some point in Generation 5. The banlist is meant to save time while not overzealously relegating Pokemon to Ubers, and I feel banlists 5 and 2 accomplish this. While I'd prefer to see Darkrai begin Uber based on my experiences with it in both Generation 4 and 5, I can see where the controversy for him lies, so I wouldn't mind if banlist 2 was adopted. Banlist 3 just seems so overly arbitrary to me that I'm surprised it's even here. We may as well have no banlist, and while I most certainly do not agree with that position, at least I feel it's more sensible than banlist 3.
__________________
◠‿◠ |
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
is a competitor
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,237
Passaic County, NJ
|
5
2 4 3 1
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
:D
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Moderator
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,175
|
5
2 4 3 1
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Have fun with birds and bees.
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,828
Brampton, Ontario
|
3
1 5 2 4 Last edited by Bologo; Oct 26th, 2010 at 12:14:21 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#20 |
![]() ![]()
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,158
|
5
2 4 3 1 |
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Grant Holt <3
![]() ![]()
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 842
Brisbane
|
2
3 1 5 4 |
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,777
Location: Alaska, USA Occupation: Gamer Gamerscore: 84319
|
2
5 3 1 4 #2 and #5 remove everything that absolutely needs to be covered, but I agree with Firestorm that it's lame that they alternate one ban and make us pick the lesser of two evils. I'd be all for #4 if it didn't include Wobbuffet (which I will not advocate under any circumstance); I also don't know why it's lacking Darkrai, since I'm supposing that to be the all inclusive list. I fail to see why #3 does not include Reshiram/Zekrom, they're more ridiculous than Dialga/Palkia. I should have spoken up in the other thread, minor tweaks to each list would make them all solid options. Also come on pokedex listings are so much easier to comprehend than alphabetical.
__________________
Now playing: Minecraft, Street Fighter x Tekken |
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Atticus
![]() ![]()
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,248
Toronto
|
4
5 2 3 1
__________________
Last edited by Atticus; Oct 26th, 2010 at 6:42:12 PM. Reason: change of heart |
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
UNH UNH UNH UNH
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,915
|
2
5 3 4 1 |
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,710
|
1
3 2 4 5
__________________
Analyzing battle data for luck factors... |
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|