np: OU Suspect Testing Round 3 - So Long and Thanks for all the Fish

[Ulevo]

Originally Posted by Fat badabing

Wow back at it again. You just completely ignore the second half of my post. I totally understand that complex bans are frowned upon and no one wants to create a trend of using them, but in Sand Veil's case it seems to be the cleanest solution. With a complex ban, all movepools are left intact and pokes that aren't broken without their hax-inducing abilities permanently activated can remain in OU. If ability + weather combinations are too complicated for you, maybe you should stick to ingame or go fucking play COD.

Banning Sand Veil entirely doesn't make any sense at all, considering Chomp is the only poke that can abuse those free misses behind a sub to the point where it's gamebreaking. Waiting until DW confirmation on Rough Skin for Chomp and then banning Sand Veil Chomp is also not going to happen. You would just need a plain Garchomp ban because we can't dissect a poke and handpick which qualities are suitable for OU. People tried to make the same argument for Blaziken without Speed Boost.

One, I am not going to address everything you have to say, because believe or not, not everything you say has value. I pick and choose my battles.

And why is waiting until Garchomp gets Rough Skin not going to happen? 'Cause you say so?

Garchomp isn't broken. Garchomp isn't even a problem. Sand Veil is irritating when it causes a loss, but beyond that it isn't an overwhelming dilemma that needs attending to. We've waited thus far, we can wait some more.

[Thorhammer]

Originally Posted by Fat TheValkyries

This is a solution looking for a problem. Honestly, if the RNG screws you over 100 times, there is 400 more times where it didn't. The 20% chance isn't remotely in an area where it is even worth talking about. Excadrill's Rock Slide flinch is more haxy then this, and yet it's never talked about.

The only reason this is even discussed is because a miss against a Garchomp is very dangerous. So there is one of two solutions:

1. Make your team not so damned Garchomp weak, so that a miss doesn't make you lose every single time.

2. If solution 1 is forced upon everyone, and it hinders team-building too much, then ban Garchomp outright.

Sand Veil isn't the problem, only a small piece of a larger one.

All statistics are relative. In competitive Pokemon, where a miss can cost you the game under good circumstances, a 20% chance is very much meaningful. Although Rock Slide's flinch capability has a meaningful chance of occurring, the conditions that must be met in order for it to take effect limit it enough that it can be dealt with strategically. It can only cause a flinch on the turns Excadrill uses Rock Slide, and even then, only when Excadrill moves first. Evasion requires no such conditions, and therefore it is the one form of hax that is inherently uncompetitive. All other forms of hax are irrelevant to this discussion.

As I said, Garchomp illustrates the problem. However, the problem is not Garchomp; the problem is uncompetitiveness, and the uncompetitiveness is equal among all Pokemon with an activated Sand Veil or Snow Cloak ability. For all of these Pokemon, you can't just prepare your team better. Again, a miss can determine a battle not just when a team is unprepared, but when it's as prepared as it can reasonably be.

Originally Posted by Fat badabing

How is that possibly a valid argument? That's the kind of nigger logic I was talking about earlier and it's just not worth repeating myself for.

Please stop talking. You're making my arguments look bad by association.

[alexwolf]

to anyone saying that evasion raising abilities shouldn't be banned 'cause they are only broken,or are considered broken by some,on certain pokes(garchomp with sand veil)i have to say that the point is not brokeness...

the problem with evasion raising abilities in general is that they are UNCOMPETITIVE!
things don't get banned only 'cause of brokeness they also get 'cause of uncompetitiveness...

so the problem with sand veil in every poke is that it introduces unecessary luck to the metagame...it is an ability that has only one purpose:make you miss(don't bring me any arguement like cacturne gets sandstorm immunity,cause we are talking about things that actually matter)...and this is considered uncompetitive 'cause smogon as a competitive community wants luck,whenever it is possible,not interfering with the metagame.

so i am too in supporting thorhammer's proposal of banning any combination of weather ability + evasion raising according ability.
with this ban we:1.get rid of the free evasion boost given to those with any evasion raising ability and 2.we also avoid any restrictions on movesets due to compatability(like cutting half of cacturne's moveset)or banning of pokes due to unreleased dream abilities(garchomp and others) that would happen if we have made a blanket ban on sand veil and snow cloak...

[Ulevo]

I'd never advocate yet another complex ban. I realize that Sand Veil/Snow Cloak do not encourage a competitive environment, but they're bearable until the solution (their Dream World alternatives) come along.

And if we're being honest here, the only OU Pokemon that uses this ability is Garchomp. So, yeah.

[Thorhammer]

Originally Posted by Fat Ulevo

I'd never advocate yet another complex ban. I realize that Sand Veil/Snow Cloak do not encourage a competitive environment, but they're bearable until the solution (their Dream World alternatives) come along.

And if we're being honest here, the only OU Pokemon that uses this ability is Garchomp. So, yeah.

There is nothing inherently undesirable about complex bans, and there's nothing about this complex ban to make it any more undesirable than any other.

[Hyper Cutter]

...so is this Sand Veil/Snow Cloak argument really just a... well, veiled attempt to ban Garchomp? I mean, Hail's so awful Snow Cloak is a non-issue, for all intents and purposes, and the Gible line is the only one restricted to Sand Veil that actually matters...

[Ulevo]

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

There is nothing inherently undesirable about complex bans, and there's nothing about this complex ban to make it any more undesirable than any other.

Except that it complicates the ruleset, and sets a precedent for others like it.

[Thorhammer]

Originally Posted by Fat Hyper Cutter

...so is this Sand Veil/Snow Cloak argument really just a... well, veiled attempt to ban Garchomp? I mean, Hail's so awful Snow Cloak is a non-issue, for all intents and purposes, and the Gible line is the only one restricted to Sand Veil that actually matters...

Precisely why we're saying that Sand Veil should only be banned in combination with Sand Stream.

Originally Posted by Fat Ulevo

Except that it complicates the ruleset, and sets a precedent for others like it.

Complicating the ruleset to this extent is not undesirable, and we can prevent the precedent from extending to bans that are complex to the point of being undesirable by having the people in PR get off their asses and make a decision about the official view towards complex bans now that we've had one for the past three months.

[badabing]

Originally Posted by Fat Ulevo

And why is waiting until Garchomp gets Rough Skin not going to happen? 'Cause you say so?
.

Because replacing Sand Veil with their respective DW abilities for each poke doesn't solve anything. Things like Cacturne and Sandslash lose a lot of their usable movepool without Sand Veil and though that wouldn't have much of a competitive impact even Chomp loses SR and Aqua Tail iirc. People seem to be ignoring that for some reason… Then there is the whole argument that we can't pick and choose which qualities of a poke to allow in OU. That side would say to either ban chomp entirely or don't ban Sand Veil at all. That's why Blaze Blaziken isn't in OU. A complex ban on Sandstream + Sand Veil just seems like a much tidier solution, but I'm not allowed to talk about those anymore. If you read that entirely, hopefully you understand. Thank you for your time.

[Blackdragonking]

If it's really such an issue, I guess sand veil/sand stream ban makes more sense than kneecapping two good UU pokemon and a strong OU sweeper because of something that's not so much broken as it is not ideal for a skill-based metagame. O_o

I still think the only time a Sand Veil Miss is going to break the game is when you're up against Garchomp's Swords Dance set or when something with bad defenses fails to hit Cacturne while it's setting up a Swords Dance or Focus Punch, but I'm not a big competitive battler, so maybe I'm missing something.

[iDunno]

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

Precisely why we're saying that Sand Veil should only be banned in combination with Sand Stream...Complicating the ruleset to this extent is not undesirable...

Hey if you want to ban Sand Veil Garchomp in Sandstorm, then fucking nominate Garchomp AS A WHOLE and stop being a pussy about it. Garchomp is the sum of its parts. Sand Veil makes Garchomp who he is just like Levitate makes Latias who she is or Speed Boost makes Blaziken who he is. Taking off Sand Veil from Garchomp is like taking the Ice Cream out of the Sundae. It. Just. Doesn't. Work.

Do you realize that complex bans are a LAST RESORT and are only made if the element being banned is absolutely vital for the stability of the metagame? Who are you to say that they don't make a metagame any less desirable? You definitely have no right to state that as fact, as it is anything but fact. I know it is not explicitly stated, but that's because the people at PR [mistakenly] assumed that the people on Smogon are mildly intelligent and wouldn't abuse it. Garchomp is not the only column keeping this metagame afloat by far. In contrast, drizzle was one of the only things keeping sun and sand in check, so accommodations had to be made for it. All of your arguments are circular. Actually, I don't think your arguments have enough substance TO BE circular. They're more like a puddle. Stop polluting this thread with your puddles, Thorhammer and company. You have made no convincing arguments at all as to why Garchomp should not be banned by itself. It is the only thing that effectively uses Sand Veil, so why not just ban that? Instead of banning every single pokemon that uses sandstorm, how about just ban ONE. We want a meta with the fewest bans possible, after all. There; I just used one of your fucking horrible arguments against you.

Yeah, I know my argument might be a bit rash, but I don't think this thread deserves my civility. These arguments that are being made out to seem more convoluted than they really are are getting on my last nerve.

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

...PR get off their asses and make a decision about the official view towards complex bans now that we've had one for the past three months.

Uh... get off their asses? Do you realize how PR works? They aren't obligated to do anything for the sake of you or anyone else for that matter. Just because they won't let you post in PR doesn't mean you have to take jabs at them. They have better things to do than contemplate on things that shouldn't even matter. Seriously, this shouldn't even need to be contemplated on. People should know when to stop abusing precedent. You should know when to stop abusing precedent.

Just to make this clear, I would have never replied to your arguments if it weren't for you being so pompous and acting like you were the smartest guy in the thread. It takes a lot for me to post here.

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

Please stop talking. You're making my arguments look bad by association.

Trust me... you don't need help for that.

[kaonohiokala]

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak really don't fall under the "Evasion Clause," as they aren't consistent evasion boosters, unlike, say, Moody which has the possibility to be a consistent evasion booster. Personally, I view it as moronic when people try to aim for a hax-free metagame, because, quite simply, it's impossible. We wouldn't be simulating Pokemon anymore.

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak grants a 20% evasion boost. Compare this to say, Jirachi's Ice Punch, which has a 20% chance to freeze, or Whimsicott's GrassWhistle which has a 55% chance to sleep. Heck, even some moves that would be crucial to the game, such as a 70% Focus Blast or 80% Stone Edge involve "hax." Yes, Garchomp is a strong threat, and 20% of your attacks may miss, but this can also be said about Pokemon who are primarily dealt with with Stone Edge or Focus Blast.

This isn't to say that we should allow all hax, as the Shaymin-S ban was justified as the hax that it caused was ground-breaking. But Shaymin-S's 60% flinch chance is much greater than Garchomp's 20% dodge chance.

[FearZeCrawdaunt]

...

---

Originally Posted by Fat thunderstone

I would like to see Auto-Rain and Auto-Sun banned. However I don't necessarily believe they are broken. They are capable of being dealt with; I just dislike this metagame built around weather.

I think we would be banning something not because it breaks the metagame, but because we dislike the metagame we have atm. And to me it feels like a very different ban than Garchomp or Salamence last gen.

Banning one Pokemon for overcentralising - not breaking - the metagame is one thing; but what about a whole playstyle? To repeat a tired argument, we may as well ban Trick Room because we dislike playing against it.

But this is Smogon and we have never played Pokemon as Game Freak intended; rather we remove Pokemon and strategies we dislike playing against and create an artificial metagame we are comfortable playing and label it standard.

But where do we draw the line between playing Game Freak's intended meta (if they had any intentions at all) and the one that we call Standard? Is banning a whole playstyle too far?

This community has already demonstrated a willingness to stick with Game Freak's wishes by adhering to team preview, something that other communites decided against. However when what Game Freak has given us so clearly needs regulating (Moody, Evasion abuse, OHKO moves) where is it we draw the line?

Just my two cents.

tl;dr

I dislike auto-weather, not convinced it should be banned.

I don't think auto-weather is broken either. I don't even dislike it. I just can't help but notice that the inclusion of auto-weather overcentralizes the game around a key set of abilities. Not pokemon, but abilities. The idea of eliminating auto-weather isn't really one talking about how it's broken, nor even overcentralization of a pokemon or particular strategy. It's simply an interesting point to ponder. We'd be changing the metagame entirely, but is it really a bad thing?

[alexwolf]

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Hey if you want to ban Sand Veil Garchomp in Sandstorm, then fucking nominate Garchomp AS A WHOLE and stop being a pussy about it. Garchomp is the sum of its parts. Sand Veil makes Garchomp who he is just like Levitate makes Latias who she is or Speed Boost makes Blaziken who he is. Taking off Sand Veil from Garchomp is like taking the Ice Cream out of the Sundae. It. Just. Doesn't. Work.

Do you realize that complex bans are a LAST RESORT and are only made if the element being banned is absolutely vital for the stability of the metagame? Who are you to say that they don't make a metagame any less desirable? You definitely have no right to state that as fact, as it is anything but fact. I know it is not explicitly stated, but that's because the people at PR [mistakenly] assumed that the people on Smogon are mildly intelligent and wouldn't abuse it. Garchomp is not the only column keeping this metagame afloat by far. In contrast, drizzle was one of the only things keeping sun and sand in check, so accommodations had to be made for it. All of your arguments are circular. Actually, I don't think your arguments have enough substance TO BE circular. They're more like a puddle. Stop polluting this thread with your puddles, Thorhammer and company. You have made no convincing arguments at all as to why Garchomp should not be banned by itself. It is the only thing that effectively uses Sand Veil, so why not just ban that? Instead of banning every single pokemon that uses sandstorm, how about just ban ONE. We want a meta with the fewest bans possible, after all. There; I just used one of your fucking horrible arguments against you.

Yeah, I know my argument might be a bit rash, but I don't think this thread deserves my civility. These arguments that are being made out to seem more convoluted than they really are are getting on my last nerve.

man pay attention!try to understand others...you are so hostile against others that you are making discussion seem impossible with you..and that is this thread's purpose:discussion.

and in fact thorhammer has real arguements...it's just that you haven't tried to understand them...

when he says that the evasion raising abilities introduce nothing but luck to the metagame what don't you get?their only purpose is introducing luck...they have no other application...that is uncompetitive in my book...and i think that this is smogon's policy also...
isn't the above what evasion clause intented to accomplish...removing unecessary luck from the game....such as ohko moves evasion rasing moves and even evasion raising items?don't you think that if the evasion raising items were banned ,that only offer a fixed small amout of evasion,the evasion raising abilities deserve it also for doing exactly the same thing,except that they provide a larger evasion boost...the only difference is that the evasion raising abiltities must be used alongside their respective weather to be effective...

so that's why thorhammer's proposal is ideal!with his idea we accomplish the removal of the evasion raising abilties but only when they are active(when thei weather is active)...

Originally Posted by Fat kaonohiokala

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak really don't fall under the "Evasion Clause," as they aren't consistent evasion boosters, unlike, say, Moody which has the possibility to be a consistent evasion booster. Personally, I view it as moronic when people try to aim for a hax-free metagame, because, quite simply, it's impossible. We wouldn't be simulating Pokemon anymore.

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak grants a 20% evasion boost. Compare this to say, Jirachi's Ice Punch, which has a 20% chance to freeze, or Whimsicott's GrassWhistle which has a 55% chance to sleep. Heck, even some moves that would be crucial to the game, such as a 70% Focus Blast or 80% Stone Edge involve "hax." Yes, Garchomp is a strong threat, and 20% of your attacks may miss, but this can also be said about Pokemon who are primarily dealt with with Stone Edge or Focus Blast.

This isn't to say that we should allow all hax, as the Shaymin-S ban was justified as the hax that it caused was ground-breaking. But Shaymin-S's 60% flinch chance is much greater than Garchomp's 20% dodge chance.

man it has been said severous times so pls read carefully before posting....all these examples require your opponent to do something(attack,move first or both).also all these moves have main effects other than introducing luck element...

[Hallow]

Originally Posted by Fat kaonohiokala

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak really don't fall under the "Evasion Clause," as they aren't consistent evasion boosters, unlike, say, Moody which has the possibility to be a consistent evasion booster. Personally, I view it as moronic when people try to aim for a hax-free metagame, because, quite simply, it's impossible. We wouldn't be simulating Pokemon anymore.

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak grants a 20% evasion boost. Compare this to say, Jirachi's Ice Punch, which has a 20% chance to freeze, or Whimsicott's GrassWhistle which has a 55% chance to sleep. Heck, even some moves that would be crucial to the game, such as a 70% Focus Blast or 80% Stone Edge involve "hax." Yes, Garchomp is a strong threat, and 20% of your attacks may miss, but this can also be said about Pokemon who are primarily dealt with with Stone Edge or Focus Blast.

This isn't to say that we should allow all hax, as the Shaymin-S ban was justified as the hax that it caused was ground-breaking. But Shaymin-S's 60% flinch chance is much greater than Garchomp's 20% dodge chance.

Now I do not wish to put down the value of this argument, but the fact that most of you people seem to have been missing is that Garchomp has Sand Veil behind a SUBSTITUTE. This means that you need two turns to actually do damge to your opponent. Now when one of these attacks MISSES, Garchomp has a free turn, allowing it to either rejuvenate its Substitute or use another booster, and if it is holding Yache Berry, it can take a hit to its greatest weakness and be almost sure to survive it. This raises the number of turns needed to kill it, with one miss, as follows:

...

---

Turn #1: Garchomp switches in on something weak to it.
Turn #2: You switch to a counter, Garchomp Substitutes.
Turn #3: You attack and MISS. Garchomp uses Swords Dance.
Turn #4: You attack and break the Substitute. Garchomp uses Swords Dance.
Turn #5: You hit with an Ice-type attack, Garchomp takes ~70% damage. It attacks and MISSES.
Turn #6: You attack, Garchomp faints.

You see my point? This was assuming 'Chomp is slower than your Pokémon, and that it misses on the crucial turn. If that miss doesn't happen (and your Pokémon is probably not under Evahax)? Exactly. Sweep without possibility of parole. You need to put this kind of thing into perspective.

[shrang]

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

I didn't say Garchomp is not broken without Sand Veil. I said Garchomp is not broken, period. With Sand Veil activated, Garchomp is uncompetitive, but even then, it is not broken. The key point here is that Garchomp is not broken whether or not we restrict Sand Veil.

For this reason, the Groudon analogy is irrelevant, because Groudon without restrictions is broken, whereas Garchomp without restrictions is not broken, merely uncompetitive. There is a difference, and being uncompetitive is sufficient justification to ban something - it is merely not sufficient justification to ban an entire Pokemon. Furthermore, the problem of Garchomp being uncompetitive doesn't have anything to do with any attribute of Garchomp other than its ability, and therefore it applies equally to all Pokemon with the ability. Therefore, it is the ability that must be addressed, not Garchomp, and in such a way that does not result in the banning of any Pokemon entirely. A complex ban is ideal for this purpose. Because a complex ban takes less from the metagame, less of a problem is needed to justify a complex ability ban than a simple Pokemon ban. Therefore, it is suited to solve the lesser problem of the uncompetitiveness of the combinations of Sand Stream + Sand Veil and Snow Warning + Snow Cloak.

Alright, I know I can't be bothered reading through 100 pages of waffle, but you really need to define what you mean by "uncompetitive" and differentiate it from the word "broken". To me, the two words are virtually synonymous, and my definition is a Pokemon/ability/item/thing is uncompetitive/broken if when used, it creates an unfair advantage that usually is the deciding factor between two people of similar skill. Usually can be loosely defined as a simple majority, ie 50% of the time or more. Before we keep arguing, I would like you to define your own version, otherwise we argue on my terms (Garchomp in Sand is uncompetitive/broken, therefore it should be banned).

[Ulevo]

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

Precisely why we're saying that Sand Veil should only be banned in combination with Sand Stream.


Complicating the ruleset to this extent is not undesirable, and we can prevent the precedent from extending to bans that are complex to the point of being undesirable by having the people in PR get off their asses and make a decision about the official view towards complex bans now that we've had one for the past three months.

And how are you deciding what is and isn't undesirable, Thorhammer? To me it seems like you're making these conditions up as it suits your argument. What standards am I supposed to presume you're using to coming to such a conclusion.


Also, the last time PR had to make a major decision involving precedent, Phil had to intervene and overrule a majority.

Don't count on other people doing things for you.

Originally Posted by Fat badabing

Because replacing Sand Veil with their respective DW abilities for each poke doesn't solve anything. Things like Cacturne and Sandslash lose a lot of their usable movepool without Sand Veil and though that wouldn't have much of a competitive impact even Chomp loses SR and Aqua Tail iirc. People seem to be ignoring that for some reason…

That's because it doesn't matter. You're bringing up very trivial examples here.

Sandshrew and thus Sandslash has Sand Rush now. He won't be running Sand Veil. Dugtrio is exclusively used for Arena Trap. Gliscor uses Poison Heal. Golem and Donphan would rather use Sturdy, Larvitar evolves in to Tyranitar, and Stunfisk would rather run Static.

What do you have left?

You have Garchomp, which is our main concern. And you have Cacturn. Woopee. Cacturn is UU, and no one cares about nor uses Cacturn in OU.

And when was the last time you saw Garchomp use Aqua Tail? I mean seriously?

Originally Posted by Fat badabing

Then there is the whole argument that we can't pick and choose which qualities of a poke to allow in OU. That side would say to either ban chomp entirely or don't ban Sand Veil at all. That's why Blaze Blaziken isn't in OU. A complex ban on Sandstream + Sand Veil just seems like a much tidier solution, but I'm not allowed to talk about those anymore. If you read that entirely, hopefully you understand. Thank you for your time.

I'm proposing that Sand Veil be banned not because it is a quality of individual Pokemon, but because it circumvents Evasion Clause. That's the only reason, and its the only reason I need. At the moment, it is a concern, just not something so grand that it needs to be dealt with by banning Pokemon until the alternative is provided for us.

I can't view a complex ban as a tidier solution, but I've made that apparent already.

Originally Posted by Fat kaonohiokala

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak really don't fall under the "Evasion Clause," as they aren't consistent evasion boosters, unlike, say, Moody which has the possibility to be a consistent evasion booster. Personally, I view it as moronic when people try to aim for a hax-free metagame, because, quite simply, it's impossible. We wouldn't be simulating Pokemon anymore.

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak grants a 20% evasion boost. Compare this to say, Jirachi's Ice Punch, which has a 20% chance to freeze, or Whimsicott's GrassWhistle which has a 55% chance to sleep. Heck, even some moves that would be crucial to the game, such as a 70% Focus Blast or 80% Stone Edge involve "hax." Yes, Garchomp is a strong threat, and 20% of your attacks may miss, but this can also be said about Pokemon who are primarily dealt with with Stone Edge or Focus Blast.

This isn't to say that we should allow all hax, as the Shaymin-S ban was justified as the hax that it caused was ground-breaking. But Shaymin-S's 60% flinch chance is much greater than Garchomp's 20% dodge chance.

The difference in your examples is that I can adequately defend myself against assumed hax from say, Jirachis Ice Punch. While I can't accurately predict the hax, it is a matter of concern, and can be taken in to account while battling and thus dealt with accordingly. I do this all the time.

"I need to switch out my Garchomp. Jirachi is likely using Scarf. I'd rather not get flinched repeatedly, but if he gets a freeze, that could be a problem. So I'll switch to X"

The opponent cannot however adequately prepare for passive evasion without using limited resources available to them, almost none of which are very effective in competitive play.

[badabing]

When was the last time you saw it use SR? Seriously? Usage stats aren't the point either. It's the fact that you're proposing a somewhat shitty solution when only Garchomp can significantly abuse Sand Veil misses. If Garchomp is the problem, why should other movepools have to pay the price? A complex ban is "tidier" because it precisely removes what we have deemed uncompetitive from OU without detrimentally effecting anything else. For reference:

Gliscor loses Roost and SR
Sandslash loses Super Fang, Body Slam, Knock Off, and SR
Cacturne loses Bullet Seed, Dark Pulse, Drain Punch, Encore, Focus Punch, Giga Drain, Superpower, Synthesis, T-Punch
Garchomp loses SR, Aqua Tail, Sleep Talk, Dragon Pulse, and Earth Power

A complex ban may "complicate the ruleset", but at least it doesn't cause irreparable damage to a lot of movepools. Flat out banning Garchomp is better than that terrible fucking idea. I don't have enough patience for this. *Retires from thread

[Thorhammer]

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Hey if you want to ban Sand Veil Garchomp in Sandstorm, then fucking nominate Garchomp AS A WHOLE and stop being a pussy about it. Garchomp is the sum of its parts. Sand Veil makes Garchomp who he is just like Levitate makes Latias who she is or Speed Boost makes Blaziken who he is. Taking off Sand Veil from Garchomp is like taking the Ice Cream out of the Sundae. It. Just. Doesn't. Work.

As I have said repeatedly before, even with Sand Veil, Garchomp is not broken, and therefore there is no justification for banning Garchomp. Garchomp is not the point here any more than Cacturne or Froslass is the point here. The abilities they all share are the point here.

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Do you realize that complex bans are a LAST RESORT and are only made if the element being banned is absolutely vital for the stability of the metagame? Who are you to say that they don't make a metagame any less desirable? You definitely have no right to state that as fact, as it is anything but fact. I know it is not explicitly stated, but that's because the people at PR [mistakenly] assumed that the people on Smogon are mildly intelligent and wouldn't abuse it. Garchomp is not the only column keeping this metagame afloat by far. In contrast, drizzle was one of the only things keeping sun and sand in check, so accommodations had to be made for it. All of your arguments are circular. Actually, I don't think your arguments have enough substance TO BE circular. They're more like a puddle. Stop polluting this thread with your puddles, Thorhammer and company. You have made no convincing arguments at all as to why Garchomp should not be banned by itself. It is the only thing that effectively uses Sand Veil, so why not just ban that? Instead of banning every single pokemon that uses sandstorm, how about just ban ONE. We want a meta with the fewest bans possible, after all. There; I just used one of your fucking horrible arguments against you.

Complex bans have not been decided by PR to be a last resort. As a result, we are forced to use logic for ourselves to determine what is and is not the truth, and there is no logical reason to withhold useful complex bans except when they are a last resort. If PR would make a decision, as it's clear that they need to, we would have that decision to go off of, but we don't. And that is why we need PR to make a decision, to sort through this insanity.

As I've been saying, the problem here is Evasion, and that Evasion is equal among all Pokemon with the Sand Veil or Snow Cloak abilities. Therefore, there is no reason for any of them to get any different treatment from one another.

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Yeah, I know my argument might be a bit rash, but I don't think this thread deserves my civility. These arguments that are being made out to seem more convoluted than they really are are getting on my last nerve.

That does not give you the excuse to substitute anger for logic.

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Uh... get off their asses? Do you realize how PR works? They aren't obligated to do anything for the sake of you or anyone else for that matter. Just because they won't let you post in PR doesn't mean you have to take jabs at them. They have better things to do than contemplate on things that shouldn't even matter. Seriously, this shouldn't even need to be contemplated on. People should know when to stop abusing precedent. You should know when to stop abusing precedent.

They have an obligation to decide and review the policy that keeps Smogon functioning as a competitive community. Look at all of the chaos and needless unproductive disputes that arose in the past three months because no one can agree on what complex bans are okay. PR needs to define the policy towards complex bans in order for Smogon to function at all, and yet no one has even taken the first step towards doing so.

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Just to make this clear, I would have never replied to your arguments if it weren't for you being so pompous and acting like you were the smartest guy in the thread. It takes a lot for me to post here.

If that's how you take using logic to analyse a situation, okay.

Originally Posted by Fat iDunno

Trust me... you don't need help for that.

You've given little cause for concern as to your own views on the subject.

Originally Posted by Fat shrang

Alright, I know I can't be bothered reading through 100 pages of waffle, but you really need to define what you mean by "uncompetitive" and differentiate between it and the word "broken". To me, the two words are virtually synonymous, and my definition is a Pokemon/ability/item/thing is uncompetitive/broken if when used, it creates an unfair advantage that usually is the deciding factor between two people of similar skill. Usually can be loosely defined as a simple majority, ie 50% of the time or more. Before we keep arguing, I would like you to define your own version, otherwise we argue on my terms (Garchomp in Sand is uncompetitive/broken, therefore it should be banned).

Uncompetitive is an element of the game that only serves to increase the luck element of the game rather than increasing strategy. The existing examples of bans based on uncompetitiveness are the OHKO and Evasion Clauses that have been a part of Smogon through past generations, and the recent bans on Brightpowder and Lax Incense. None of these things are broken, but they have all been agreed upon by voters to be undesirable.

Originally Posted by Fat Ulevo

And how are you deciding what is and isn't undesirable, Thorhammer? To me it seems like you're making these conditions up as it suits your argument. What standards am I supposed to presume you're using to coming to such a conclusion.

In lieu of a decision from PR, I use my own logic to determine what is and is not undesirable. If you wish to challenge this determination, you have two ways of doing so. One, you can use logic of your own to show why it would be undesirable. Two, you can start a thread in PR to begin the process of making an official determination as to the status of what complex bans, if any, are to be permitted, and when. I suggest the latter, as it would be the most productive in settling this dispute once and for all once a decision is reached.

[Ulevo]

Originally Posted by Fat badabing

When was the last time you saw it use SR? Seriously? Usage stats aren't the point either. It's the fact that you're proposing a somewhat shitty solution when only Garchomp can significantly abuse Sand Veil misses. If Garchomp is the problem, why should other movepools have to pay the price? A complex ban is "tidier" because it precisely removes what we have deemed uncompetitive from OU without detrimentally effecting anything else. For reference:

Gliscor loses Roost and SR
Sandslash loses Super Fang, Body Slam, Knock Off, and SR
Cacturne loses Bullet Seed, Dark Pulse, Drain Punch, Encore, Focus Punch, Giga Drain, Superpower, Synthesis, T-Punch
Garchomp loses SR, Aqua Tail, Sleep Talk, Dragon Pulse, and Earth Power

A complex ban may "complicate the ruleset", but at least it doesn't cause irreparable damage to a lot of movepools. Flat out banning Garchomp is better than that terrible fucking idea. I don't have enough patience for this. *Retires from thread

Sure. Lets allow Blaze Blaziken while we're at it. Any other complex bans you'd like to run with because as long as we're discussing it we should just keep going.

Now that we've banned an ability + ability combination, and we've just proposed we should ban an ability + Pokemon combination, I think we should go on to banning move/item + Pokemon next.

Originally Posted by Fat Thorhammer

In lieu of a decision from PR, I use my own logic to determine what is and is not undesirable. If you wish to challenge this determination, you have two ways of doing so. One, you can use logic of your own to show why it would be undesirable. Two, you can start a thread in PR to begin the process of making an official determination as to the status of what complex bans, if any, are to be permitted, and when. I suggest the latter, as it would be the most productive in settling this dispute once and for all once a decision is reached.

A PR topic won't solve anything; they've been tried before and never established anything concrete. It was mostly a rhetorical question on my behalf. I was attempting to imply that you shouldn't be acting like you're assuming the desires of the community within your statements. If you're really just representing your own desires and ideas, it should be explained as such.

I don't like to nitpick, its just misleading with the way you talk about it, since it sounds like you're speaking for the community when a lot of your proposals I feel may not all be within the communities interest. Majority wise.

[Thorhammer]

Originally Posted by Fat Ulevo

Sure. Lets allow Blaze Blaziken while we're at it. Any other complex bans you'd like to run with because as long as we're discussing it we should just keep going.

Now that we've banned an ability + ability combination, and we've just proposed we should ban an ability + Pokemon combination, I think we should go on to banning move/item + Pokemon next.

Not all complex bans are equally feasible.

Originally Posted by Fat Ulevo

A PR topic won't solve anything; they've been tried before and never established anything concrete. It was mostly a rhetorical question on my behalf. I was attempting to imply that you shouldn't be acting like you're assuming the desires of the community within your statements. If you're really just representing your own desires and ideas, it should be explained as such.

I don't like to nitpick, its just misleading with the way you talk about it, since it sounds like you're speaking for the community when a lot of your proposals I feel may not all be within the communities interest. Majority wise.

Has it? I don't recall seeing any recent decisions on the matter. Certainly not since Aldaron's proposal was passed.

I have never attempted to act as if I represent the desires of the community. However, I am certainly not just representing my own desires and ideas. I am advocating logic, which is universal whether or not it fits with peoples' desires.

We don't actually know what the community wants. Perhaps we should find out.

[Hallow]

Since this thread seems to have degenerated to a tug-of-war between Thorhammer and Ulevo:

Why don't you two just stop flinging excrement at each other (and before you retaliate by doing the same to me: You'll see when you read through the last 4 pages of your posts!), calm down and state your exact desires in a comprehensive post each that does not incorporate the defense of any of your positions against outside attacks, be they unjustified or not.

Then maybe we can all try to agree on a compromise.

[Cherub Agent]

Originally Posted by Fat kaonohiokala

I view it as moronic when people try to aim for a hax-free metagame, because, quite simply, it's impossible. We wouldn't be simulating Pokemon anymore.

Must say I completely agree with this. "Hax" is simply part of the game. So many aspects of competitive Pokemon are hax related. The chance of Earth Power dropping SpDef, the chance of Rock Slide flinching, the chance of a Pokemon missing against Garchomp in the sand... Garchomp was intended to use the Sand Veil ability in a Sandstorm. I don't see why we have to take that away.

[Thorhammer]

Worth a shot.

I desire for all reasonable potential for Evasion abuse to be removed from all Pokemon in the metagame, without any of those Pokemon being banned entirely for that reason.

Anything more you wish to hear?

[Hallow]

No, I think that should be fine. Now we only need to wait on Ulevo...