1. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.
  2. Click here to ensure that you never miss a new SmogonU video upload!

Balanced Hackmons Suspects and Bans Thread

Discussion in 'Other Metagames' started by E4 Flint, Dec 3, 2016.

  1. E4 Flint

    E4 Flint -inactive in BH due corrupt leader-
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    326
    The [Gen 7] Balanced Hackmons Suspects and Bans Thread
    [​IMG]
    Quick Links:
    Welcome to the [Gen 7] Balanced Hackmons Suspects and Bans thread. The purpose of this thread is to stay in spirit with the one verbatim created here, and my own i.e.
    • defining BH's Ban philosophy
    • defining what makes something banworthy in BH
    A Banning Philosophy for a Broken Meta
    To be honest, the "balanced" title is a misnomer; a truer name for BH is probably AEA - "Almost Everything Allowed", a tier where conventionally 'broken' things stay in the same space and check each other. The central identity is therefore inclusion of as much as possible in the games.
    We want to remove as few things as possible to solve a problem we are facing in the meta, by banning the exact source of the problem through discussion.

    Ban Guide
    Here's what to look for when considering bans:
    Pokemon Ban:
    Click to view (open)

    These are the following properties a Pokemon should have to be considered banworthy:
    • Inherent/Natural Qualities:
      • A banworthy Pokemon should be considered first and foremost as a blank state with no ability or specific moveset, on the merits of its stats in both an offensive and defensive setting. It should outshine every other Pokemon in the tier and be considered head and shoulders above them.
      • In addition, their typing would grant both a great offensive STAB as well as uncommon or easy to patch weaknesses (e.g. by an ability), and also be neutral or resistant to common hazards
    • Multidimensional and Unique Sets:
      • Because of its stats and typing, the Pokemon can run many different sets and different roles, all of which vary from passable to dominant in the tier, whether defensive or offensive
      • It is important to get past simply being the jack of all trades. There has to be a subset of the main sets that can be run on the 'mon that are unique to it, either from its STAB combination, defensive typing or more
    • Centralization: Centralization here would take everything that has been said above into account. This includes the following aspects:
      • One of (or both):
        • It's difficult to win without using the banworthy pokemon or
        • Checks and counters for this mon are insufficient, niche or uncommon to the point of forcing the decision to either prepare for the ban-worthy Pokemon uniquely or the rest of the tier
      • The Pokemon is so good at different roles/sets that preparation for one leads to a loss against the other
    Ability Ban:
    Click to view (open)

    An Ability should be considered for ban based on:
    • "Splashable"ility:
      Can be slapped onto nearly any 'mon, regardless of role, stat spread or moveset .e.g. Shadow Tag and Wonder Guard
    • Extreme Augmentation:
      The capabilities of the 'mon it is on that the set in question are difficult or impossible to check or counter. This implies that the power originates from the ability and that the choice of 'mon, item and even moveset, is irrelevant. e.g. Pure Power, Parental Bond
    Move Ban:
    Click to view (open)

    A banworthy move would be:
    • An attack with either no counters, or unreasonably niche or unusable ones e.g. OHKO Moves
    • A move (attack or status) that removes the emphasis on skill, planning and/or preparation and moves the outcome to forces not in control of the player e.g. Chatter
    They would be effective without needing real synergy with the Pokemon itself, its ability, the rest of its moveset, item or any in-game condition
    Item Ban:
    Click to view (open)

    While unprecedented and therefore difficult to make a guide for, I have included some initial thoughts about what would be needed to advocate an Item ban:
    • Extreme Augmentation:
      Just like Abilities, a ban-worthy item makes mons so much better that the game reduces to "do you have the item or not" question
    • Prevent Illegal Mechanics:
      An item ban can also be considered if it allows Pokemon access to mechanics that have already been banned (see FAQ). E.g. Gengarite. For this, the Pokemon with the item would have to be evaluated as if it were a new Pokemon ban, with a preset ability and item
    Clauses:
    Click to view (open)

    Clauses should be reserved for complex cases where you'd either need a lot of individual bans, or it's more of a strategy that needs to be reduced. Saved for:
    • Dominant strategies with either no checks, or the player has to choose between preparing for this specific strategy or the general meta
    • Remove the emphasis of the game from skill to outside forces such as luck or amount of time the battlers have e.g. Endless Battle Clause
    • Blanket limitations instead of going for multiple bans e.g. Ability Clause
    Exception: No complex bans which disallow specific Pokemon from having specific moves, items, abilities or any combination thereof
    Thanks
    E4 Flint
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2017 at 5:59 AM
  2. E4 Flint

    E4 Flint -inactive in BH due corrupt leader-
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    326
    Current Banlist
    Last updated: 01/16/2017
    Moves
    Abilities
    • Wonder Guard
    • Pure/Huge Power
    • Parental Bond (Link)
    • Protean (Link) (Gen 7: Link)
    • Shadow Tag/Arena Trap
    • Moody (Link)
    Clauses
    • Ability Clause: No more than two Pokemon with the same ability per team. (Link)
    • Endless Battle Clause: Forcing an endless battle is banned, similar to the rest of PS
    • Evasion Moves Clause: No moves that can increase Evasion are allowed. This does not include abilities or items that may modify Evasion passively such as Sand Veil or Brightpowder (Link)
    Ban History:
    Nov 18, 2016: [Gen 7] Balanced Hackmons goes live on PokemonShowdown! Initial Banlist Decision Breakdown here
    Nov 19, 2016: Extreme Evoboost Banned from Gen7 BH Link
    Jan 16, 2017: Crystal-Free Z-Moves Banned from Gen7 BH Link
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2017 at 6:38 AM
  3. E4 Flint

    E4 Flint -inactive in BH due corrupt leader-
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    326
    FAQ

    Is the guideline you posted like a checklist, and absolute?
    No. If you have something that clashes with what I have here, that's fine as long as you can substantiate it with sound logic and reasoning.

    How will theorymons play into the discussion?
    I want discussion to be supported by ladder performance and vice-versa.

    Why have you allowed access to banned mechanics through items that initiate a form change, such as Mega Evolution and Primal Reversion?
    Having the item puts in a limitation on what can be run and must be analyzed separately.

    How will the suspect process get started?
    I will begin suspects based on discussion in this thread. If we need multiple options, I'll put a vote for them. The suspect process itself shall be decided for each one but will likely involve a new ladder and a ranking requirement. I will post my thoughts intermittently in this thread as well.

    What if we want discussion of an unban or ban modification?
    Bring it up in this thread and if we all decide it's needed, there will be another suspect process for it.

    Is there scope for a BH Council?
    Possibly in the future, but right now just me
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2016
    Kit Kasai, nv, motherlove and 2 others like this.
  4. E4 Flint

    E4 Flint -inactive in BH due corrupt leader-
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    326
    Why isn't ___ Banned?
    Show Hide

    [​IMG]
    Imposter (open)
    Imposter is one of the few things in BH that you have a near 100% expectation of what you'll be facing because you design the set. The only variation is the amount of HP and the item. Imposter-proofing ("Improofing") is woven into the entire experience of BH and the power of imposter is entirely dependent on your own teambuilding.

    Taking advantage of Judgment, Illusion, uncommon hard-counters to sweepers, and even its 20 pp movepool are all common and valid strategies.
    The only way it'd be banned is if it gave an unfair advantage on top of copying what is on the field e.g. transforms and gets +1 in each stat.

    [​IMG]

    Shedinja (open)

    While I acknowledge that this mon can be annoying with Sturdy, there are many effective tools to manage it including (but not limited to)
    • Status
    • Hazards
    • Mold Breaker
    • Partial Trapping (e.g. Infestation, Fire Spin)
    • Ability Suppression e.g. Gastro Acid, Entrainment, (NEW) Core Enforcer
    • Other residual damage (e.g. Curse, Sandstorm, Rocky Helmet)
    • NEW: Ability-ignoring moves e.g. Sunsteel Strike, Moongeist Beam

    [​IMG]
    Normalize (open)

    Normalize seems kinda OP when initially facing it, but there a few key things to remember about it:
    • All status moves except Thunder Wave still affect the Ghost-type mon even if you are given Normalize
    • Magic Bounce will bounce back Entrainment and give them Magic Bounce
    • All attacks by the Normalize 'mon except Judgment are still Normal-Type


    Why is ___ Banned?
    Show Hide

    [​IMG]
    chatter (open)

    Here and here are some excellent posts highlighting the problems Chatter had, which are mostly true. The only nerfs that Gen 7 have given, namely the nerf to Gale Wings, and the minor drop in Confusion hit chance, do not outweigh its many advantages.

    Last edited: Jan 16, 2017 at 5:58 AM
  5. E4 Flint

    E4 Flint -inactive in BH due corrupt leader-
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    326
    Let's talk about the current most pressing issue: Crystal-Free Z Moves (or as I'll now call them, CFZ moves/CFZ's)

    I think that the CFZs are a cool new addition for gen 7 BH, but they are a little overpowering and fit into my definition:
    I think it may be too much of an extreme step to go for a full fledged ban, so let's decide what options we want for a limitation on z moves. Note that this doesn't mean that banning is off the table forever, I just think it's too much of a step to outright ban them all. So either we
    • ban specific Z moves, but no overall CFZ ban
    • ban specific Z moves with a limit on CFZs
    • limit 1 CFZ per mon
    • limit 1 CFZ per team
    These are the options I am considering. Feel free to post your opinion (with support) and we can get the ball rolling on this.
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2016
  6. morogrim

    morogrim ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2015
    Messages:
    115
    As I already mentioned, imo having 1 CFZ per mon would follow the logic of the number of megas allowed.

    This is exactly why Deo-A spam teams are not a good representation of the BH meta imo. I'm not saying they are overpowered necessarily, just that putting together 6 Deos in a team should not be so rewarding (same goes for LeppaHarvest users such as Mmy which can act as very effective wallbreakers).
  7. ARandomNoob

    ARandomNoob

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2013
    Messages:
    62
    Yeah I think we need to put in some form of species clause because Deo-A x6 teams are the entire reason my Pheromosa cant use Ice Beam to threaten MegaQuaza, because it literally has to run Beat Up so that I don't get overwhelmed, which is generating a case of 4MSS that doesn't even need to exist. If I want Ice Beam and Beat Up, I have to either give up Surf (my way to clean up MDiancie), Bug Buzz (STAB/anti-Grass/Dark) or Moongeist Beam (answers to MMY and especially Sturdydinja, the latter of which some cancerous people still use). Add on the fact that Beat Up is literally useless against everything else (you'd be hard pressed to get more than 20% out of it when used turn 1 on anything not named Deo-A or Blissey level useless) and...you get the idea, right? It's a boot on my tires simply because someone was no more creative than six of the same fucking pokemon with slightly different sets for the sole purpose of not falling afoul of ability clause (which doesn't even hinder it at all). It's like the 5 Final Gambit Blisseys + FEAR Eevee team i had in G6BH but without literally falling apart on a hair trigger because Deo-A is fast as fuck and hits like a truck no mater what its HP looks like. Oh, and if two of them have Scarf, I'm still fucked because Phero can only afford to be outsped ONCE.
  8. sin(pi)

    sin(pi) lucky n bad

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2015
    Messages:
    453
    disclaimer: I haven't actually played BH since SuMo. this post is also kinda rambly, sorry

    Deo-A spam (emphasis on spam, as Deo-A does have a niche by itself, ie OHKO'ing its imposter) is only worth using because of Z-moves (it wasn't a problem throughout the entirety of gen 6). If you want a more reliable out to all of those mons, check out morogrim's scarf Phero set here, which handles all of those except Sturdinja (and you can run Sunsteel Strike if you really want to beat that, though U-turn + moldy pursuit is arguably better). Your arguments imply that Deo-A is the problem, not a species clause. From the OP:
    Throughout my experience of BH, the only times I've found multiples of a mon to be a problem are GKR (which are arguably all broken in themselves, seeing as how two of them were banned and the third nearly so). I think it's fairly safe to say that species clause would not be effective here.

    tl;dr Deo-A is only problematic because of Z-moves, which are being considered for a ban anyway. Even if 6 Deo-A teams were broken, it would suggest that Deo-A was the culprit.

    (also FEAR is completely outclassed on pokemon not named Ferrothorn/seed/Heatran because of immunity to Toxic/Wisp/Sand)
  9. SuperSkylake

    SuperSkylake

    Joined:
    May 6, 2016
    Messages:
    90
    If we are going to ban individual cfz's, I believe that we should start by banning Genesis Supernova. Unlike all the other Z moves in the game, this one also summons Psychic Terrain, which powers up all Psychic moves for 5 turns. No other Z move has an effect like that, except for 10m Thunderbolt which has a 100% paralysis chance. Psychic Terrain is far worse, since it benefits the user, and turns Psystrike resists into 2hkos or OHKOS. It basically mandates that you run a Dark mon and predict when the enemy will use it. There are a few other niche answers like Regen-vest Solgaleo, but a simple move change can lure and KO them too. I do agree about the 1 CFZ per mon clause at least to begin with, but I still think that even with this limit Genesis Supernova would still be broken. Any mon that runs a Psychic STAB would love to have it freely boosted, and any mon without an immunity takes a ton from Supernova anyway, leaving it easily finished off next turn.
  10. MAMP

    MAMP

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2014
    Messages:
    766
    On Z-Moves: As I see it the reason that Z-moves are an issue is just their sheer power, which makes them an unparalleled tool for wallbreaking and luring. Even though they only have 1 PP, thats generally all you need to break a hole in the opponents team. BH has always been full of very powerful lures and wallbreakers, but almost nothing compares to Z-Moves (before anyone says 'durr z moves arent broken bc v-create is just as strong and that didnt get banned!!!!', v-create is half the reason that p-don got banned back in oras and i think a reasonable case could've been made to ban v-create rather than pdon). Defensive play is completely unfeasible in a meta with Z-Moves -- they hit too hard, they're too abusable. This is not to mention Guardian of Alola, which is legitimately one of the stupidest things I have ever played against or with in BH -- you can just slap this move on whatever offensive mon and just completely invalidate any and all defensive counterplay.

    Everyone seems to be in agreement that Z-moves are an issue, but the question then becomes, what do we ban? What I really don't get is why people keep suggesting restricting Z-moves rather than just banning them outright? Why do we need a complex ban for this situation? I haven't actually seen any reasoning for why Z-moves are broken in multiples but fine when restricted to one per mon or whatever. As I see it, complex bans are something that should be reserved for extreme cases, where something is an issue but banning outright would result in the loss of an important/necessary aspect of the meta. An example of this is Baton Pass Clause in OU -- rather than banning Baton Pass outright, it was restricted because it was felt that drypassing and some stat-passing strategies were healthy and provided counterplay to Pursuit trapping or whatever. For a BH specific example, an -ate clause was put in place rather than a flat -ate ban because it was felt that -ate helped to keep set-up in check and gave offense teams more counterplay against random Shell Smash garbage or whatever. Wrt restricting Z-moves, the question is not 'are Z-moves still unhealthy if we restrict them rather than banning them?' (answer is still yes imo), but 'what of importance do Z-moves contribute to the metagame that would be lost if they were banned?'

    The idea of banning some but not all of them is interesting though, could be worth experimenting with. If that's the route we go down, how do we decide which ones to ban? I mean this in a practical sense -- obviously we can't suspect them each individually, so would we decide on a list of broken ones in this thread (it's very unlikely that we'd reach a consensus) and then suspect them, or would we have a Z-move suspect and then let those that qualified vote on each Z-move individually? The latter has a couple of issues that I'm worried about. Not all of the Z-moves are common enough for everyone to have a considered opinion on them all individually (like fr who uses Sinister Arrow Raid for example), and it seems really likely that we'd end up underestimating some of them due to lack of experience and end up having to deal with them again down the line.

    Other stuff that should be looked at:

    Water Bubble is stupid ass shit and if I hear 'water bubble not broke u can just run water absorb xd' one more time i stg

    If a threat mandates that pretty much every team run a specific ability that is extremely mediocre otherwise, that means it's overcentralising and unhealthy for the metagame. Also, it isn't like Water Bubble mons can't run coverage. Boosting moves, Ice Beam, Moongeist Beam, Earth Power, Guardian of Alola, Core Enforcer/Gastro Acid, Taunt, and secondary STABs in the case of MGyara, Palkia and Ash Greninja are all options that I've used or seen used that let Water Bubble mons get past common Water Absorbers.

    Psychic Surge is one I'm a bit more iffy about, because I think it's only really broken on M2Y (and maybe Deo-A). Seeing as M2Y was also by far the most broken abuser of Protean, it might be worth discussing whether the broken element here is Psychic Surge or M2Y.

    Dazzling and Queenly Majesty are potentially broken too, not really sure because I haven't played with them enough.

    Triage Mega Rayquaza isn't that broken currently with all the priority blockers/focus sash/genesis supernova running around, but I think it certainly will be once some things get banned. Again, I'm not sure that banning Triage would be the right course of action here because the ability is only broken on Mega Rayquaza, a Pokemon that was almost banned once before. If Mega Ray is also still as broken with Aerilate as it was last gen then just banning Ray may be the preferred course of action.



    I also have an issue with the banning philosophy in the OP, specifically the criteria for a Pokemon ban. Basically, I think it's too restrictive. As it is now, it mandates that a broken Pokemon be extremely potent both offensively and defensively, and even specifies that the Pokemon must 'be neutral or resistant to common hazards' and must be able to 'run many different sets and different roles, all of which vary from passable to dominant in the tier, whether defensive or offensive'. I think it's pretty unreasonable to say that a Pokemon that's weak to SR or that isn't that great defensively can't ever be broken, and it's kinda strange to me that the criteria for banning a move or ability are so open while the criteria for a Pokemon ban is so specific.
  11. Rumors

    Rumors

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    852
    By virtue of disliking complex bans and, looking upon ORAS and its history with -ate and standard ORAS with Baton Pass and seeing how friggin' messy they get and have a tendency not to fix the problem enough, I'm going to vote ban CFZs, period. Regular Z-moves can add a lot of strategic value on team building and in-game. "What do I give up to run a Z-move? Where do I put it? Do I give up more to have access to a second or third? If so, which do I use? When do I use it? Is my opponent's offensive Pokemon running one to take out my wall? Is their defensive Pokemon with reasonable offensive-stats running one to take out my sweeper out of nowhere?" And so forth.

    So yeah... can we please avoid a huge mess and just kill the thing instead of spending a whole gen breaking somethings legs again?


    ...if I have to absolutely vote one of the listed options, one CFZ per team. But only if my above opinion is not permitted to have an impact on the discussion.
    JungleB, Kl4ng, Wendig0 and 5 others like this.
  12. ARandomNoob

    ARandomNoob

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2013
    Messages:
    62
    So then I'm forced to run Scarf, which completely removes my ability to be relatively sure of taking a hit that I had with Sash (hazards make it not definitive) or run Mold Breaker instead of Psychic Surge (which Phero desperately wants because any manner of -ate priority, or priority in general, will absolutely fucking shit on it). Spam of this mon is definitely a problem. We have Ability Clause so that people can't run 5 Innards Out + Final Gambit Failsafe Blisseys and a FEAR mon because that's disgusting and basically makes the user able to make any match a 1v1 nigh guaranteed, which should not happen, so we don't let it. Having a full team that requires some particular set on a particular mon to stand a chance is far too rewarding for far too little effort. CFZ just makes it all that much worse.
  13. motherlove

    motherlove

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2014
    Messages:
    585
    Yeah I completely agree with MAMP, z moves are way too powerful no matter how many you run on the same team. To expect a mon to be able to take a life orb boosted 180+ base power move is completely unreasonable and a z move user really only needs to use the move once. If my PH Regigigas took out Giratina with seven star bullshit, then I more than likely win. If my Diancie took out Registeel or something with Guardian of alola, than I more than likely win. If my mmy OHKOd Yveltal with 10,000,000Volt bullshit, then I more than likely will. Z moves just completely invalidating a switchin with like no opportunity cost and no way to prepare for it it's absolutely ridiculous. Even a Shedinja can take out max defence Giratina wih 7 star thing + spectral thief and shedinja is a garbage mon all around.

    Z moves are broken pls ban.
  14. ReidIsBad

    ReidIsBad

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2016
    Messages:
    15
    Z Moves are the reason I don't really like playing BH. It's not even balanced.
    Team 1. Full Z Move Team: Assist/Z Move/Leppa Berry
    Team 2. Full team that can (try) to break Z move team by walling and overpowering/outsmarting.
    Team 3. Team that loses to full Z-Move team but can beat any regular team.

    If I see a game full of Deoxys-A / Hoopa-U / PDon or POgre or Mega Ray I'm not playing it. There's no use playing against a full 170 attack/spatk and 200 Base power reusable move. Basically nothing can wall it, but if you take one (lets say Genesis Nova) you cant stand up against a second one.
    I support a rule that makes you have to have a Z Crystal (the appropriate one, obviously) and only on ONE pokemon. At least it can only use it once.

    On the topic of Shedinja (or Sturdinja specifically) it's pretty easy to deal with, like you said. I'm sure people know, but abilities like Rough Skin can also defeat this pretty easily, meaning you don't need to use your item slot.

    Also just pointing out, Psychic Terrain is (kind of?) pretty OP. No priority moves means its basically Queenly Majesty where you get a boost of your (most likely) already high base power attacks. Of course, you can try to stall it our, but with Terrain extender its kind of tough. 8 Turns is enough to knock out 6 pokemon. There's even an extra 2 turns for a victory lap!
    I understand I don't really have proof, but many games have been lost because priority doesn't work.
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2016
  15. The Immortal

    The Immortal They Don't Want None
    is a member of the Site Staffis a Battle Server Administratoris a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Live Chat Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
    Other Metas Leader

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    5,053
    Let's not limit them. They should be treated as any other moves. Would you limit Fire moves per team? Would you limit Physical moves per mon? No. As MAMP pointed out, we don't need a complex ban in this situation.

    Either: ban specific Z-Moves, or prevent all Z-moves from being used directly (like Primals last gen).
    nyan kat, JungleB, Kit Kasai and 7 others like this.
  16. morogrim

    morogrim ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2015
    Messages:
    115
    The thing is that this case is a bit different. Regular Z-moves are not the problem here because if you need the ztone in order for the move to be effective (in other words, you need to sacrifice your item slot for a powerful, one-time use move), otherwise a regular zmove has a bp of 1. Exclusive zmoves on the other hand do not have this restriction as they can be used without the need of stones since they all have a fixed bp. Imo this is what makes exclusive zmoves so strong, the user does not need to sacrifice much in order to gain a powerful wallbreaking tool. I personally am completely fine with regular zmoves, and I'm pretty sure many others share this opinion. The problem being discussed is exclusive zmoves (which Flint refers to as CFZs).
  17. aki0s

    aki0s

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    318
    CFZ's are strong. There's no denying that. But, they are not over-centralizing as of yet nor all that broken really. I personally don't think they should be banned (not yet at least). I'd still like to see how it plays out in the meta.

    The difference CFZ's bring to the meta right now is that defensive play is not as rewarding as it once was. This means that a meta like Gen-6 BH, which was characterized by a predominately "balance" playstyle, is seeing some change in Gen-7. Playstyle's such as HO / Offense are now seeing play and are actually viable to use on the ladder, whereas in the previous Gen, they were not as viable. Getting rid of CFZ's could prevent this renaissance.

    But then again, some people might not like seeing 6 Deo-A teams on the ladder and such; I can understand this. But, some part of me wants them to stay to see how the meta develops, to see how stall / Semistall adapts to them (and I think they can adapt) and to see how the meta as a whole develops in reaction to them. An outright ban just seems boring to me and could halt the development of more diverse playstyles to the meta.
  18. Whatwasthatnoise

    Whatwasthatnoise

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Messages:
    137
    Personally, though I feel a flat ban on CFZs would be consistent, banning some of them while imposing a limit would be about as good as it will get.

    It's basically what makes the spam teams even viable, because it allows you to sacrifice running additional Psychic Surge or Dazzling in favour of Harvest or Adaptability, or whatever you feel like running (Tinted Lens?). It also means that running counters to those (I.E. Electric Surge, Mold Breaker) doesn't work, because when they nuke you they just straight-up reset the Psychic Terrain timer- which also means that you can run Psystrike alongside and get the boost off Psychic Terrain for sure, making it practically impossible to wall outside of Dark-types- and of the relevant Dark-types in the tier (Hoopa-U, Gyarados-M, Tyranitar-M, Yveltal, Ash-Greninja) all save Hoopa are weak to either 10,000,000 Volt Thunderbolt or Oceanic Operetta, and Hoopa has the approximate physical defence of wet paper and thus cannot take a hit from Malicious Moonsault, Soul-Stealing-7-Star-Strike, or Catastropika.

    Notably, of the major walls that have any business even attempting to block Mewtwo-Y or Deoxys-A, only Assault Vest Zygarde is likely to live Genesis Supernova followed by Psystrike from even Timid, completely unboosted Mewtwo-Y. Assault Vest Solgaleo can take Psychic hits all day long, but is completely ripped apart by Malicious Moonsault or Soul-Stealing-7-Star-Strike- Naive, completely uninvested Mewtwo-Y has a good chance of OHKOing 252/4 Solgaleo, and 252/252+ Solgaleo is guaranteed to be 2HKOed by SS7SS followed by 10,000,000 Volt Thunderbolt even if it doesn't crit. Deoxys, meanwhile, is quite capable of just up and OHKOing it.

    Oh, and absolutely the biggest thing about this is that this take literally zero skill to use or build. It's absoultely possible to slap a team of Deoxys and Mewtwo together in like two minutes and reasonably expect to get decently high on the ladder.

    The other CFZs are certainly problematic (10mil Volt Thunderbolt and it's 50% crit ratio especially) but Genesis Supernova forms the lynchpin of these teams and is the only thing that most of them need to absolutely destroy the meta.

    In absence of an option to ban all Z-moves from Pokemon that can't naturally use them, my vote goes for Ban Genesis Supernova, restrict CFZs to one per team.
  19. Squawkerz

    Squawkerz Torchic is best mon

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    245
    I think that banning specific CFZs is the way to go, as they are not all equally as broken. For instance, the post above mine and many others made an excellent point on why Genesis Supernova and 10,000,000 Volt Thunderbolt are way too overpowered. But moves like Sinister Arrow Raid, Pulverizing Pancake, and Guardian of Alola make are not used enough to be considered OP. Arrow Raid is directly outclassed by Soul Stealing 7-Star Strike, and while Guardian of Alola is a good way to reduce a lot of HP on a bulky Pokemon, almost all bulky Pokemon have a recovery move, and a different Z-Move or Terrain boosted attack will likely out-damage it. And while Pulverizing Pancake is very powerful, it's normal type is bad and it's even worse because it can't be under the effects of an -ate or Galvanize (It does show it in Showdown but it doesn't affect ghost types (http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen7balancedhackmons-490471982 heres a replay to prove it).
    thesecondbest likes this.
  20. david0895

    david0895

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2015
    Messages:
    128
    CFZs are simply too powerful to be used on more than one pokemon. Allowing all pokemon to use them will force other players to use a lot of defensive way to stop them. That why i'm for limit 1 CFZ per team (but i'm not against to test the limit of 1 for pokemon).

    For specific bans, Genesis Supernova surely deserve it because powers up Deoxys Attack and Mega Mewtwo X/Y moves, but I also want to spot Stoked Sparksurfer beacuse has 100% to guarantee paralysis.
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2016
  21. MAMP

    MAMP

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2014
    Messages:
    766
    ...are you actually saying that people didn't use offense in Gen 6 BH? Unless you've got a very strange definition of 'offense', I can't fathom how you can think that. Offense was consistently one of the most potent and popular playstyles throughout Gen 6 BH in both a ladder and tournament setting. In any case, the reason that people don't like Z-moves isn't that they make offense better, it's that they invalidate defensive play and enable garbage like the Deo-A spam teams. Also calling the rise of mindless Z-move spam nothing-with-less-than-110-base-speed offense a 'renaissance' is pretty wild lmao
  22. VoltDarkrai

    VoltDarkrai

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Messages:
    59
    252 SpA Mewtwo-Mega-Y Genesis Supernova vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Zygarde-Complete: 306-360 (48.1 - 56.6%) -- 88.3% chance to 2HKO

    Want Assault Vest?

    252 SpA Mewtwo-Mega-Y Genesis Supernova vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Assault Vest Zygarde-Complete: 204-241 (32 - 37.8%) -- 95.1% chance to 3HKO
    252 SpA Mewtwo-Mega-Y Genesis Supernova vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Assault Vest Zygarde-Complete in Psychic Terrain: 306-361 (48.1 - 56.7%) -- 89.5% chance to 2HKO

    So even with a minimum roll, you're doing well above half (80%, although maximum still does 94.5%) to Assault Vest Zygod in two hits. The reason why two hits is relevant is due to Leppa Berry shenanigans. What Pokemon has the right to do that much damage to Zygod?

    Oh, by the way - Friendly reminder that Zygod gets no recovery moves like Shore Up since it's Assault Vest, so don't argue that it can recover HP. Even with Leech Life, it doesn't recover that much HP (Not that Leech Life Zygod is relevant, but it's going to be in here for completion's sake.)

    4 Atk Zygarde Leech Life vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mewtwo-Mega-Y: 156-184 (44.1 - 52.1%) -- 14.1% chance to 2HKO

    From Leech Life, it gains 92 HP maximum which is roughly 14.47 of Zygarde-Complete's HP at max. It's simply not going to live a third hit, which has a 50% chance of occuring. Assault Vest Zygarde's not good enough?

    252 SpA Mewtwo-Mega-Y 10,000,000 Volt Thunderbolt vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Assault Vest Solgaleo on a critical hit: 224-264 (46.8 - 55.2%) -- 69.5% chance to 2HKO

    And don't complain about the crit - 10,000,000 Volt Thunderbolt has what, a 50% chance to crit? We know how often Scald burns so a 50% chance is damn good (Although I wouldn't take that gamble, personally. After having all six of my mons frozen in one battle, I don't believe RNG is too kind to me.)

    Please ban CFZs entirely or apply a clause - Complex bans aren't really necessary, but I don't care what action is taken so long as some form of action is. I feel like with the calcs I've presented, it's clear that Z Moves are busted. Even Mimikyu agrees.

    [​IMG]

    As always, lemme know if there's anything wrong with my post.

    Edit: Yeah, I only used 10,000,000 Volt Thunderbolt & Genesis Supernova in my calculations. Like I said, if it's deemed best that only specific Z-Moves are banned, I'm fine with it as long as action is taken.

    Edit #2: Forgot to cover the fact that the Vest mons generally use Regenerator. I don't feel like this matters as after a few Harvests, it's more a question of what dies after you switch out rather than what you have that's immune to the most recently used Z-Move.
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2016
    Deluks917, sin(pi) and ih8ih8sn0w like this.
  23. aki0s

    aki0s

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    318
    Just my opinion friend. I didn't attack yours, no need to attack mine. I'd suggest reading my post again. I never said no-one used offense, I just said it wasn't as viable as Balance in the Gen-6 meta. Which to my knowledge it was not. Sorry if my knowledge isn't up to standard.
  24. E4 Flint

    E4 Flint -inactive in BH due corrupt leader-
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    326
    I kinda compare CFZ moves more to megas or alternate forms than regular moves since their legal limitations are similar. My own personal vote would be for one per team as that is a closer match to their real mechanics with the Z crystal while still having an interesting interplay in the meta. It also is a closer to the idea of minimally removing the unhealthy aspect than an outright ban, which is pretty much the exact reason to have complex clauses. If that's not an option, I'm gonna backtrack and go for the options as all-or-nothing, since I don't want individual CFZ bans for multiple reasons.
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2016
    Grains of Salt likes this.
  25. Iloveweather

    Iloveweather

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Would priority blocking abilities such as Dazzling be banned? They could become a huge problem if a pokemon sets up and can't be stopped easily.

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)