Baton Pass - its role in the metagame and possible solutions to nerf full Baton Pass chains

Status
Not open for further replies.
BP is basically one giant mega kanga
Cant counter it without niche shit, strong AF, and no (viable) ways to stop it after boosts unless your opponent is stupid
Baton Pass' presence in the meta is VERY akin to Mega Kanga, turning it into a rock-paper-scizor game where one type of team loses to another and always wins vs another
Standard<BP
Anti-BP>BP
Anti-BP<Standard
WHEN WILL YOU PEOPLE LEARN
 
Mr. Mime said:
By limiting the number of Baton Pass users on a team to three, we do not keep Baton Pass chains playable as a strategy; the only strategy we conserve is the infamous combination of Scolipede, Espeon, and Sylveon.

Banning Scolipede will however serve a very similar purpose, while keeping the tactic intact and flexible
1) There's no guarantee Scolipede itself is the problem: it could be totally what is breaking BP, or it could be a better Ninjask to the point where BP is broken, or it could be better than Ninjask, but Ninjask might also be good enough to break BP. We don't know.
2) You know what totally ends the "infamous combination"? Limiting the number of BP users to 2 instead of 3! It effectively bans one of the three for each team, while still preserving them for niche usage on other teams. BP would still be useable as a utility move for Pokemon such as Celebi, and speedpassing would be useable. The only downside is chains couldn't be used, but chains are the problem.
 
We dealt with Rain teams by banning the combination of Swift Swim and Drizzle. We should deal with Baton Pass by banning the specific combinations that make it so powerful
Such as: Magic Bounce + Baton Pass, Stored Power + Baton Pass, or Scolipede's Iron Defense + Baton Pass.

But lets remember that some people enjoy playing teams like Baton Pass and Trick Room. Its a unique style that can provide a different experience to players. Let's not accidentally remove any aspect of Baton Pass from the game! Players should be able to use Defensive Baton Pass Teams (6 users of Baton Pass) or a Chain Baton Pass Teams (5 users of Baton Pass and one bulky receiver) if they want to.


I motion that we incorporate conditional bans on Baton Pass based on the number of users. This will allow Baton Pass to remain a viable tactic at all stages, quick pass, chain pass, and defensive pass.
  • If your team consists of 4 Baton Passers, X cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 5 Baton Passers, X and Y cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 6 Baton Passers, X, Y, and Z cannot be used.
where x, y, and z, are specific bans like those mentioned above.

The goal here is to preserve the varying play styles of Baton Pass. Simply only allowing three Baton Passers removes an interesting competitive tactic from the game (essentially banning it). And the general consensus seems to be that we don't want it removed, we just want it nerfed.
 
The problem with banning Scolipede is that a lot of people think that Scolipede is only broken when used in Baton Pass teams, which, theoretically, causes unnecessary collateral damage. Which is why again I bring up this question I posted in the previous page: is Scolipede broken outside of Baton Pass teams, under the support characteristic?
I don't think it is; as explained before, Smogon has always banned Pokémon for their best sets, the conditions these sets need to function not always being as relevant. I think that the very best comparison I can make is to Generation V's Excadrill: it was considered overcentralizing, and thus banned, but I don't think that anyone will deny that it was not overpowering on any team that was not a Sand team.

My hope is that that we can argue Scolipede's function(s) on a full Baton Pass team to be just as overpowering as Excadrill's were on a Sand team: I think this is notion worth looking into before deciding to annihilate full Baton Pass teams completely.
 
1) There's no guarantee Scolipede itself is the problem: it could be totally what is breaking BP, or it could be a better Ninjask to the point where BP is broken, or it could be better than Ninjask, but Ninjask might also be good enough to break BP. We don't know.
You're absolutely right that we don't know, but how about we test and find out?

(By the way, I do not consider myself anywhere near a good enough player to do any testing myself or evaluate the merits of the specific arguments that people are making. I'm just trying to help steer the conversation in a more productive direction.)
 
We dealt with Rain teams by banning the combination of Swift Swim and Drizzle. We should deal with Baton Pass by banning the specific combinations that make it so powerful
Such as: Magic Bounce + Baton Pass, Stored Power + Baton Pass, or Scolipede's Iron Defense + Baton Pass.

But lets remember that some people enjoy playing teams like Baton Pass and Trick Room. Its a unique style that can provide a different experience to players. Let's not accidentally remove any aspect of Baton Pass from the game! Players should be able to use Defensive Baton Pass Teams (6 users of Baton Pass) or a Chain Baton Pass Teams (5 users of Baton Pass and one bulky receiver) if they want to.


I motion that we incorporate conditional bans on Baton Pass based on the number of users. This will allow Baton Pass to remain a viable tactic at all stages, quick pass, chain pass, and defensive pass.
  • If your team consists of 4 Baton Passers, X cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 5 Baton Passers, X and Y cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 6 Baton Passers, X, Y, and Z cannot be used.
where x, y, and z, are specific bans like those mentioned above.

The goal here is to preserve the varying play styles of Baton Pass. Simply only allowing three Baton Passers removes an interesting competitive tactic from the game (essentially banning it). And the general consensus seems to be that we don't want it removed, we just want it nerfed.
However, it's also the general consensus that complex bans should be avoided whenever possible. And the one you have proposed is a very very very very complex ban, and it's probably not worth the effort.
 
However, it's also the general consensus that complex bans should be avoided whenever possible. And the one you have proposed is a very very very very complex ban, and it's probably not worth the effort.
Nerfing an entire competitive tactic shouldn't be easy. It's a huge deal. Reducing the number of Baton Passers under 4 eliminates the playstyle of Chain Pass and Defensive Pass.

The complex ban of Drizzle + Swift Swim is the only comparable nerf to a competitive tactic. I think we have plenty of idea and the ban doesn't have to be that difficult to implement. Stored Power can't be used at 4, Scolipede can't be used at 5, Magic Bounce can't be used at 6. Something simple like that.
 
Aqqq said:
You're absolutely right that we don't know, but how about we test and find out?
I understand we could test and find that Scolipede is broken, or whatever. But what is the point of doing that? We know Baton Pass Chains are a problem (alright most people do, but the ones who do not will not be convinced. A majority does). The simplest and most effective strategy is to limit BP to two users a team. That solves the problem of BP chains being broken. When Swagplay (a playstyle that was like a coin flip instead of Rock - Papper - Scissors) was considered broken, we didn't say "lets see, I think Thundurus is what's breaking it, lets try banning that first, and if it doesn't work, then we'll try again!" That approach has two flaws: it may not be effective or it may be unfairly scapegoating one pokemon. There's no guarantee Scolipede is breaking BP, and if we test and it fails, we've let the broken strategy perpetuate longer than we've needed to. Also, taking out Scolipede could unbreak BP, but so could banning Sylveon, or Espeon. If that is the case, then the overall inability to use Scolipede is unfair. The two BP user cap is simple and solves the problem while still allowing specific pokemon to be used and Baton Pass to be utilized in a support capacity.
 
The simplest and most effective strategy is to limit BP to two users a team.
Simple true, but effective? Sure it's effective if you want to remove two completely viable tactics from the game. No more Baton Pass chains and no more defense baton pass teams.

You are essentially PRO BAN. This isn't a nerf, its complete removal of the tactic all together.
 
I understand we could test and find that Scolipede is broken, or whatever. But what is the point of doing that? We know Baton Pass Chains are a problem (alright most people do, but the ones who do not will not be convinced. A majority does). The simplest and most effective strategy is to limit BP to two users a team. That solves the problem of BP chains being broken. When Swagplay (a playstyle that was like a coin flip instead of Rock - Papper - Scissors) was considered broken, we didn't say "lets see, I think Thundurus is what's breaking it, lets try banning that first, and if it doesn't work, then we'll try again!" That approach has two flaws: it may not be effective or it may be unfairly scapegoating one pokemon. There's no guarantee Scolipede is breaking BP, and if we test and it fails, we've let the broken strategy perpetuate longer than we've needed to. Also, taking out Scolipede could unbreak BP, but so could banning Sylveon, or Espeon. If that is the case, then the overall inability to use Scolipede is unfair. The two BP user cap is simple and solves the problem while still allowing specific pokemon to be used and Baton Pass to be utilized in a support capacity.
I've already explained my point of view, several times, but when I actually tested teams, I felt pretty strongly that there was absolutely nothing broken about the idea itself. Uncompetitive either. My full thought process is here:

http://www.smogon.com/forums/posts/5385081/

But I really don't want to hear your uniformed opinion again, so come back when you've tested things
 
I understand we could test and find that Scolipede is broken, or whatever. But what is the point of doing that? We know Baton Pass Chains are a problem (alright most people do, but the ones who do not will not be convinced. A majority does). The simplest and most effective strategy is to limit BP to two users a team. That solves the problem of BP chains being broken. When Swagplay (a playstyle that was like a coin flip instead of Rock - Papper - Scissors) was considered broken, we didn't say "lets see, I think Thundurus is what's breaking it, lets try banning that first, and if it doesn't work, then we'll try again!" That approach has two flaws: it may not be effective or it may be unfairly scapegoating one pokemon. There's no guarantee Scolipede is breaking BP, and if we test and it fails, we've let the broken strategy perpetuate longer than we've needed to. Also, taking out Scolipede could unbreak BP, but so could banning Sylveon, or Espeon. If that is the case, then the overall inability to use Scolipede is unfair. The two BP user cap is simple and solves the problem while still allowing specific pokemon to be used and Baton Pass to be utilized in a support capacity.
I'm not advocating just banning Scolipede and hoping that solves the problem, only to possibly revisit it later. I'm saying that some smart players should try out some BP teams without Scolipede for a while and see whether they still seem broken. Only if some preliminary testing suggests it would be a good solution should we actually seriously think about going through with it.
 
Simple true, but effective? Sure it's effective if you want to remove two completely viable tactics from the game. No more Baton Pass chains and no more defense baton pass teams.

You are essentially PRO BAN. This isn't a nerf, its complete removal of the tactic all together.
...show me where Defensive Baton Pass has been viable. I'd like to see this in action before it gets any label.

Also, show me where limiting Baton Pass to two users severely restricts the playstyle enough where Baton Pass falls.

I want to see replays, evidence that such a restriction will destroy Baton Pass.
 
Infiltrator Topsy-Turvy Malamar. This what I wanted to avoid when I made my last post. The mentioning of obscure counters that haven't been tested and struggle to hold their own in OU against teams that are Baton Pass. If you're going to mention something that beats Baton Pass please make sure that you have tested this set and you have good replays of that set working both against Baton Pass and non Baton Pass team. Otherwise don't bother posting the set.


I motion that we incorporate conditional bans on Baton Pass based on the number of users. This will allow Baton Pass to remain a viable tactic at all stages, quick pass, chain pass, and defensive pass.
  • If your team consists of 4 Baton Passers, X cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 5 Baton Passers, X and Y cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 6 Baton Passers, X, Y, and Z cannot be used.
where x, y, and z, are specific bans like those mentioned above.

The goal here is to preserve the varying play styles of Baton Pass. Simply only allowing three Baton Passers removes an interesting competitive tactic from the game (essentially banning it). And the general consensus seems to be that we don't want it removed, we just want it nerfed.
Okay, let's run with this idea. Most people have come to the conclusion that a some sort of nerf is needed, how about we discussion the implication of possible options. Replays of what Baton Pass teams would resemble post nerfs are encouraged. Remember that we aren't trying to kill of Baton Pass as a whole but nerf it to become more manageable. Think Drizzle + Swift Swim ban, we didn't make this complex to kill of Rain teams off completely but rather make them more manageable.

The most common options that I've seen have been:

  • Ban Speed Boost + Baton Pass
  • Ban Magic Bounce + Baton Pass
  • Limit 3 or 4 Baton Pass user per team
These are the common suggestions that have been brought up so far. Discuss these as potential actions. How effective are Baton Pass teams with these implemented? How manageable are these teams now? How is team building affected with both for Baton Pass teams and non-Baton Pass teams?

Replays are encouraged to support your arguments.
 
Last edited:

Arcticblast

Trans rights are human rights
is a Forum Moderatoris a Tiering Contributoris a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnusis a Past SPL Champion
I've already explained my point of view, several times, but when I actually tested teams, I felt pretty strongly that there was absolutely nothing broken about the idea itself. Uncompetitive either. My full thought process is here:

http://www.smogon.com/forums/posts/5385081/

But I really don't want to hear your uniformed opinion again, so come back when you've tested things
Ninjask still gets Baton Pass + Speed Boost. Are you saying we ban that too?
 
Ninjask still gets Baton Pass + Speed Boost. Are you saying we ban that too?
No, he's too frail, and the inability to use iron defense means his support is limited to speed. Plus, he is usually a one time use, so teams can't reset as easily as before. Overall, Agility Zapdos is significantly more effective, but that requires at least the ability to get free turns, while Scolipede just requires the ability to sub stall.

I have replays showing this saved on my laptop, but I won't be able to show them until I get back to my appartment tonight. Basically the point of removing Scolipede from Baton Pass teams is to make them more susceptible to accepted modes of countering available to most teams, immediate pressure. And without the automatic boost to speed and the easily obtainable boost to defense, BP teams are pretty easy for skilled players to handle
 
I motion that we incorporate conditional bans on Baton Pass based on the number of users. This will allow Baton Pass to remain a viable tactic at all stages, quick pass, chain pass, and defensive pass.
  • If your team consists of 4 Baton Passers, X cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 5 Baton Passers, X and Y cannot be used.
  • If your team consists of 6 Baton Passers, X, Y, and Z cannot be used.
This. Complex, but if not this then limit of 3 sounds good too. BP seriously needs to be nerfed some way or the other. I'm surprised this isn't a suspect test and nothing's actually being done (at least so far). Good use of offensive BP is admirable but defensive BP is gay. I feel that if not any big nerfs, the least step that could be taken is to make Iron Defense incompatible with BP on Scolipede. He still has SD and Substitute with Speed Boost to make him one of the best passers in the game, just that now the IQ of a Slowpoke would no longer be enough to use him effectively.

I was forced to include niche in my team to deal with BP teams but that weakened my team against other opponents. I decided to chuck the BP counters, play the real games and just quit BP games without wasting my time on that garbage. Ladder ain't worth it.
 
Simple true, but effective? Sure it's effective if you want to remove two completely viable tactics from the game. No more Baton Pass chains and no more defense baton pass teams.
"Viable" is different from "fair". Swagplay was viable. It was also uncompetitive. I'm taking what you termed "viable" as "fair and competitive to use i n the metagame". I'm of the opinion that Baton Pass Chains (including defensive Baton Pass Chains, which i assume only pass defensive boosts?) are uncompetitive and therefore should be taken out of the metagame.

I've already explained my point of view, several times, but when I actually tested teams, I felt pretty strongly that there was absolutely nothing broken about the idea itself. Uncompetitive either. My full thought process is here:

http://www.smogon.com/forums/posts/5385081/

But I really don't want to hear your uniformed opinion again, so come back when you've tested things
I get that you're of a contrasting opinion, but saying my opinion is "uninformed" is pretty much degrading the idea of an opposite opinion having merit. My opinion (BP in its current state is uncompetitive) is shared by many users who are probably better than me. Are you calling their logic unfounded? They have offered ample evidence supporting this opinion, so it seems like you're saying the entire concept of disagreeing with your "informed" opinion makes me and others idiots.
 
Non-Guest 31415 believe it or not, you are the first one to mention infiltrator Malimar. Feel proud buddy :).
I was the first one to mention Imprison + BP Musharna. Should I feel proud too?

No. Do you know why?

Because outside of strictly countering Baton Pass, they are completely worthless.

This is why people want a nerf, because outside of Baton Pass battles these pokemon and their anti-BP sets are utter garbage.
 

Albacore

sludge bomb is better than sludge wave
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Well, he're a replay of me using a BP team with 3 users :

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-111169459

Now, I lost this match, but that being said, my opponent (who was Andrew, by the way) specifically counter-teamed me, using known BP checks such as Pinsir, Talonflame, Thundurus, and a Taunt user Espeon does not want to switch into in the form of Gengar. I'm pretty sure 3 BP users in one team is still a little broken. Oddly enough, this kind of team isn't that matchup-based : if I had been running a full BP team, I would've probably been competely stopped dead. This match, on the other hand, was relatively close. If I had been able to get off a single Iron Defense, I could've probably won.

On the other hand, banning Scoliopede and/or Espeon from being part of BP chains in one way or another but allowing 6 users would stop making BP broken, but it might make it just as matchup-based. It seems to me like the more BP users are limited, the more the playstyle is manageable using normal methods. I think limiting BP to 2 users might fix it, but then again, I realized while using this team that SpA or SpD boosts are actually pretty trivial compared to what Scoliopede brings to the table, so that may actually be the problem.

I would *really* love replays from both a full BP team without Scoliopede or Espeon and a team whose only BP users are the aforementioned Scoliopede and Espeon, in order to confirm or deny my suspicions.
 
Last edited:
I am seriously tired of losing to baton pass teams. If the player is even semi-competent it is impossible to win unless carrying a dedicated niche counter, and I shouldn't have to run haze Quagsire on every team I make.

Seriously, when the best counters people can come up with are Shedninja, imprison musharna and infiltrator malamar you know things have gotten bad.
 
I actually agree on principle with the first post on the thread after Haunter's on the first page. Espeon is the root of what makes full Baton Pass teams a threat. Do something to deal with Espeon, and the problem is basically gone.
 
One thing I'd like to add: if we end up nerfing bp, it should be something definite and permanent. Whatever we decide for bp should last. So I don't think banning specific pokemon or abilities is a good idea, bacause bp can get boosted again by the introduction of new pokemon, abilities or moves in the next gen, which would create the need for this debate all over again. For example, we ban scolipede and then gen 7 introduces a new pokemon with speed boost who is as good as scolipede. No, if bp is gonna be nerfed, it better be nerfed for good, in a way it cannot go back naturally in future gens. Because frankly, I doubt anyone here wants to have this thread again in the future.

So I believe the most fair nerf would be to limit the number of bp pokemon. Since I'm against removing bp teams from the game, I feel like a number like 4 would be ideal, though that's mostly a guess. With a lower number of pokemon with bp, it doesn't matter if bp gets new tools, since it would still me limited by the pokemon cap so it'd have to choose between those tools.

Then again, I'd rather let bp teams remain untouched, but I've already repeated my points on that to exhaustion in the last few days,so I wont do it again.
 
I was the first one to mention Imprison + BP Musharna. Should I feel proud too?

No. Do you know why?

Because outside of strictly countering Baton Pass, they are completely worthless.

This is why people want a nerf, because outside of Baton Pass battles these pokemon and their anti-BP sets are utter garbage.
I feel the need to explain my comment, mostly due to this post (and yes I realize I was incorrect in the first place).

The idea of something new coming up, no matter how trivial, after 50+ pages of rather exhaustive arguments is rather impressive. Unviable? Sure. Irrelevant because of that? Probably. But it impressed me nevertheless.
 
  • Ban Speed Boost + Baton Pass
  • Ban Magic Bounce + Baton Pass
  • Limit 3 or 4 Baton Pass user per team
  • Since speed is vital in chain pass, the Speed Boost ban would surely make it difficult for BP teams but definitely possible with Agility Zapdos/Mew/Gliscor and Quiver Dance Smeargle. I would consider Mew the best speed passer in this case due to access to both Barrier and Amnesia. Very few mons can 2HKO Mew considering the second hit taken is Barrier/Amnesia boosted.
  • Pretty much kills BP chain pass. Roar/Whirlwind, Taunt, status, hazard stack. Even without keeping a BP opposition in mind, any team would find themselves with a counter or three. Substitute counters status, but nothing else. Smeargle's Ingrain would be next to impossible to set up unless speed boosted since he's a 2HKO (or a [one-hit,eat Spore, switch out and another hit]KO), and has trouble against priority moves.
  • Scolipede and Espeon would need to be there. I'll just mention what would happen with the absence of other commonly used members (and the potential roles of some others).
  1. Smeargle: No Spore + Focus Sash contingency. Without Quiver Dance, Scolipede, a defensive booster, becomes the only speed passer. As a result, hard hitting special attackers with coverage can put major dents in the team. Most notably Landorus who has Sludge wave for Sylveon and Mr.Mime (The CM boosters). No Smeargle means no Ingrain as well, which means Espeon needs to be brought in against every possible Roar/Whirlwind.
  2. Vaporeon: Without Vaporeon, Many SD users would find it easy breaking through the team. Bisharp, Mega Mawile, Garchomp, etc. Vaporeon is the only one on general BP teams who is extremely bulky even without boosts and is a major buffer in BP teams.
  3. Zapdos: Considering only 3/4 slots are available, Zapdos would be one of the less likely picks, but a point to be noted is that without Zapdos the team would have a lot of trouble against Mega Pinsir and CB Talonflame.
  4. Mew: Many teams don't use Mew even when there are 6 BP slots available, but considering 3-4, Defense and SpD have to be completely covered. Mew brings in great flexibility with both Amnesia and Barrier. As mentioned before, he can also replace Scolipede as the speed booster leaving another slot open.
  5. Sylveon: Dragon Tail. Also loses Hyper Voice as a hit to Dark types which are immune to Stored Power (generally Espeon's only damaging move).
  6. Mr.Mime: Same as Sylveon except uses Dazzling Gleam. Soundproof note.
That's all I can think of for now. also BTW, I'm new to the forum, I just play PS, so feel free to tell me if I'm off :).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top