BW Reuniclus

[BKC]

This isn't going to get any discussion in the Sun / Exca thread and McM told me to make this a thread of its own for ~proper discussion~ so we can justify banning Reun from WCoP the same way we are the other suspects.

"I would like to propose that Reuniclus is added to this suspect. For the past few months, bulky spiking Reun teams have been the unquestionable best team style in the metagame because of how absurdly easy it is to 1) set up a sweep with it due to its immense bulk and hazard immunity and 2) how effortless wearing out its few checks is since they're all hazard weak, hazard bait and physical attackers, meaning Garchomp, Ferrothorn and the occasional Rocky Helmet Skarmory/Landorus-T chip away at them even more quickly. The exception of course is Sableye but he has glaring issues of his own. It's gotten to the point where some teams are using ridiculous amounts of speed creep and Life Orb on their Reun to counter others (this is honestly the best/most practical/consistent one too seeing as it lacks the flaws that kill the others) and there have been several high level games recently that everyone knew would inevitably come down to a Reun CM war right from team preview. Even if Excadrill is unbanned, giving us some recourse against the six billion spikes we see in every battle nowadays, it won't do much to help against Reun's immense power, not to mention it wants nothing to do with most hazard setters so we will most likely see a repeat of BW1 where hazards get spun and re-stacked multiple times a game, with the hazards usually outlasting the spinner."

The bolded part needs to be emphasized because right now the TDs want to wait until the Exca metagame settles before looking at Reun but I feel this is the wrong way to go because despite having a spinner much more viable than what we have now, it will not prevent the absurd Reuniclus wars we are seeing. Look at SPL finals, look at Heist vs. Ojama for BW Cup, if I could find the replay I'd post one of my no johns games where I won a near mirror match solely because I had the right Reun. This will continue happening in WCoP if we let Reun continue to run wild, even with Exca helping out in the hazards department Reun'll continue to outlast everything as it does now and it doesn't take a Smogon Tour winner to recognize that. Thanks for reading let's have some discussion!

 

[Bad Ass]

agreed, reuniclus' list of realistic, long term counters is just so small, and furthermore easily exploitable. but even pure offense teams that should be able to overwhelm it before it sets up are bound to lose 1-2 to it and the OTR version is another story by itself, ripping through unprepared offense; and from team preview, you can't tell whether this reuniclus is capable of pulling a sweep by turn 9 or going to outlast your whole squad until the opponent reveals the set. not to mention how perfect it is against the hazard-minded metagame right now. please ban x_x

 

[Tesung]

I think reuniclus is broken, and if not broken 100 pct suspect worthy. Exca doesn't make a difference. First of all, its prowess as a spinner is questionable; it may be able to get one off, but it won't last forever. It is also skarm-bait, as well as rh chomp and lando (3 huge setters). Also, unlike starmie, it can be outsped and forced out by a decent amount. So the spikes will be set, it just might take a bit longer.

The main problem with reuniclus is that it avoids all of the normal methods of dealing with A. Bulky cm mons. and B Psychics. The main ways to deal with bulky cm mons is roaring them though hazards, statusing, capitolizing on their weakness, setting up with them, and just hitting very hard physically. Toxicing doesn't work of course, and neither does hazard phazing. Reuniclus, unlike latias pesay, is strong initially, with decent coverage that not much can even switch into well with spikes up, and most of what can switch in is set-up bait. Setting up with reuni with lati or something won't work due to psyshock. This basically only leaves hitting it hard physically, and essentially 2 viable mons in sableye and volc that I would feel comfortable as my reuniclus check (checking it with mew or jelli is not going to be successful when you can't touch reuni back, leaving moemtnum in the favor of reuni user). These physcial checks, however, or easily neutralized by the rest of the team. They all take spikes, they all take helmet, barbs/rough skin dmg, and they are all status susceptible, especially burn (these teams will usually have a WoW ghost). So only have one way to consistently deal with reuni as a cm mon, and it is hard to do over the course of a match). As a psychic, reuniclus presents similar challenges. Psychics are all dangerous, most notably the latis and alakazam. But those 3 can all at least be beaten by the standard methods, pursuit and a fast u-turn. One could argue for zam's brokenness due to being so fast to avoid pursuit, and a huge threat to clean teams, but at least chople ttar and fast u-turns can beat it. Reuniclus can easily take attacks from a non banded ttar, and focus blast on the switch or 50-50 it if ttar gets in for free. Worst case scenario, it takes like 60 from pursuit on the switch (a hard play for ttar user to make) and recovers it off easily.


The other main problem with reuniclus is the inability to play around it. With most other things, you can double switch against it with hazards, or use a surprise moveset to check it, or use mons designed to check other things to check it With reuniclus, nothing that isn't specifically designed to beat it will beat it. If you lose your reuniclus check, or don't bring one, it is practially impossible to win, moreso than anything else. It sets up on so much that preventing set up is futile.


So on to the checks itself. It does have checks, so that is good. However, most are flawed in themselves or as a check

TTAR: Scarf switches in horribly and reuni can afford to recover scout easily. Band switches in ok, but is hard to fit and is a 5050 most likely. Chople can force it out, but it cant switch in forever. All very much spikes bait

Scizor: A very good check, if spdef Sd. Every other set will get worn down very much. Reuniclus even lives a banded u-turn. Spdef sd scizor is probably the best pure check, but it is a set that is fairly hard to fit on teams and easily countered by so much.

Jirachi: Spdef jirachi is a strong check. But it does rely on luck; paraflinching is far from gauranteed. Also, if reuniclus gets toxed/burnt, jirachi's odds decrease significantly. Also if jirachi gets statused its over. A strong check, but far from perfect.

Sableye: a perfect counter, but honestly pretty shitty overall in practice, and basically only used because reuniclus exists

Volcarona: Very hard to fit on teams, also very hazards weak

Hydreigon: Can't switch into focus blast at all

Setup stuff like chomp/rain gyara: Good checks, but a well built reuniclus team should wear them down too much, and they don't love switching in

Other fast reuni: lol

There is other random shit like victini, specs toad kinda,etc, but the point is most reuniclus counters are just so unreliable or spikes weak. The tier isn't able to handle reuniclus, at least in conjunction with spikes and shit. It gives the user an unfair advantage against too many teams, and too many games are decided between who crept their reuniclus more or crit first, because in a hazard filled match, only the reunicluses will be left at the end (see spl playoffs if an example is needed)

Edit: Oh and yeah the offesne that fairs decently against cm will be fucked by the otr set every time

 

[BKC]

Reuniclus strikes again with Peachy vs. cosine for tour quarterfinals. Can we please get some discussion here, especially from the TDs who I've been told haven't discussed what is a very pressing issue with WCoP quite close, they seem to be against the ban for the sole reason that Exca makes hazards a little more manageable which I believe to be nonsense... look at the linked battle, Peachy didn't set up a single layer of Spikes. In g2 of Heist vs. Ojama, Ojama's entire team bar Dugtrio wasn't affected by Spikes, yet it still came down to a Reun war. Exca would do nothing to help this issue and claiming otherwise is delusional.

edit: forgot to mention there's also the fact that Exca can't even beat any hazard setter, which has already been stated but I felt it needs to be emphasized just how little Exca will help here

 

[Tomahawk]

Reuniclus strikes again with Peachy vs. cosine for tour quarterfinals. Can we please get some discussion here, especially from the TDs who I've been told haven't discussed what is a very pressing issue with WCoP quite close, they seem to be against the ban for the sole reason that Exca makes hazards a little more manageable which I believe to be nonsense... look at the linked battle, Peachy didn't set up a single layer of Spikes. In g2 of Heist vs. Ojama, Ojama's entire team bar Dugtrio wasn't affected by Spikes, yet it still came down to a Reun war. Exca would do nothing to help this issue and claiming otherwise is delusional.

edit: forgot to mention there's also the fact that Exca can't even beat any hazard setter, which has already been stated but I felt it needs to be emphasized just how little Exca will help here

g2 Heist vs Ojama

Not a very fun game to watch.

 

[Lavos]

I don't have much to say about this because the Reuniclus issue is fairly simple. Why does it thrive in the current metagame? Because the status quo emphasizes stacking spikes and phazing coupled with spreading chip damage and Toxic. Reuniclus is immune to all of this and subsequently creates an insane amount of pressure all by itself, forcing teams to run extremely suboptimal Pokemon/sets to deal with it - and sometimes that still doesn't work, because it's just THAT strong.

The simple solution seems to be banning Magic Guard Reuniclus. This prevents it from steamrolling the Spikes metagame, making it care about Spikes, status, Sand, etc. I think this puts Reuniclus in a good spot for OU where it isn't too strong and isn't too weak either. It's still capable of setting up and wrecking a Stall team but has to be wary of getting hit with Toxic. It's still capable of clicking Trick Room and running through a HO team but can't be so free with its attacks due to Life Orb now dealing recoil. I think if this change were implemented we'd probably see Reuniclus drop to a low amount of usage in OU, under 5%. It would be one of the least abusable mons in the OU tier but would still see play in niche TR and Stall teams. I don't know if Regenerator is a legal ability on Reun since I've never seen it used (why not use Magic Guard?), but if it is, that could open up some options for teambuilding creativity.

That said, I recognize the hesitation that could arise regarding banning only a single ability on a Pokemon. We did it with Garchomp, but that was different because it was part of Evasion Clause, which is distinctly in the interest of preserving competitiveness. In this situation, MG Reuniclus is simply broken, and it has to go - whether that means the ability or the Pokemon itself. This much is clear. I think banning exclusively Magic Guard Reuniclus is the better option because Magic Guard makes it far too strong for OU, but without MG it's still an interesting and versatile threat which will undoubtedly make the metagame more diverse (which is the opposite of what it does right now).

If it comes to a ban/no ban, I'll be in full support of the former, but I truly believe this is the best solution for the tier.

 

[Fireburn]

I can't really ever support a Pokemon + Ability ban tbh. While we all more or less know that the significant motivation of the Sand Veil ban was to bring Garchomp back into OU, Sand Veil is arguably an Uncompetitive™ ability (hence its lumping into evasion) regardless and thus more justifiable to ban completely. You can't make that same argument with Magic Guard. Even Excadrill is only coming back because it's getting lumped into a general Weather + Speed Boosting Ability ban (generality being key here). I don't think forcing Reuniclus into OU is worth the can of worms we would open up by doing a specific Pokemon + Ability ban, particularly in an old generation. If Reuniclus is truly broken the simplest solution would actually just be to ban it and move on, not like BW OU has a shortage of bulky and threatening Psychic-types (hi Mew).

I don't have an actual opinion as to whether or not Reuniclus should be banned, but it does seem pretty ridiculous to deal with just from watching several tournament matches being decided by Reun vs Reun CM wars. That being said, I am concerned that we might be trying to do too many things at once by testing Reuniclus and Weather + Speed Boosting ability bans at the same time, especially when we don't have a defined process for handling what is looking like to be a very significant change to an old generation. Remember that we are dealing with a small sample size for what will probably be a very large metagame shift - the BW OU ladder got ~0.2% of the matches the OU ladder got last month and outside of annual tournaments (mostly Smogon Tour and now BW Cup) and friendlies no one really plays BW OU too much. We don't and won't have the luxury of an active suspect ladder (our traditional method of examining questionable things) to generate many matches in a short timeframe to produce a wide sample base with which to judge the metagame, so I do wonder if taking things one step at a time would be more prudent.

I feel like this concern is valid since the multiple suspects approach was tried in BW OU and did not prove to be as efficient as hoped. The mass suspect testing in early BW OU when Reuniclus was actually nominated at one point led it to being pushed by the wayside in lieu of more powerful things like Deoxys formes and forgotten until...one generation later. Trying to test Tornadus-T and Keldeo at the same time led to Keldeo getting its own test anyway because Tornadus-T was having too much of an effect on the metagame to properly examine pony. It is difficult to get an accurate picture of questionable metagame elements when two supposedly independent testing variables may actually influence each other (as is the argument for waiting on Reuniclus due to Drill returning hopefully making the hazard game more bearable...and we do not yet know if it will actually help or not outside of pure theory, so we can't say it is unrelated at this time).

Just my $0.02.

 

[Jirachee]

Reuniclus strikes again with Peachy vs. cosine for tour quarterfinals. Can we please get some discussion here, especially from the TDs who I've been told haven't discussed what is a very pressing issue with WCoP quite close, they seem to be against the ban for the sole reason that Exca makes hazards a little more manageable which I believe to be nonsense... look at the linked battle, Peachy didn't set up a single layer of Spikes. In g2 of Heist vs. Ojama, Ojama's entire team bar Dugtrio wasn't affected by Spikes, yet it still came down to a Reun war. Exca would do nothing to help this issue and claiming otherwise is delusional.

edit: forgot to mention there's also the fact that Exca can't even beat any hazard setter, which has already been stated but I felt it needs to be emphasized just how little Exca will help here

lol come on, the replay you linked between peachy and cosine doesn't mean anything. cosine's team was awful. It had no way whatsoever to check Reuniclus, so it was obvious that he'd lose to it. Leftovers MixTar without Crunch isn't a check to any bulky Psychic type at all, that team would have lost to Alakazam if it had faced it too, regardless of Spikes or whatever support you would typically give it.

not posting an actual opinion on Reuniclus for now but yeah, stop making it sound like Reuniclus is just plain unbeatable, Arceus-Ghost style (it isn't)

 

[BKC]

Sure, but the argument that replay disproves - one I have heard from many people - is "hard hitting offense overwhelms/easily plays around CM Reuniclus" and as you can see, the usefulness of Reun's bulk and immunity to non-attacks extends further than just beating "passive" teams. If that team, packing offensive sets on everything and wielding dangerous monsters such as SD Landorus and DD Gyarados, isn't considered hard hitting then I don't know what to say. A more standard sand offense team has similar issues against Reun. If cosine had run a more defensive team, the hazards Peachy probably would've been more focused on laying would've forced him to fall back on his own Reun, no different his offensive team unable to break it (it is not nearly as easy to break Reun as genius arguments such as "just overwhelm it with offense" make it sound) was forced to.

I would also like examples of people "easily playing around" Reun as many claim to do on a regular basis, because I have provided examples of all sorts and all I have gotten in return are generalized, laissez-faire copout answers such as "I've beaten it before" (wow, so have I!) and "just play around it" and "people will adapt to it eventually" (for the latter two - how, if I may ask? the metagame simply doesn't have the tools; similarly to people saying "if it was broken why wasn't it banned before" I can say "if the tools to reliably beat Reun exist why haven't they been discovered already" and so on and so forth).

 

[Ciele]

Reuniclus strikes again with Peachy vs. cosine for tour quarterfinals. Can we please get some discussion here, especially from the TDs who I've been told haven't discussed what is a very pressing issue with WCoP quite close, they seem to be against the ban for the sole reason that Exca makes hazards a little more manageable which I believe to be nonsense... look at the linked battle, Peachy didn't set up a single layer of Spikes. In g2 of Heist vs. Ojama, Ojama's entire team bar Dugtrio wasn't affected by Spikes, yet it still came down to a Reun war. Exca would do nothing to help this issue and claiming otherwise is delusional.

I feel the need to point out the fact that Reuniclus was 0-3 in Tour play-offs before this cosine-Peachy game. Also, its "dominance" in SPL saw it achieve two BW wins in the entire tournament, one of which was against another Reuniclus. This is a list of the "major" BW2 OU games this year (that I could find) that featured Reuniclus.

It's also concerning that the examples of it being broken are almost always games where both sides are using Reuniclus on bulky Spikes teams. In the two Heist-Ojama games where Reuniclus was only on one side, it's clear to see that the Latis influenced the games far more than Reuniclus did.

That being said, I don't have a strong opinion on whether Reuniclus is broken or not, but I do feel that testing it at the same time as the Sun/Excadrill thing is a bad idea. Reuniclus only became "an issue" shortly after bulky Sand teams with Ferro/Skarm became the dominant playstyle, so given that it's only been considered "banworthy" for the past 2-3 months, we have to consider the possibility that it's only "broken" in the current metagame and not the tier as a whole (see: Keldeo from a year or so ago). If it continues to "be an issue" even after the metagame settles from the other changes then maybe something should be done about it, but for now I think we should see how things go in WCoP before making even more changes.

 

[blarajan]

I don't have much to say about this because the Reuniclus issue is fairly simple. Why does it thrive in the current metagame? Because the status quo emphasizes stacking spikes and phazing coupled with spreading chip damage and Toxic. Reuniclus is immune to all of this and subsequently creates an insane amount of pressure all by itself, forcing teams to run extremely suboptimal Pokemon/sets to deal with it - and sometimes that still doesn't work, because it's just THAT strong.

The simple solution seems to be banning Magic Guard Reuniclus. This prevents it from steamrolling the Spikes metagame, making it care about Spikes, status, Sand, etc. I think this puts Reuniclus in a good spot for OU where it isn't too strong and isn't too weak either. It's still capable of setting up and wrecking a Stall team but has to be wary of getting hit with Toxic. It's still capable of clicking Trick Room and running through a HO team but can't be so free with its attacks due to Life Orb now dealing recoil. I think if this change were implemented we'd probably see Reuniclus drop to a low amount of usage in OU, under 5%. It would be one of the least abusable mons in the OU tier but would still see play in niche TR and Stall teams. I don't know if Regenerator is a legal ability on Reun since I've never seen it used (why not use Magic Guard?), but if it is, that could open up some options for teambuilding creativity.

That said, I recognize the hesitation that could arise regarding banning only a single ability on a Pokemon. We did it with Garchomp, but that was different because it was part of Evasion Clause, which is distinctly in the interest of preserving competitiveness. In this situation, MG Reuniclus is simply broken, and it has to go - whether that means the ability or the Pokemon itself. This much is clear. I think banning exclusively Magic Guard Reuniclus is the better option because Magic Guard makes it far too strong for OU, but without MG it's still an interesting and versatile threat which will undoubtedly make the metagame more diverse (which is the opposite of what it does right now).

If it comes to a ban/no ban, I'll be in full support of the former, but I truly believe this is the best solution for the tier.

blaziken

I don't know how relevant my opinion is on the matter, but I agree with the sentiments regarding Reuniclus. We didn't ban Reuniclus when it was suspected ages ago but as far as I can remember, there were more pressing things to deal with at the time, and then we never got back around to Reuniclus. If you don't have CB Tyranitar, Volcarona, CB Scizor, or specially defensive Jirachi, Reuniclus WILL sweep you. The issue is that unlike other Pokemon, the only way to get rid of Reuniclus and Alakazam is to actively kill it, but that's hard when it has natural 110/85/75 defenses and can simply wear YOU down. I understand we shouldn't really look at Reuniclus in tandem with other Pokemon, but pairing it with Magnezone is legitimately unstoppable. I don't have much to say outside of what already has been but really, Reuniclus is so much more annoying than Sun ever has been (and likewise countered Sun in its entirety, really) and should definitely be the topic of discussion.

 

[The Grand Babido]

spike is the big fat elephant in the room that has ruined tiers but fsr a lotta dudes like to stack spikes cause its aeesthetically pleasing lmao ...... every tier would be better without the move but u do what u gotta do . everyone loves their big fat skarm spikin on everthing and annoying things with ferrothorn. when do we look at moves. scald and spikes are dumb they shouuld go away for ever.


renucleus though. hes way more restricting than sun ever was in BW building. honestly bro i dont even prepare for that strategy cause its so rare. its like preparing for rain offense in dpp u dont actively think abiut trying to beat that strategy when u build but maybe ur team would lose to it if u play. some of my b est bats in bw came against sun teams cause u gotta analyse the best time to bring the ninetales in and it makes for some good thinking bats. u gotta be thinking a few turns ahead in that sort of game cause if u make one bad read then the tales is in for free or the hippo+sr is in and then ur screwed. people got it stuck in their minds that sand defense is like the 'standard' archetype and that a meta is bad if it isnt good and that it should always be present and be able to do well against all squads. reun is an annoying guy tho cause u cant really outlast him. just like torn-t in xy. nothing can consistently exploit the dude and be able 2 chill with him til the end game. nothing tht isnt massive spikes weak at least. but na spike is cool. not restricting at all.


funny that spikes and stealth rock and scald will have a more of a detrimental effect on literally every tier than any sort of uber poke but they'll never be looked at seriously. spike are an easy way to win vs noobs tho for sure. just stack them and switch to ur counter every turn and the noob will never win

 

[Ojama]

I thought I wouldn't post here because I'm against suspecting Reuniclus right now because I feel like we have to see how the metagame will be with Excadrill unbanned but Heist brought up a very interesting point. It's been now a year that I'm really tired of building whether it's in DPP or BW2 because of how restricting Spikes and Stealth Rock make the teambuilding.

I hate Stealth Rock since it's been first introduced and I'm not gonna change my mind about that move seeing how dirty both DPP and BW2 are right now. A DPP game (I'm gonna exaggerate a bit but you'll get where I'm coming from) is all about setting up Stealth Rock as soon as possible because we all know how important that move is. Someone who has Stealth Rock up on turn 1 and managed to prevent his opponent from setting them up has a huge advantage. Do you realize how important the Lead Matchup is in DPP because of this move? It doesn't sound that bad when you read the description of the move but we all know how much important those 12.5% can be. I'm not gonna talk about the 25% damage because that's just stupid as fuck. I always end up not using Dragonite or Gyarados because of Stealth Rock and god knows how much I like those Pokémons (DPP and BW2).

Stealth Rock doesn't even exist in ADV and I think everyone will agree on that point too: 3 layers of Spikes is cancerous. I'm not supporting a Spikes ban but I definitely think 1 layer is way enough (like in GSC). We all know what is dominating the ADV metagame: Gengar + Spikes. We all know what is dominating the DPP metagame: Stealth Rock + Spikes + Rotom-W/ScarfTyranitar. We all know what's dominating the BW2 metagame: Stealth Rock + Spikes + Magic Guard.

That being said I can know give you my arguments regarding the Reuniclus issue. Hazards make both Reuniclus and Alakazam broken and I don't think they deserve to get banned. They are several Pokémons in the tier that can be considered as checks or counters but end up being a "1 time option" because of Spikes + Stealth Rock. Jirachi should be an amazing counter but it actually isn't because of how easy it is to wear it down thanks to Spikes + Stealth Rock doing 32% whenever it comes in and also because Specially Defensive Jirachi is a Spikes/SR bait. Jirachi can't touch Ferrothorn and Skarmory and becomes a free switchin to both, then they can just spam their shit.

I can't help but think about a metagame with SR gone and 1 layer of Spikes allowed. Yes, I can see you come from miles away with your "VOLCARONA WILL BE BROKEN OMG" but in my opinion Volcarona wouldn't be that broken because stuff like Dragonite and Gyarados would be used much more often; some other stuff would survive its moves even at +1 without the SR/Spikes damages; maybe some BL/UU Pokémons would become viable in the OU tier (Rotom-H, Darmanitan, Chandelure, Victini, Moltres, etc). Same goes with DPP, I'd love to see how cool the teams would be without SR/Spikes (3 attacks Recover Starmie, Abomasnow, no more stupid lead matchup, Nite-Gyara teams, etc). Also the Sets would be so much cooler without Stealth Rock, trust me... Don't tell me you never got disappointed when you were forced to run Stealth Rock on your Heatran instead of using Roar/Sub/Wow...

I know if something is done it would be after World Cup but I genuinely think that we should consider a Hazards suspect as soon as we get the chance because something must change in my opinion. Unless you wanna see more bab-ojama games that last 170 turns and end up being a reu war...

To Heist and those who think we are "banning" Sun by banning Weather + Speed boost ability -> read my thread, Venusaur was cancerous and almost everyone agrees about that. If the only reason to use Sun was Venusaur, then there's definitely a problem with that Pokémon. You are exaggerating by saying that Rain in DPP is as much present as Sun in BW2. A lot of players got great results by spamming Sun in official tournament: Sogeking, Alice, Aqualouis. It's used often enough to be considered as a huge threat when building a team, I'm sorry but that's the truth. We banned Kingdra + Rain and it didn't kill Rain as far as I know...

 

[Slimmer]

I agree with Ojama on the Venusaur point (I gotta think about the whole hazards point since it's not something you can judge about it without a long analysis and meditation); I'd like to add also that Venusaur is still usable in a Rain Dance Kingdra way, aka Sunny Day sweeper: surely this set loses a important moveslot on a mon that already got 4MSS (GigaDrain, SludgeBomb, HP Fire/Ice, Growth, Sleep Powder are the most used moves, other than rare subseeder set for sun stalls) but this would help it being less broken as it already is. This set is probably subpar to RD Kingdra because rain also boosts STAB, but it should help anyway in some teams

About Reuniclus: I see the issue, it's something too easy to use and to support with spikes spam that lures its checks but I don't know if it's banworthy. Stuff like Mew Stallbreaker isn't used at all while it should help vs CM Reuni and still have other use in the metagame (it cripples Scizor/Tar, taunts spikes spammer and slower taunters like Jellicent etc). It can't deal too much with OTR set but other mons can deal with it, and I don't see that "unpredictability" on Reuniclus like in other mons, since OTR Clus in order to sweep has to set up TR first (so you can send your check, and stuff like CB Scizor, Wish SDef Jirachi and Chople Tyranitar can help against it).
Also CM Wish Rachi can help against reuni considering Serene Grace drops on Psychic (or Psyshock 3HKOes with 0 SpA and Thunder para helps preventing the Recover) while Reuni can only 6HKOes w/Psyshock (and deals 8,4% max w/Psychic), and has 3% chance to 4HKO w/FocusBlast (which has 8 PP), and Jirachi runs Wish.

Hide

+6 0 SpA Jirachi Psyshock vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Reuniclus: 148-175 (34.9 - 41.2%) -- 72.8% chance to 3HKO after Leftovers recovery
+6 0 SpA Reuniclus Psyshock vs. 252 HP / 236+ Def Jirachi: 76-89 (18.8 - 22%) -- possible 6HKO after Leftovers recovery
+6 0 SpA Reuniclus Focus Blast vs. +6 252 HP / 0 SpD Jirachi: 105-124 (25.9 - 30.6%) -- 3.1% chance to 4HKO after Leftovers recovery

calcs on OTR Reuni set, who can be setup field for CM Wish Rachi
252+ SpA Life Orb Reuniclus Focus Blast vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Jirachi: 182-214 (45 - 52.9%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Leftovers recovery
252+ SpA Life Orb Reuniclus Focus Blast vs. +1 252 HP / 0 SpD Jirachi: 122-144 (30.1 - 35.6%) -- guaranteed 4HKO after Leftovers recovery

 

[Omfuga]

Can't speak much for OU, however I played BW UU for the majority of its run and spike-stacking was evidently troubling to play. In a tier where the "reliable" spinners were foresight Blastoise/Hitmontop, it was really easy to set spikes up and sweep with Sharpedo or something late-game.

Every generation has some pokemon moved to BL/Ubers simply because they can too reliably set up spikes (Froslass, for example), which is too much for any tier. Spikes are restrictive on building, and because of the lack of a reliable hazard-removing move such as defog, rapid spin becomes kind of a makeshift answer. I can't speak for BW OU, but I'd assume it's the same concept. Like Ojama said, part of the reason Alakazam and Reuniclus thrive so much is because spike-stacking is so easy/common. I'd be interested to look more into a ban like Spikes, however I doubt it's likely to happen.

Banning moves is always going to be controversial. I proposed a scald suspect in both UU and RU council, but although there was significant support, and UU even got a scald-less ladder, the idea is still too controversial to settle well with a lot of people. That being said, I still think Spikes are an issue in BW, and without them Reuniclus would probably be far less problematic.

 

[danilo]

Just wondering, why are so many against banning moves? Is it a slippery slope sorta thing, cause I mean we already have banned moves, right? I've never understood why people are against banning things that are clearly bad for the game, not that Spikes necessarily are, but I think many would at least agree that Scald is.

 

[kokoloko]

afaik it's a transitivty issue. "if uu bans scald will it also be banned in ru and nu? cause we don't want that"

there was a thread about this (actually maybe two?) but I can't be bothered to dig it/them up while I'm on mobile.

personally I think rocks and scald should have been long ago but even as a former tier leader even bringing the topic up is a huge taboo and I will never understand why people are that opposed tbh.

 

[blarajan]

Maybe this is weird, but when I led Little Cup, my thought process for non-Pokemon bans was if it was broken (or uncompetitive) on anything that got it / would be broken (or uncompetitive) on anything that had it. Maybe that's not the best way to do it, but that's how I did. For example, Moody was uncompetitive on everything that had it, including stupid things like Bidoof, so it got banned. However, I got a lot of people asking to ban Speed Boost in BW LC because the two Pokemon that had it, Carvanha and Yanma, were broken. I did not like that proposal and did not ban it in BW because I did not think Speed Boost would break any Pokemon that had it. I looked at XY with Speed Boost Venipede and Torchic and knew those would not be broken in BW had they had those abilities.

I wanted to differentiate bans from Pokemon being broken and other factors being broken, making those other factors more difficult to ban. I did not think Carvanha, for example, was broken because Speed Boost was broken, but instead of was broken because of its high offensive traits combined with Speed Boost.

Thus, if Scald, Stealth Rock, Spikes, whatever are arguably broken in and of themselves, and not because some Pokemon are really effective at spreading them, then I would support their bans. I personally do not think that is the case, but that is the basis in which I evaluated all non-Pokemon bans.

 

[danilo]

gangstas who are against banning moves should post here. let us know ur position so we can engage in respectful and moderately intelligent warfare.

 

[blarajan]

I think it's an interesting argument to point out how Spikes is already a problem and that it could be the thing that exacerbates Reuniclus's strengths to the degree that it currently is, and that removing it would be both beneficial for the tier and might make Reuniclus less of a problem. However, before I engage this argument, something did catch my eye that's been on my mind for a while now that I'd like to address.


I apologize in advance if I have misinterpreted what you meant, but time and time again I've seen this thought process regurgitated as a means to justify not banning moves, and quite frankly, this line of reasoning is just so flawed that I have a hard time understanding why people latch on to it so much. The problem with using this "all or nothing" kinda philosophy as a basis for not banning moves is that you ignore any grey areas which makes it difficult to ban moves, even if they do present themselves as problems, simply because it's not luck based nor does it present itself as a problem when evaluating the lowest common denominator even though it is a problem when you look at in a much more practical standpoint. For example, if you gave your typical Water-type access to Scald, would this Pokemon be able to make use of the move to either a) check Pokemon that it would not be able to do otherwise or b) exploit the burn rate in order to beat a Pokemon it otherwise would not be able to. The answer to both of those questions is an obvious yes. Be it in tournament setting or otherwise, I can't tell you how many matches I've seen that have been decided on whether or not Scald will burn at this specific turn. Here are two examples from SPL that I dug up in like 5 minutes, but I'm sure there are more. The point I'm trying to make is that outside of hax and controllable factors such as team building and playing ability, Scald has been a universal aspect that has the capability to single handedly decide the outcome of a match for multiple tiers across more than one generation even, and unlike your typical hax, something can actually be done about this. So I come to wonder why is it that people insist on using this flawed and archaic mentality to keep moves from being banned when the philosophy for banning Pokemon has evolved from "the broken not broken" vacuum to something less black and white such as "is this Pokemon healthy for the tier"? I too like many other in this thread would like to see certain moves being looked at with much more scrutiny, but in order to do so, something needs to change about the way people think about these things otherwise nothing will happen.

I included uncompetitive in my response. If we find Scald's 30% burn rate to be universally uncompetitive then it's okay to ban, too. I don't appreciate that response as if I only examined pure-Brokenness, otherwise we wouldn't have banned Swagger.

 

[kokoloko]

youre kinda missing the point bud. broken and uncompetitive, under the premise that we ban for the sake of metagame improvement, are the same thing.

and i mean in my eyes they always were but now there's REALLY no point in differentiating them.

 

[Rowan]

Spirit, you say that blarajan's point is silly because of the all or nothing approach, yet then you sort of argue that scald causes so much issues in all tiers where it decides the outcome of matches. It's sort of like you're arguing that scald is inherently broken/uncompetitive, in which case, with blarajan's philosphy it would get banned. I don't see how you're arguing with him here.

I do kinda agree with blarajan on his 'broken on everything', or to put it differently 'inherently broken' philosophy. Scald may be inherently broken, yet speed boost is not, hence speed boost not getting banned. There are obvious exceptions to the rule, Scald, or Swagger isn't going to be broken on a Magikarp for example. Scald wouldn't be broken on a physical attacker, such as Sneasel, as well. Maybe 'broken on a vast majority' is a better way of saying it.

The thing with scald, and hazards is does it just push a small minority over the top, (like idk keldeo and a few others, not too familiar with OU)? Or does it push too large an amount of things over the top (like swift swim+drizzle did).
Hazards is a very hard thing to ask that question for, and there would have to be quite a bit of testing into hazard-less metagames before a decision was made.

 

[ryan]

There was no scald burn in the second replay, and windsong had three chances to burn in the first so I mean eh.

But I've brought this up before as well. Moves like Stealth Rock, Scald, and Knock Off aren't really even questionably broken (barring Knock Off in NU where there's one viable absorber and LC where there are like two), but they make the game considerably less fun to play. Scald burns can swing games either way. Stealth Rock can take a theoretically fantastic Pokemon and make it unviable. Knock Off can allow certain Pokemon to beat would-be checks and counters or even just put on absurd pressure due to lack of passive recovery or lack of Eviolite boost. Scald and Knock Off in particular don't make the game more enjoyable. Scald is used on every bulky Water-type that learns it (rip Seel), and Knock Off is used on almost everything in the entire goddamn game that gets it. Stealth Rock is so good that almost every single team carries it, and no team becomes worse by adding Stealth Rock to it. They're staples because there's almost no reason not to run them.

You can lump Spikes into the above argument, but to a lesser degree because they take longer to have a great effect and because three turns of setup can be wiped out in just one turn. Spikes also has lower distribution than the others, which helps to keep them from being staples on literally every team, even if they are very common in certain metagames. It's harder to get rid of Spikes in BW, but at least when you can, it's a greater payoff than the amount of time it took to set them up.

I know a lot of people are very skeptical on making such drastic changes to our tiers, but I'd like to try it out at least. Find me another competitive video game that doesn't make adjustments due to fairness or things being frustrating to play against. I don't play any MOBAs, but I know at least one of them (wanna say League but I cannot remember at all) makes constant adjustments to champions. Hearthstone does it. Diablo does it. Smash Bros nerfs Greninja regularly. Unfortunately, Pokemon developers have little interest in competitive singles play, and although they care about doubles and have made nerfs to account for it (see: Gems, banning most of the top Pokemon in the first VGCs of XY), they care more about making money, which means appealing to the casual crowd. We can't nerf or buff things, but we can ban them.

 

[danilo]

hollywood , you seem to be on the pro banning moves side, but I don't understand why from your post. Is it because " they make the game considerably less fun to play"? Is it because "there's almost no reason not to run them"? Do either of the two quotes I picked, according to u, fall under the "we ban things to make the metagame better" umbrella that the council has been following? What framework are you working with for banning moves?

 

[Lavos]

Since no one’s brought up the argument as to why we shouldn’t ban moves, I suppose I’ll do it. I’m one of the loudest advocates of getting as close as we can to a state of pure competition in our metagames, but there is merit to keeping a little RNG involved, for lack of a better solution.

The main fear of taking away the limitation on banning moves is that it can potentially open up a gigantic floodgate in which a slippery slope of banning moves, items, etc. that the community deems “uncompetitive” will occur. Take Scald, for example, since it’s the move which has probably been labeled as uncompetitive the most. I fully recognize that 30% Scald burns can decide the outcome of a game. I remember back in the late BW1 OU rain stall days, the matchup essentially came down to whoever’s Tentacruel burnt the opposing Ferrothorn first, and that shouldn’t happen in a competitive setting obviously. Another example, perhaps less common, but switching a CB Ttar into a Jellicent on Scald, there’s a 70% chance Jelli is dead and the Ttar player gets a huge swing but a 30% chance they’re completely fucked. There are near-infinite examples to draw upon where Scald burning or not burning decides matches. And 30% means it occurs frequently enough to justifiably frustrate players, unlike Ice Beam, where a 10% freeze will almost assuredly decide a game, but it isn’t prevalent or common.

At this point I’d like to direct attention to another move: Focus Blast, the sole key Fighting-type coverage option for a myriad of specially attacking Pokemon including Reuniclus, Alakazam, and Gengar. Often jokingly referred to as Focus Miss, but for good reason, this move can decide the outcome of a match just as easily, and perhaps more decisively than Scald. With an accuracy of 70% and thus a 30% chance to miss, it is the most comparable to Scald and thus deserving of similar analysis. If we ban Scald, ought Focus Blast have to go as well? Logically speaking, if the moves are operating in a vacuum, then yes. They are equally uncompetitive from a purely mathematical sense, but also in application. Yet banning Focus Blast, unlike Scald, would completely destroy the OU viability of the Pokemon listed above (even Reuniclus). One might argue in defense of FB that it’s a necessary risk to undergo in teambuilding and something which is in the forefront of a teambuilder’s mind when opting to use Pokemon which rely upon the move, making the tradeoff of higher risk for a stronger teammate instead of something like Aura Sphere Mew, and yet that doesn’t make it any less uncompetitive. Scald, too, is a teambuilding tradeoff. Most Pokemon that get Scald, and certainly all Water types, also have access to Surf, which is significantly stronger in terms of base power, but Scald is the objectively better choice due to the burn rate. It’s not a perfect comparison, but it’s the best one we have because Scald is unparalleled in terms of its ability to instantly swing a game through chance RNG. Those against the banning of any and all moves generally think along these lines.

Additionally, we can see that this slippery slope happens in real life. When policymaking institutions are granted slightly more power, they often end up exploiting it to an absurd level – if you don’t believe me, look up Andrew Jackson, the first U.S. president to use an executive order that actually affected public policy, and compare his expansion of the power of the executive office to the current power we see presidents wielding. The scenario of a banning snowball where any move deemed even slightly uncompetitive is put on the chopping block…well, it’s not entirely unrealistic.

Disclaimer: I don’t necessarily believe any of the above, but it’s a logically sound argument that has yet to be presented for the opposition and I feel that it has a place in this discussion.

Edit: Paragraphs for clarity.