1. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.
  2. New to the forums? Check out our Mentorship Program!
    Our mentors will answer your questions and help you become a part of the community!

Evasion Clause: A Discussion of a New Addition.

Discussion in 'Stark Mountain' started by Ambitions, Mar 8, 2008.

  1. RaikouLover

    RaikouLover

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,430
    You can't ban Sand Veil. It would change the game mechanics and is not possible to do. Get mad at Game Freak, but there is nothing you can do. If it bothers people so much, build a rain dance team. Problem solved. No snow cloak, no sand veil.

    Frostitute also doesn't like that you left her out.
  2. Ambitions

    Ambitions

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,749
    Raikoulover- Froslass and Mamo got broke links and no where does it say we should ban those abilities learn to read.
  3. merubin

    merubin

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    251
    Sure you can: "All Pokemon with the ability Sand Veil are now part of the uber tier and unusable in standard play. For clarification, Gliscor with Hyper Cutter and Dugtrio with Arena Trap (lol) are not.

    Alternately: "All Pokemon with the ability Sand Veil are now considered violations of the Evasion clause and unusable in standard play. The item Brightpowder is also disallowed under evasion clause."
  4. CardsOfTheHeart

    CardsOfTheHeart

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    1,970
    That's the point. You can't ban the ability without banning the Pokemon with the ability.

    Again, it needs to be stated that rules need to be as simple as possible. I'm sure there are simpler solutions to the problem. (but they escape me, at the moment; damn insomnia)
  5. Dragontamer

    Dragontamer

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,068
    I find it hard to believe that you'd like to lump Froslass and Glaceon in the same catagory as Garchomp.

    Further, Brightpowder generally sucks. Quite literally, 90% of the time, it doesn't do anything. LO Garchomp is far more dangerous than Brightpowder Garchomp.

    Case in Point: Flamethrower Garchomp can fail to 2-hit KO Skarmory... BrightPowder Garchomp has to ether use Fire Blast, use up EVs on Sp. Atk, or settle for the likely 3-hit KO. LO Garchomp can 2-hit KO Skarm all the time, even when Adamant or Jolly (aka, -Sp. Atk nature)

    And SD Garchomp needs 3 turns to KO Skarm anyway. 1 for swords dance, 2 for fire fang.
  6. Glen ^^

    Glen ^^

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    434
    Would any serious trainer drop their Life Orb, Choice xxx, for a Bright Powder?
    Just leave it as is. Start banning everything with luck involved and it'll eventually get stupid.
  7. Spaniard

    Spaniard

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    241
    This thread is not completely well based. I mean, of course brightpowder plus sand veil plus sandstorm can be anoying.

    But not sub. I mean, you use this tactic to try and pull out a substitute (but substitute doesn't help increasing the evasion). Then with a sub up you try to swords dance so as to do a sweep.

    In my opinion using this tactic means that you are a noob. Also I feel that people who say ban garchomp are noobs as well (they are not good enough to stop it). Of course garchomp can be deadly, but after you work to get an advantage position, and this is done by many other pokes like metagross, infernape, tyranitar...

    Also, If you look at statistics. So as to get a free sub up you will need 3 turns, wich means you sacrifice 50% hp. No big deal in my opinion. And if they sub/swords dance on the switch that's because you got outpredicted and that's only your fault. Also if you carry sub-swords dance your movepool is limited enough to be 100% safely countered by many common pokes.

    Example: hippowdon vs chomp
    sub-ice fang
    sub-ice fang
    sub-ice fang (miss)
    switch to skarmory-swords dance
    outrage/fire fang/ fire blast/ whatever-whirlwind

    So your skarm will be at 50% and chomp at 25% (and can be hurt on the switch when they come again). Not to mention that they are not super fast since they don't pack choice scarf. Wow I'd love to be at this position, I can even roost. And even if you aren't lucky, statistics say that most of the times the advantage will go for you. And maths don't lie, so if you insist to use this garchomp, you will be fighting against chances, and in the long run that means losing.

    What I want to point out is that every single garchomp version can be stopped if you are smart. Just scout to find out which kind of garchomp your foe is (just like heatran or salamence). I'm not saying that garchomp is a bad poke. It is good, but it requires skill to play with/against it. And if you get crushed by it, that's because your oponent played better.

    I hope that this is clear. I wouldn't like that chomp was banned due to a poll where most people are noobs that don't understand the game. Please, don't make us, pro-gamers, have to stop using our loved garchomp. And if you fear garchomp that much you can always use it yourselves (I bet you have, but you have found out that you can't use it as well as we do that you want to ban it because you are jealous. You want to ban every threat to your stallish game style).

    I know this post is offensive for some people, but I attemted to use logical reasoning. You offend me as much when you say that I win because I use garchomp.
  8. 133tSneasel

    133tSneasel

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Messages:
    964
    What about Mamothswine? (or how ever you spell it) Doesn't Snow Cloak and Bright powder, and Sub effect that him too? with Sub/Ice Shard/Earthquake/Stone-Edge, or Rock Slide@Bright Powder. You could put Curse in there somewhere. Should he be band?
  9. IggyBot

    IggyBot !battle
    is a Tutor Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    948
    I havn't read the topic, but I'll say right now that including Sand Veil and Snow Cloak under evasion clause won't happen in D/P. Why? It can't be enforced on WiFi. You may argue that freeze clause can't either, but freeze clause is really just a formality, not something as standard as Evasion, and freezing attacks only have a 10% chance of doing so.
  10. Ambitions

    Ambitions

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,749
    Where does it say include just the ability's under the evasion clause Iggy?

    And Sneasel, no one is talking about the banning of pokemon at all, just the combo of sub, bright powder, and those abilitys. My Mamoswine sprite got a shitty broken link, so the picture wont show up.
  11. evolutia

    evolutia

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    608
    You can't clause combinations otherwise we could have ubers in standard as long as they didn't have a combination of x moves.

    You also haven't proven that this combo is so broken and so overcentralizing that it must be banned. Banning should be used as a last resort.
  12. Ambitions

    Ambitions

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,749
    Then why was the species clause rushed into so hastily? And I never said I support my idea for this clause, I just wanted to see what Smogon thought. Every one is talking about Chomp being uber, so I thought this thread might solve that issue.
  13. wDro

    wDro

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Messages:
    1,123
    do people usually give you props for such brilliant strategy or the opposite ;)


    Banning brightpowder alone is good enough. Sand veil + sandstorm can be made useless by other weather manipulation, even though they may not be very common and harder to set up. On the other hand, to solve the brightpowder problem, you can only use moves like knock off/trick to get rid of it. Such moves are even more uncommon and there's a chance of missing, not to mention the effect of those moves can be protected by a fast sub.

    Everyone says that there are better items to use instead of brightpowder because it only works 1/10th of a time. If other items are really good, I don't see any harm banning brightpowder, since, according to them, it "sucks" and the odds of working is against the user. That way we can force the n00bs/pros, who think BP is good, to use the "better" items instead -choice band/scarf, life orb or salac. As a bonus, people who are against brightpowder will be happy to see it banned. In the end, everyone will be happy :)

    My point is, basing a strategy on evasion, regardless of how low/high the chance is, is just not ethically right. It seems to me that it is another way to circumvent the evasion clause IMO (if you are pro-evasion clause).
  14. evolutia

    evolutia

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    608
    Regarding the species clause, I'll save that for another topic. I was just giving my opinion on the subject.

    Everyone says that there are better pokemon to use instead of my BL's and UU's because they only work on a niche team, if other pokemon are really good, I don't see the harm in banning BL and UU's. =/

    Give me a break; your playing pokemon a game filled with luck and complaining about an item that does not break or overcentralize the metagame. Don't compare Bright Powder to double team because the last time I checked you couldn't use BP until you got +6 evasion.
  15. wDro

    wDro

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Messages:
    1,123
    You are right. It's silly to ban BL's and UU's, especially your BL's and UU's. Let's ban BP in OU and only allow it in BL/UU.

    I wasn't really complaining. Banning brightpowder, even better if it's only limited to garchoomp, is a little bonus to have. I was trying to make everyone happy; so give me break too.
  16. DarkDestruction

    DarkDestruction

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    37
    Here's how I see it:

    You lose - find out what you lost to so you can beat it next time
    You win - another battle over

    If you don't like the Brightpowder Garchomp, then find a way to beat it and discourage its use through using some common moveset that can kill off Garchomp with ease.

    If you try to ban the item, what comes next? The banning of all items that can "unfairly" tip the balance (Choice whatever, Salac / Liechi / Petaya, virtually any item)? Then it comes down to the actual Pokémon and the stats. That's no fun.

    My main point is this: If you don't like it, find a way to beat it. The item itself (or the combination of certain moves / abilities) does not deserve banning, not in my opinion. Maybe we need a no-miss Ice move to deal with Garchomp. Or maybe we need something called BRAINS.

    Stop Garchomp either with a better strategy (one that can deal with the hax) or your own Brightpowder Sand Veil / Snow Cloak Substitute Pokémon. End of rant.
  17. GengarCrysis92

    GengarCrysis92

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    512
    The point of banning Brightpowder + Sand Viel is because it is haxy. Salac Berry and the rest of the items aren't dependant on luck. I have yet to come across a BP Garchomp, so I have no experience, but losing because your 100% acc ice Beams kept on missing. There is no way to stop that. Lock-On and the other automatic move that evades me atm, would work, but then you are over-centralizing saying that you NEED this move to hit it. Also, how can you beat it, if you NEED amaziong luck? Adding that move not only centralizes, but wastes an important moveslot just so you can beat ONe POkemon. You can consider it a suicide mission, but if Chomp switches out, you already set-up. then that used Moveslot could be used to KO the switch in.
  18. Quixim

    Quixim

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2011
    Messages:
    65
    I disagree with this idea on many counts.

    1) It is a complex bans and complex bans are something that Smogon as a community have decided they don't like.

    2) As stated above, with the math, you will end up with a very weak Garchomp against something that it can't kill, and will either beat it with priority, beat it with speed, or phaze it out

    3) As the statistics are against it working as a viable strategy, the only conclusion is that people who do in fact a strategy in which the chance of winning is measurably lower than half do so out of emotional, not logical reasons. It cannot reliably sweep as well as, for example, something that a Ninjask has passed a pile of boosts onto, or a subpunching breloom on a slightly weakened team.

    4) Arguments that luck make the game unfair are irrelevant and hypocritical. A fast serene grace pokemon that can paralyze or confuse and has access to a flinching move has an astronomically high chance of causing the other pokemon to become unable to move, and yet when this point is brought up it is brushed off without any reasoning. Confuse ray is a move whose only ability is to lower the accuracy of the opposing pokemon to 50%, which is even lower I believe than a double team on a sand veil brightpowder pokemon (I'm not sure how the numbers stack up).

    5) Complaints that perfect accuracy moves are weak is a very poor complaint. Priority moves are 20 BP weaker, and yet they are incredibly powerful in this metagame because of high speed (particularly Excadrill). This has the effect of causing pokemon who may otherwise not be useful (A Conkeldurr without any priority moves would be BL without support due to its low defenses and speed by my measure). Excadrill's high speed causes the metagame to flourish with even more viable pokemon and strategies. For example - Persian outspeeds garchomp and gets a STAB Technician swift (off of its admittedly average attack stat). Scizor gets Aerial Ace off of his technician also, making it exactly as strong as his bullet punch, and he also has enough defense and a powerful enough typing to probably even switch in.

    For people asking about Brightpowder to be banned, it is only really viable on pokemon with sand veil or snow cloak (the 10% or so evasion is nearly irrelevant otherwise), and those tend to have much more desirable items to use.
  19. Slightly

    Slightly

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    112
    ^ This is Stark Mountain, all gen 5 pokemon are irrelevant.

    Buy I do agree. Bright power and sand veil don't overcentralise the meta, therefore aren't broken. Annoying yes. But not broken.

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