Hi RB Golbat! :)
I was just wondering, do you have any plans to prevent the community banning Pokemon that don't actually need to be banned when we begin constructing the UU tier?
Basically, I understand that we want as few Pokemon to be put in BL as possible. If we're extremely lucky, we may have a relatively balanced metagame without having to ban a single Pokemon (or perhaps, with banning only one or two Pokemon). I know that this is very unlikely, but if it did happen, I fear that people will carry on with the bannings, when they're not actually needed, and we'll have dozens of interesting Pokemon that can't shine in any particular metagame, just like we have at the moment.
It's just that most people I talk to seem to be under the presumption that we're banning 20-30 Pokemon, when ideally, we won't have to ban a single Pokemon.
I know it's unlikely that less than 5 Pokemon will be needed to go to BL, but if it did happen, I think a lot of people would have a hard time getting to grips with it, and will still cry out for more bans when we won't need them. Do you have any way to get around this problem, or do you have a mathematical model to tell us when we've got a balanced UU (e.g. when there are 50 "OU" UUs, and no obvious centralizing Pokemon, we don't need to ban anything else).
To sum up, how will you determine when we stop bannings, as it seems that many members here are ready to ban 30 Pokemon in February and that is not supposed to happen? I just want to help ensure that the test goes right, and that those members who don't entirely understand what the aim of the test is don't ruin it for everyone.
Thanks in advance. :)