Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Pokémon Policy' started by DougJustDoug, Jan 24, 2009.
this was kind of my original point but i wasn't clear about it, i guess
Debate was still raging so it needed to be restated. Love you :*
I agree that not using the suspect can actually provide useful information. However, I would want that EVERY battle on the Suspect ladder contain at least one instance of the suspect Pokemon. A battle that doesn't contain the Suspect Pokemon should either be disallowed straight away by shoddy (difficult to implement), or the rating of both players not be updated after the battle (maybe less difficult to implement).
I know this is difficult to do, but really we don't want players to increase or decrease their suspect rating in battles where the suspect Pokemon wasn't even tested. :(
Even in suspect battles in which Latias wasn't a member on either player's team, both teams still had to prepare for the possibility of facing it, and so I think those battles are still relevant. Like previously stated, if Latias' mere presence on the ladder forces people to change their teams to the extent in which they are far more open to being swept by other pokemon, then there's an argument for "the threat of Latias sets up a situation in which it makes it substantially easier for other pokemon to sweep", and this is one of the support characteristics for uber.
And if we ever test a suspect in which next to no people use it on the suspect ladder, then I think that tells us a lot about the pokemon's status. If people can consistently win to voting eligibility without using a 'possibly uber' pokemon against teams that are using this 'possibly uber' pokemon, then chances are it is probably not uber.
If people are biased from having used a pokemon more, then surely it doesn't matter? The person who has used Latias the most will know it best - know what it is and is not capable of - and would therefore make the best informed decision about it. If the people who use it consistently are all biased towards OU or uber, then since they have the most experience with it and can be trusted to make the right decision based on this experience, it shouldn't matter where they are biased.
These are both easy to implement. However, I'm pretty sure this would be quickly noticed by people who are battling, and thus people would only use the suspect.
I could not disagree more vigorously with the point X-Act made for the reasons already outlined by Legacy Raider. We can't do that.
Okay then. I stand corrected.
And to further this point, if someone has no Suspect EXP and makes marks of exactly 1665/65, he or she will literally have to convince both Aeolus and myself that he or she knows what he or she is talking about. I'm not saying that we will actively take into account everyone's Suspect EXP marks when assessing submissions, because it will probably be very obvious whether or not the potential voter knows enough about the Suspect and how it played out in practice (and actually I don't think it's a bad idea for Aeolus and I to consider everyone's Suspect EXP rating prior to reading submissions).