np: ORAS OU Suspect Process, Round 3 - Ghosts [Giratina-O remains in Ubers - check the OP]

[Enki]

Yeah, after playing on the suspect ladder, I too think that Giratina-origin is (as of now, as I dread future generations, actually) too much by ou standards (and as such, unbanning it, will raise/ would have raised the power creep more than what we have now), it is also not true that it helps stall/semistall teams, defog, great offensive presence, great attacking type in ghost, paired with Aura Sphere/wow and levitate are enough to cause big troubles to majority of teams based arounds hazards, and even without defog, sets like Substitute+ calm mind are very difficult to stop, and even all out attacking ones with stuff like Shadow Ball, Aura Sphere, Draco Meteor, Earthquake etc still pack a punch and are very difficult to switch (and actually reiterate, due to Giratina's natural bulk).

 

[Der Twist]

I can understand the implications of this, but I really think you guys missed the mark on this one. I'm happy to advocate the removal of the 'cover legends are broken, end-of' stigma beyond just Kyurem Black, but good lord you picked a Hell of a mon to try with because this thing is just borked. Providing easy offensive and defensive coverage backed up by a vast offensive and supporting movepool make it excel beyond most others at any role it tries to pull, and with the ridiculous things it blanket checks or just flat-out hard-walls it will have you forcing switches left and right, it'll make hazard stack styles a piss-easy way to wear opposing teams down, especially with access to Roar for phasing and Shadow Force in conjunction with Toxic Spikes does not make things easier; Roar Will-O Phantom Force Gira with Rocks Toxic Spikes support will be team-grinding 101 and it honestly sounds more skilless than the notorious Baton Pass.
Access to Rest-Talk isn't exactly the shit recovery it's made out to be, it makes more defensive utility sets that much more hard to take down, given that it deals with a nice chunk of current potent wallbreakers anyway, Rest helps it bounce back from status and is pretty damn good for the less offensively oriented sets, though those sets value their great coverage anyway so it's not a major loss, though if you really want an offensive Giratina set with recovery then CroTina is an option.
Speaking of the Cro set, or any set really but Cro pretty much needs to follow this, this thing's synergy with the already overabused KeldeGross core is pretty fucking solid, KeldeGross can handle either type immune to Gira's STAB and very much threaten it's counters (lol) and in turn Gira can shut down the powerful beasts that threatened the original KeldeGross like Zard Y and Lando-I; KeldeGross was potent enough as it was and was very much a likely incentive prompting this suspect, but instead of encouraging creativity by using new cores with mons that can handle KeldeGross better, the KeldeGrossTina core was born and will likely be on half of the teams around, their synergy and coverage is just busted.
Counters.

180 Atk Griseous Orb Giratina-O Shadow Force vs. 252 HP / 160 Def Clefable: 223-264 (56.5 - 67%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
180 Atk Griseous Orb Giratina-O Shadow Force vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Clefable: 186-219 (47.2 - 55.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock and Leftovers recovery
252+ SpA Giratina-O Earth Power vs. 248 HP / 192+ SpD Heatran: 296-352 (76.8 - 91.4%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
180 Atk Griseous Orb Giratina-O Shadow Force vs. 0 HP / 24 Def Mega Gardevoir: 576-680 (207.9 - 245.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO
180 Atk Griseous Orb Giratina-O Shadow Force vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Klefki: 160-190 (50.3 - 59.7%) -- 85.9% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
252+ SpA Griseous Orb Giratina-O Draco Meteor vs. 56 HP / 0 SpD Kyurem-B: 576-680 (142.2 - 167.9%) -- guaranteed OHKO
180 Atk Griseous Orb Giratina-O Shadow Force vs. 248 HP / 0+ Def Mega Scizor: 144-169 (41.9 - 49.2%) -- 83.2% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock
180 Atk Griseous Orb Giratina-O Shadow Force vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Mega Altaria: 142-168 (40.1 - 47.4%) -- 48.4% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock
252+ SpA Giratina-O Aura Sphere vs. 4 HP / 0 SpD Assault Vest Bisharp: 324-384 (119.1 - 141.1%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252+ SpA Giratina-O Aura Sphere vs. 248 HP / 252+ SpD Tyranitar in Sand: 176-208 (43.6 - 51.6%) -- 56.3% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock and Leftovers recovery
252+ SpA Griseous Orb Giratina-O Draco Meteor vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Mega Venusaur: 226-267 (62 - 73.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

What counters? This is just against the mixed attacking variant with varying coverage facing off against various Pokemon I've seen people list in this thread as 'counters', the only two mons I've seen actually describable as counters to this are Ferrothorn (though I'm not sure how common HP Fire is or will be) and Audino. Audino! Mega fucking Audino in OU! Is this the creativity people want in OU? 50% of teams running KeldeGrossTina offence based balance and the other 50% running GirAudinoThorn hazard stack balance?
Speaking of which...

Giratina-O's 150/100/100 defenses will help balanced teams deal with threats such as Charizard-Y, Landorus-I and Serperior.

This was the anvil that broke the camel's back for me. Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting this, but Giratina is coming home because all these offensive powerhouses are giving balance a tough time. Not like Balance isn't already regarded as the best playstyle anyway with how much less it suffers from match-up issues compared to other playstyles; yes, it's not flawless, it can be greatly threatened by some things, that's how it goes. It still has an advantage simply on the basis of being balanced and introducing a massive blanket check to make it an even better playstyle is not what this meta needs. Yeah, Gira holds utility on stall and hyper offence too, but the support it brings to balance, a playstyle which arguably really doesn't need it, is too much. I have no sympathy with balance players having to deal with powerhouse wallbreakers than I do with fellow offensive players getting screwed by 'match-up issues'.
Overall, this seems like a two wrongs make a right scenario, where the answer to handling possibly borked mons in the meta is to introduce another borked mon. It just won't work out. Unless you arranged this suspect for the sake of promoting creativity with Mega Audino based hazard stack balance, in which case April Fools to you too. I've not had much time to play around in this meta, but from what I've played in it I've not hated OU this much since Mega Mence. Perhaps it's a case of Mega Slowbro or Shiny-Eyeballs syndrome where it just seems out of whack because it's new here and we're not quite sure what to do to deal with it, but eventually we will find solutions without having to overcentralise the meta too much. I very much doubt it though.

 

[bludz]

So this has been compared to the Kyurem-Black suspect and I think that is a fair comparison but there are some pretty big differences. Giratina has way better typing, and its weakness to dark is not nearly as problematic as it is for stuff like Latios since it learns Will-O-Wisp and Aura Sphere while also outspeeding Tyranitar (eating up attacks from ScarfTar too) and Bisharp. This also makes it a pretty reliable Defogger since it can deal with Bisharp regardless as Will-O-Wisp beats Sucker Punch and Aura Sphere beats Knock Off or SD although Lum Berry variants can be somewhat annoying. On top of all that its not weak to Stealth Rocks and it has a far better movepool than Kyu-B so it can play many different roles: offensive tank, offensive defogger, subCM, resttalk, etc with a plethora of support moves to choose from and awesome coverage choices as well. So Kyurem-Black has the obvious lack of a physical movepool holding it back but there's no single trait of Giratina-O's that is really that harmful to it.

But the big thing is the bulk. I'm not going to post any calcs because this thread is full of them but the fact that Diancie's Moonblast doesn't OHKO 0 investment Giratina is pretty ridiculous -- more ridiculous than Lando-T's EQ not KOing Metagross. On top of that, Shadow Sneak threatens would be checks like Gengar, Latios and Gardevoir if they've taken some prior damage.

Granted with no reliable recovery it can be worn down but it is pretty much a zero opportunity cost pokemon that's as good or better than most of the megas in the current metagame. Because of the wide variety of viable options, Giratina doesn't have much on the way of universal counters. Unless you really want to start bringing Mega Audino but that's just a sign of brokenness - bringing obscure counters that wouldn't be viable in the metagame if it weren't for one pokemon. Also it does have enough bulk to pull off RestTalk sets so you can't just rely on wearing all variants down over time.

Anyway I think that Gira-O is way too centralizing and although it brings some positives to the table like easing teambuilding from a threat perspective, I'm not really sure that should be our sole focus in trying to balance out the metagame.

 

[Red King]

I think it's clear to say Giratina-o is something that really shouldn't be in the metagame. It's easy to say it's better than almost everything else in the metagame in terms of bulk combined with power. 120/120 mixed offenses are above average, but nothing we haven't seen before in OU. It's the bulk combined with that that make it an obscenely good pokemon in this game. Pokemon like this really shouldn't be in the metagame. it's also got a large movepool with good coverage and utility moves. it's opportunity cost as pokemon is almost too good not be run, similar to aegislash. The pokemon themselves aren't really similar though outside of opportunity cost.

It's not an immortal god however, as it lacks anysort of recovery and forgoes leftovers for griseous orb. It's not impossible to take down, but it's not easy. pokemon like spdef tflame and spdef gliscor can come in and take on it's sets. it's important to remember it's offenses don't blow everything away, but to say they're not good, or even decent would be wrong. they're great above average offenses combined with a good attacking type and aura sphere is a welcome coverage move. It doesn't swamp teams as easily as Khan or Mence and it doesn't require specialized counters to deal with it, even keldeo's specs icy wind deals a solid 40%, from which it can't recover from b/c it lacks recover.

It's somewhat easily worn down, especially with the teams that rely on it as a defogger, repeatedly coming into rocks and moves to defog. HP stat still massive tho. I think people are doing a lot of overstating and understating about this pokemon. What it also does it take on powerful threats like Lando-I that a lot of the competitive community thinks is broken, and unlike other counters like Gliscor or Torn-t or latias doesn't die to any coverage move landorus-i has in it's arsenal. although Lando i can force past it with a little chip and a calm mind, it for the most part takes on this pokemon solidly, which almost nothing else in the game bar cresselia or mega latias does (taking into consideration all of it's sets including stuff like hp ice and rock slide. It also checks mega metagross.

It's effect on the metagame is obviously unhealthy, but so far it's made teambuilding pleasant for me because of all the threats it handles without me having to stretch my team or worry about matchup. It doesn't however make a good player good or negate good teambuilding, it's similar to aegislash in terms of opportunity cost and the amount of pokemon it checks. it makes the metagame much smaller and less diverse and there isn't a reason not to run it. I'm enjoying it being in OU.

Despite this, personally i don't think it should be in the metagame. Bringing this pokemon down to take on the threats we have in here, but the metagame was awful before hand and i like how small it is now.

bludz It's not really comparable to Kyurem Black outside of the fact they both share cover legendary status. Kyurem Black doesn't have such a massive opportunity cost or a movepool that actually let's it bring it's stats into play. Giratina isn't impossible to check or beat, and it's not absurdly over the top like some others we've had in OU, but it is unhealthy for the metagame. beating really consists of getting some chip damage and then taking it out with a faster pokemon like Latios, Mega Metagross, Mega Diancie or just using an Altaria. Also i wouldn't count Shadow force's damage to altaria as concerning considering in order to kill it with the move altaria can roost or dragon dance on the turns where it's gone.

Der Twist what you seem to have forgotten in a lot of those calcs in order for Giratina to hit again and complete the 2HKO it has to spend a turn invisible, upon where something like clefable softboils, the tanks the hit next turn and moonblasts you to death. You're somewhat overstating Giratina's power. Also audino hasn't really made an appearence. Altaria on the other hand is everywhere.

If we're not getting rid of Lando i or Mega Metagross i'd prefer this pokemon stay OU. My feeling on it are a combination of Watch the World Burn and at least broken checks broken. Giratina-O is broken. that's not really disputable. It's better than everything else in OU and theres no reason not to run it because of the massive opportunity cost if you don't. But it's not leagues above everything else in the metagame. the metagame is already messed up, even if Giratina-o is a centralizing and broken pokemon it's better than what this metagame was before. Also we need the Kokoko tiering system. badly. Or even just some sort of battle limit. 72% of players with 80 GXE or above voted ban on mega metagross yet this centralizing powerhouse is still in OU. theres a lot of pokemon that push this metagame over the edge and wanting to bring Gira-O down to provide some sort of balancing act is a symptom of the problem.

 

[SketchUp]

So after playing a lot with and against Giratina-O I am now in a position where I think that reintroducing Giratina-O is not a good idea. A whole stuff have already been said so I am not going to just repeat that but I want to go further on the points about how big the centralization of Giratina-O is and (most important) if this
centralization is positive for the metagame. I don't really dislike the current metagame because I love to teambuild and with the effort you need to build a succesful team it is pretty nice to see when your team works. I still think there need to be a few changes because teambuilding is still a very important part in every tier and in ORAS OU it just sucks to use the same structure of teams because otherwise your team has so many obvious flaws. This lack of innovation could definitely be solved by Giratina, because with having a good check to many common threats, you leave your other moveslots open to pokemon that may not be the most common pokemon, which is pretty good to have in a tier. Halcyon pointed out pretty well that there is a certain balance between battling skill and teambuilding skill and how this is influenced by centralisation of the metagame. I am a big supporter of a diverse metagame and even if this requires a battle lost by matchup once in a while, this is just something' no team can be ready for. However, the amount of battles that are nearly impossible to win by matchup need to be as small as possible while there isn't a centralized force like Aegislash or Giratina that prevents this lost and imo banning pokemon that cause problems in matchups and when building teams, such as Landorus-I, would be better than reintroducing a centralizing force in the metagame.
I am not against retesting Ubers but I think that reintroducing Ubers that may be pretty difficult to deal with in a battle, but are easier to account for when building teams and don't make a metagame very centralized are also a step in the right discussion outside of just banning potential broken pokemon that are currently OU. The only problem is: Is there such a pokemon? Is there a hidden pokemon in the Ubers metagame that is very hard to deal with in a match (but not broken!) but is not difficult to prepare for when building a team? An example I could make is Keldeo. Keldeo's checks aren't as limited as Landorus, Metagross' or Charizard-Y's checks. However, in a match one of the most threatening pokemon to face is Keldeo, even when you are using strong checks like Mega Altaria, Latias, Mega Venusaur or Slowbro. This can be either because the pokemon has certain moves that make it difficult to switch into (Scald for this example, but also think of U-Turn on Genesect for example) or just because it has many sets that all work very well so you don't really know what you are facing until one of your checks is already weakened (looking at you Greninja) Keldeo in this example is a very good pokemon for the metagame. It definitely restricts teambuilding but it doesn't do it as much as other threats. In a match it is much harder to play against Keldeo than other threats even if you only have 1 check for mentioned check, just because it has some obvious flaws like a Stealth Rock weakness. This difficulty in a match itself adds the skill to the metagame instead of matchup. The question for this suspect test is: Is this also the case for Giratino-O? Well.. not really. I think the post #460 and a few other posts in this thread summed up pretty well why Giratina is not healthy for the metagame so I won't be repeating these arguments all over again but I think it is already made clear earlier in the topic that Giratina is not really the best idea from as well a 'broken' point of view as a 'centralizing' point of view. Not taking away the fact that retesting Ubers is still pretty nice and Giratina was a pretty interesting choice.

 

[Owen Xekrain]

May i point out that Heatran becomes a VERY solid wall if GO comes to OU, it checks one of GO's STABs, it checks Fairies, which become good due to being GO checks, and it checks what I consider the main threat to GO if it comes to OU, Bisharp. The only weakness it had to overcome is Ground type weakness. As i mentioned previously, the Fairies and Bisharp become more viable as GO checks and counters. People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd

TL;DR: Heatran becomes better, fairies and Bisharp become better, People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd.

 

[TURBODERP]

May i point out that Heatran becomes a VERY solid wall if GO comes to OU, it checks one of GO's STABs, it checks Fairies, which become good due to being GO checks, and it checks what I consider the main threat to GO if it comes to OU, Bisharp. The only weakness it had to overcome is Ground type weakness. As i mentioned previously, the Fairies and Bisharp become more viable as GO checks and counters. People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd

TL;DR: Heatran becomes better, fairies and Bisharp become better, People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd.

Giratina-O loves to run Aura Sphere (beats Heatran, Bisharp, TTar, Ferro). And it outspeeds all of those quite handily (and can burn the middle two to neuter them even harder).

 

[Enki]

May i point out that Heatran becomes a VERY solid wall if GO comes to OU, it checks one of GO's STABs, it checks Fairies, which become good due to being GO checks, and it checks what I consider the main threat to GO if it comes to OU, Bisharp. The only weakness it had to overcome is Ground type weakness. As i mentioned previously, the Fairies and Bisharp become more viable as GO checks and counters. People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd

TL;DR: Heatran becomes better, fairies and Bisharp become better, People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd.

I'm afraid it isn't that easy, Heatran can't do much against Giratina, other than using toxic/wow and praying that said Gira does not have Substitute/Rest, even then I have already seen a good deal of Giratina with Earthquake on the ladder, and they, well:
180 Atk Giratina-O Earthquake vs. 248 HP / 0 Def Heatran: 372-440 (96.6 - 114.2%) -- 75% chance to OHKO
Bisharp also isn't that great of a choice, being slower and destroyed/crippled by Aura Sphere/wow respectively, Fairy do have a better chance, but they don't like coming in on powerful ghost types attacks, unless you are... Mega Audino

 

[Force Majeure]

May i point out that Heatran becomes a VERY solid wall if GO comes to OU, it checks one of GO's STABs, it checks Fairies, which become good due to being GO checks, and it checks what I consider the main threat to GO if it comes to OU, Bisharp. The only weakness it had to overcome is Ground type weakness. As i mentioned previously, the Fairies and Bisharp become more viable as GO checks and counters. People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd

TL;DR: Heatran becomes better, fairies and Bisharp become better, People who think GO will break the tier are out of their gourd.

K, no. Heatran loses to Tina-O because of Aura Sphere and it can't do much in return: specially defensive Heatran can only status it and Scarftran is 2HKOd by Aura Sphere. Also, Bisharp can't do the 50/50 game with Tina-O like it can with other mons because Griseous Orb can't be Knocked off and Tina-O can burn it. No comment on the rest.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Enki

 

[bludz]

bludz It's not really comparable to Kyurem Black outside of the fact they both share cover legendary status. Kyurem Black doesn't have such a massive opportunity cost or a movepool that actually let's it bring it's stats into play. Giratina isn't impossible to check or beat, and it's not absurdly over the top like some others we've had in OU, but it is unhealthy for the metagame. beating really consists of getting some chip damage and then taking it out with a faster pokemon like Latios, Mega Metagross, Mega Diancie or just using an Altaria. Also i wouldn't count Shadow force's damage to altaria as concerning considering in order to kill it with the move altaria can roost or dragon dance on the turns where it's gone.

I was primarily comparing them because of the precedent of bringing something down from Ubers. Other than that my post kind of outlined how they are so different and I pretty much agree with you

 

[Slimmer]

I really liked Enki's post. That's the angle from which we should be looking at tests like this.
You can have a metagame that lacks diversity, but has only a few threats to keep track of. This diminishes matchup-based wins, and therefore teambuilding skill is not as important as in a diverse metagame. In a centralized metagame, battling skill is more heavily favored. Think about a metagame like GSC. Completely centralized. There are only a handful of Pokemon that are legitimately effective (compared to the later games), and every team carries a Snorlax and 2-3 ways of beating it. However, GSC is considered by some to be the best meta, and it is often compared to chess. In a meta like this, since there are fewer threats to cover with team building, the battling skill of each player is more important than the team building skill in determining the winner.

So those are the two different types of metagames we can have. I diverse, matchup-based one, or a centralized, battle-centric one. Ultimately, the decision as to what kind of metagame we're looking for is a simple one as soon as we answer the following question: do we inherently value teambuilding skill or battling skill more? If we value teambuilding more, then a diverse meta is what we want. If we value battling skill, a centralized meta is what we want. Obviously both skills are important, but determining which is MORE important will lead us in the direction we want the metagame to go.

You (and Enki) made a good point here. I'm for a centralized metagame honestly, because it seems the direction when skill prevails in the long run, compared with a "diverse metagame" (maybe funnier but I'm playing competitive pokémon so skill > fun, although both are necessary).

However I'm definitely not sure that Giratina-O can give positive side effects to this "skillful metagame". I mean even Mewtwo could give centralization to metagame but this won't mean it's caused by positive effects, but just for its "Uber" nature. Giratina surely has positive effects on metagame in terms of covering several threats which usually worried teambuilding due to their wide diversity that don't ensure optimal results versus each of these (yeah Char-Y, Landorus, Mega Metagross and so on), but covering several threats must not be disallowing to run these at all. Plus, to be honest even Giratina won't allow a perfect balancing of the metagame: indeed there was a further raise in fairies usage, already high, giving more usage in stuff like Mega Altaria (now run faster than most giras), Mega Diancie, Clefable that were already S/A+ rank, so what are we talking about.

Anyway the road for a more skillful metagame can be crossed just like we did in all this time. Analyze the meta, find what brokes the balance. Suspect it, then if it's necessary ban it. Repeat process.

About GSC: as far as I seen in GSC battles, that's a centralized metagame but matchup is really huge in battles. Teambuilding is really "rigid", as you can't allow mistakes or something between stalls (that can cover pretty much everything if built well), wak offence, electric spam, explosion, spikes + mixed stuff will dismantle you. Lack of powerful wallbreakers other than Curse/Drum mons and Marowak doesn't allow mindless offense teams often used in other gens as BW. For this reason you have to think better on your choices and elaborate better gameplans and this recognize better players vs worse ones and this is why GSC is often known to be "more competitive", but that's another story (also better players can correct this last paragraph but I guess it's not the proper thread)

 

[Eievui-Nymphia]

If Giratina-O effect in OU is comparable to Primal Groudon effect in Ubers, the suspect should end right now (if it's tomorrow, it would be better).

Primal groudon is a very overcentralizing threat (has 65% usage in Ubers, while Xerneas and BW Kyogre had around 45%) that cause that a lot of threats become unviable or just way lower than it used to be.

This is some examples that Primal groudon presence does in the metagame.

Blaziken and its Mega:_ From A+ in XY to B+ in ORAS.
Palkia: From A+ to B+
Arceus-Elctric: From A- to C.
Arceus-Poison: From A- to C.
Sylveon: From B+ to Unranked
Thundurus: From B+ to Unranked
Heatran. From B to Unranked.
Victini: From B to Unranked.
Gyarados and Mega Gyarados: From C+ to unranked
Jirachi: From C+ to unranked

In other words, some of the best Ubers Pokemon drop a lot of viability just because Primal Groudon.

For example (as shwon here), Arceus-Electric dropped from A- (an important threat) to C (niche threat). Let's see the main OR/AS changes in Ubers.
-Primal Kyogre: Weak to this form of Arceus.
-Dragon Ascent. Arceus-Electric resist this move.
-Mega Diancie. Arceus-Electric has a slight edge.
-Mega Sableye- Neutral match-up.
-Lati@s. An actual threat but Arceus-Electric is not weak to its moves, ahs CM and Ice Beam, so it has its uses.
-Primal Groudon. It's inmune to Electric, has EQ (and the even more pwerful Preciplice Blades) from a base 180 Base Attack, use sohysical moves and it's onyl enutral to ice Beam.

Personally, I think that this suspect was a bad idea with a good intention. I think this suspect test is a way to see what will happen if an Ubers with 680+ BST and no clear flaws is broken in OU.

Has Giratina-O checks in OU? Yes. But those are checks are so limited comapred to the effect of Giratina-O causing to rely on those Pokemon. That a Pokemon has OU checks doesn't mean it's fine in OU if it destroy the rest of the meta.

If a Pokemon is able to check/counter an Ubers Pokemon, doesn't rpove it's balanced. If a Pokemon can defeat a lot of viable Ubers Pokemon, it would be likely viable in Ubers. Unless...
-It auto-lose with no chance of doing anything to a top threats. Extrem case, but this is why Chansey is unviable in Ubers. (Chansey is unviable JUST because Mega Gengar).
-A very voercentralizing force counters said Pokemon. Like Heatran being unviable in Ubers just because Primal groudon.

An example of this is Klefki, who has a lot of support options to Ubers team, in particular, Prankster Spikes with the option of Dual Screens or Thunder Wave plus possibly the best type of the game. Or Ferrothorn before OR/AS who used to hard check Kyogre. one of the top threats of Ubers (and the top threat in BW).

 

[azureleaf17]

I think if we want to look at the definition of a centralizing force that was actually healthy, we should check out Snorlax in Generation II. It was an offensive monster that was strong and unpredictable. It was one of the best defensive 'mons in a defensive metagame. It warped the metagame around being able to check or counter all of its sets. If your team was made up of six non-Snorlax 'mons, it would almost unequivocally be made better by dropping one of them for Snorlax.

Yet people who go back to playing GSC say that it's still a great metagame to play, based hugely on prediction, planning, and skill. And it wasn't as if Snorlax was so centralizing that you saw the same six Pokemon on every team. Your team was basically made up of Snorlax, two or three 'mons to check or counter Snorlax, and two or three 'mons to check or counter the checks and counters to Snorlax. Though Snorlax was on every team, the ways that you could shuffle and diversify the other five 'mons made for an experience that made "Snorlax the Meta" diverse, yet fun and healthy. Without Snorlax, it was thought (but not really put into practice) that the game would stabilize not around one Pokemon, but around three or four. What was worse: having the same one Pokemon on every team, or having the same four?

But in GSC, maybe that trend was inevitable. This thread has had a few posters bring up the inverse relationship between diversity and skill. We had so few Pokemon in RBY and GSC (and, arguably, RSE) that people were able to prepare for top-tier threats with just six slots, and the game was greatly based on skill (including the abuse of hax in RBY). But as more and more threats continue to pile up through the generations, it becomes impossible to deal with all of them with just six Pokemon. Giratina may not be the definition of a Pokemon that helps to diversify the metagame in terms of being able to play any six Pokemon we want, but with the number of Pokemon right now, that may be nigh impossible. I still think Giratina-O is broken as all hell, but I haven't really played much on the suspect ladder and I don't want to theorymon. But because we have examples of Snorlax in Generation II and Primal Groudon in Ubers as overpowered, unpredictable, and centralizing Pokemon who still make fun-to-play metas... the thought that centralizing threats always lead to a stale, unchanging metagame is not true. And to say that Giratina-O would WITHOUT A DOUBT centralize the metagame in a way that sucks the fun and skill out of the game just a couple of days after its release is asinine.

 

[Expert_Occultist]

I really liked Enki's post. That's the angle from which we should be looking at tests like this.

All through Black and White as well as X and Y, we keep having suspects where people complain about how we are "forced to run obscure counters" and that the Pokemon in question "stifle diversity." Finally, we have a metagame that is pretty much as diverse as can be, with Pokemon ranging from OU to RU being legitimate metagame threats. This, in tandem with the Mega Pokemon that teeter on the line between broken and non-broken makes the metagame match-up reliant. And unfortunately, this is a side effect of a diverse metagame. If you want more Pokemon to be viable, you have to accept that there will then be more threats to consider while teambuilding, and therefore more threats you will inevitably be weak to. Metagames that are diverse tend to, in a competitive sense, favor Teambuilding skill. By this I mean, when two players of equal skill fight in this metagame, usually the one with the team matchup will win. That's an inherent quality of a diverse meta. This is, in part, why tournament players are baffled that newer users are able to beat experienced veterans like Bloo or McM or whoever, and why newer players like Tesung, Anti, and Ben Gay are widely considered to be the best ORAS players. They're great players, but they're FANTASTIC team builders. They are able to take advantage of the sometimes obscure but still powerful threats ORAS has to offer, while still building teams that solidly cover as many threats as possible. This type of skill is more favored in a metagame as diverse as ORAS is. To put it simply, if a metagame has threats A, B, C, D, and E, and you aren't the best team builder, you might cover threats A and B, but be unable to cover C, D, and E. However, a better team builder might be able to cover threats A, B, C, and D, while only being weak to E. This means they are less susceptible to matchup, and therefore have a greater chance of winning any given battle.

On the flip side, you can have a metagame that lacks diversity, but has only a few threats to keep track of. This diminishes matchup-based wins, and therefore teambuilding skill is not as important as in a diverse metagame. In a centralized metagame, battling skill is more heavily favored. Think about a metagame like GSC. Completely centralized. There are only a handful of Pokemon that are legitimately effective (compared to the later games), and every team carries a Snorlax and 2-3 ways of beating it. However, GSC is considered by some to be the best meta, and it is often compared to chess. In a meta like this, since there are fewer threats to cover with team building, the battling skill of each player is more important than the team building skill in determining the winner.

So those are the two different types of metagames we can have. I diverse, matchup-based one, or a centralized, battle-centric one. Ultimately, the decision as to what kind of metagame we're looking for is a simple one as soon as we answer the following question: do we inherently value teambuilding skill or battling skill more? If we value teambuilding more, then a diverse meta is what we want. If we value battling skill, a centralized meta is what we want. Obviously both skills are important, but determining which is MORE important will lead us in the direction we want the metagame to go.

I've always loved the post Greninja ORAS meta and all its diversity. Why can't the top players be good at both teambuilding AND battling? Players like Tesung and Ben Gay have proven that team building is a skill that can be honed as much as battle skill. If you can't build a team should you really be considered among the best players anymore?

To add something to this thread there are too many Magic the Gathering comparisons I could make (or that anyone would get). Suffice to say, there is a tier in Magic much like OU. It is considered skill intensive with lots of archtype diversity. The only thing people seem to take issue with (besides cost of entry) is that the tier is defined by one card (for those who care the card is Brainstorm). It increases deck consistency, is easy to play, and most importantly goes in any deck type (aggro, control, and combo). Even though this card is used in about 50% of decks longtime players are fine with it because strategy diversity is still preserved despite the ubiquity of one card. Point is, if Giratina sees the light of day it should function like Brainstorm as the glue that holds many team types together. However, if any one archtype (balance, offense, or stall) should suffer we should reban Giratina and start again.

Again, I love our current meta and believe that if you can get good at battling you can get good at teambuilding. However, I'm fine with Giratina's inclusion in the metagame only if archtype diversity is maintained.

 

[Halcyon.]

I've always loved the post Greninja ORAS meta and all its diversity. Why can't the top players be good at both teambuilding AND battling? Players like Tesung and Ben Gay have proven that team building is a skill that can be honed as much as battle skill. If you can't build a team should you really be considered among the best players anymore?

To add something to this thread there are too many Magic the Gathering comparisons I could make (or that anyone would get). Suffice to say, there is a tier in Magic much like OU. It is considered skill intensive with lots of archtype diversity. The only thing people seem to take issue with (besides cost of entry) is that the tier is defined by one card (for those who care the card is Brainstorm). It increases deck consistency, is easy to play, and most importantly goes in any deck type (aggro, control, and combo). Even though this card is used in about 50% of decks longtime players are fine with it because strategy diversity is still preserved despite the ubiquity of one card. Point is, if Giratina sees the light of day it should function like Brainstorm as the glue that holds many team types together. However, if any one archtype (balance, offense, or stall) should suffer we should reban Giratina and start again.

Again, I love our current meta and believe that if you can get good at battling you can get good at teambuilding. However, I'm fine with Giratina's inclusion in the metagame only if archtype diversity is maintained.

The bolded part is a misunderstanding of my point. I'm not saying Ben Gay and Tesung are bad battlers (they're excellent, and also friends of mine why would I call them bad?). Rather, I was saying that this metagame currently rewards good teambuilding MORE than good play in battles. Not saying you don't have to be good to win, but with a better team (ie, one with good matchup/as few bad matchups as possible), you have way more room for error in this meta.

Obviously you need to be able to build and play well. That's a given. But the amount of diversity in a given meta will ALWAYS lend itself to one skill over the other. Not that the other skill is unimportant, just that one is favored more. This is an inherent truth about diversity.

What we need to do is decide which is more important to the community as a whole, and head in that direction, while also trying to maintain a balance. if you like post-Greninja OU, then that's fine! Your opinion is that a meta that favors teambuilding is best, and there's nothing wrong with that. But the community needs to understand the implications of diversity/centralization and make a decision accordingly.

 

[Josh Morales]

As much as I like the idea of bringing down an Uber to smoothen out the metagame and allow balanced teambuilding, bringing down something as strong as Giratina-O is overkill. It's an incredible defogger, spin blocker, RestTalker, offensive tank, etc. The intent of making it easier to deal with Zard-Y, Lando-I, and Serperior is great and all, but the collateral damage caused by bringing down a Pokemon as strong as Giratina-O which deals with them and then much, much more is simply too significant to consider. I might be down with trying out a suspect test for Reshiram maybe, but Giratina-O? No, just no


In regards to Reshiram:
4 Atk Turboblaze Reshiram(Choice Scarf) Stone Edge vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Mega Charizard Y: 412-488 (138.7 - 164.3%) -- guaranteed OHKO

252 SpA Mega Charizard Y Dragon Pulse vs. 0 HP / 0- SpD Reshiram: 206-244 (60.4 - 71.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

252 SpA Life Orb Serperior Dragon Pulse vs. 0 HP / 0- SpD Reshiram: 161-190 (47.2 - 55.7%) -- 71.1% chance to 2HKO

252+ SpA Turboblaze Reshiram(Choice Scarf) Blue Flare vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Serperior: 542-638 (186.2 - 219.2%) -- guaranteed OHKO

Choice Scarfed can revenge kill AAA Lando-I;
252+ SpA Turboblaze Reshiram Blue Flare vs. 0 HP / 0- SpD Landorus: 348-409 (109 - 128.2%) -- guaranteed OHKO

It might be a nice thing to try out as it at least checks each of the Pokemon and Reshiram itself isn't inherently as incredibly powerful as something like Giratina-O

 

[L Y F]

From the few games I've played, I've seen that Giratina-O completely nullifies Rapid Spin as a hazard removal option - outside of Excadrill and Starmie, which G-O smacks if they lack SD and Ice Beam respectively, there isn't really a viable spinner. By simply having a Giratina-O on your team you stop spinners cold and even though Defog has always been the more reliable option, it now FORCES it. Spike stacking Ferrothorn + Bisharp + Giratina-O is great for balance/offensive playstyles - Defog is forced because spinning is no longer an option, but that is itself risky due to Bisharp, who can also smack the fairies that Giratina-O struggles to hit.

Even so, you can go bulky:

252 SpA Life Orb Starmie Ice Beam vs. 248 HP / 148 SpD Giratina-O: 185-218 (36.7 - 43.3%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
252+ Atk Life Orb Excadrill Iron Head vs. 248 HP / 114 Def Giratina-O: 173-204 (34.3 - 40.5%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock

So yeah...Shadow Claw Excadrill anyone?

I know it's only a temporary check/pivot, but if you get rocks and a spike up, that damage definitely racks up and paves the way for Talonflame or Scolipede or something to clean up.

 

[Expert_Occultist]

The bolded part is a misunderstanding of my point. I'm not saying Ben Gay and Tesung are bad battlers (they're excellent, and also friends of mine why would I call them bad?). Rather, I was saying that this metagame currently rewards good teambuilding MORE than good play in battles. Not saying you don't have to be good to win, but with a better team (ie, one with good matchup/as few bad matchups as possible), you have way more room for error in this meta.

Obviously you need to be able to build and play well. That's a given. But the amount of diversity in a given meta will ALWAYS lend itself to one skill over the other. Not that the other skill is unimportant, just that one is favored more. This is an inherent truth about diversity.

What we need to do is decide which is more important to the community as a whole, and head in that direction, while also trying to maintain a balance. if you like post-Greninja OU, then that's fine! Your opinion is that a meta that favors teambuilding is best, and there's nothing wrong with that. But the community needs to understand the implications of diversity/centralization and make a decision accordingly.

Where did I say they were bad battlers? No where in my post did I say they were bad battlers. If anything I'm knocking the players who can't seem to adjust their skills toward a meta that rewards team building.

Maybe I'm just not understanding how the current meta favors teambuilding so much more than battling. By how much do you figure this is the case? 40/60 in favor of teambuilding? More? Are truly bad players shooting to the top based on matchup alone? I'm not seeing that. The best players are still at the top where they belong. This means that play skill is still very significant in the current meta. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, this meta is not broken whatsoever.

 

[Der Twist]

Skill in battling should also take into account how one deals with poor match-ups. It was mentioned earlier by someone in a point really anyone can agree with that unless your team is quite abysmal then you're not going to be in a case of loss from team preview. Yes, it does put you at a disadvantage in a bad match-up, but it's not impossible to divert the outcome to your favour by making good plays and of course being prepared for bad match-ups with a game-plan at least. Match-ups are not the be-all and end-all of a battle, I'm sure everyone here has said that at some point or another, but the point I stress is that it does not deter need for actual battling competence. In a centralised metagame it is not going to be a case of every battle is more skilled than an uncentralised or less centralised meta because that is simple not true, it's just pushing the entire focus of what you specifically need skill in in one area, which is of course battling. I disagree with that aspect because teambuilding is in its own right a reliant skill in this game and so is isolating what would fuck you and preparing a game-plan for bad match-ups. It's more complex, and definitely something that makes the game more interesting in my opinion (and in response to the 'it's not about fun, it's about skill' argument, going back to my point of there's equal skill in both a centralised and less centralised meta, but if you have a choice between more or less fun combined with that, you'd pick the former most likely). That's my take on the centralised vs less centralised meta, I like a less centralised meta's more varying aspects of skill and a need to focus on every detail rather than a plain and simple you're either a good battler or you're not, because there's so much more depth to be had than that.
An issue I do have with a less centralised meta is how prone it is to complaints. People do not lose to bad match-ups, they lost because they're either a bad team builder or got outplayed (or hax, but that's universal), whatever the reason, you lost and you could improve. You could have improved your team, you could have improved how you handle and prep for match-ups, you could improve your plays as a whole. A loss is a chance to better yourself, whatever kind of meta.
To not get too far off topic, I don't think the more centralised meta Gira would bring with it is one that would really improve OU by bringing a more centralised meta for all the reasons above.

 

[Jaguar360]

From the few games I've played, I've seen that Giratina-O completely nullifies Rapid Spin as a hazard removal option - outside of Excadrill and Starmie, which G-O smacks if they lack SD and Ice Beam respectively, there isn't really a viable spinner. By simply having a Giratina-O on your team you stop spinners cold and even though Defog has always been the more reliable option, it now FORCES it. Spike stacking Ferrothorn + Bisharp + Giratina-O is great for balance/offensive playstyles - Defog is forced because spinning is no longer an option, but that is itself risky due to Bisharp, who can also smack the fairies that Giratina-O struggles to hit.

Even so, you can go bulky:

252 SpA Life Orb Starmie Ice Beam vs. 248 HP / 148 SpD Giratina-O: 185-218 (36.7 - 43.3%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
252+ Atk Life Orb Excadrill Iron Head vs. 248 HP / 114 Def Giratina-O: 173-204 (34.3 - 40.5%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock

So yeah...Shadow Claw Excadrill anyone?

I know it's only a temporary check/pivot, but if you get rocks and a spike up, that damage definitely racks up and paves the way for Talonflame or Scolipede or something to clean up.

You still need to factor in Analytic with Starmie though if it hits on the switch.
252 SpA Life Orb Analytic Starmie Ice Beam vs. 252 HP / 148 SpD Giratina-O: 239-283 (47.4 - 56.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock

And then Excadrill can run Mold Breaker if it's on a team with no sand setter.
252+ Atk Life Orb Mold Breaker Excadrill Earthquake vs. 252 HP / 112 Def Giratina-O: 214-253 (42.4 - 50.1%) -- 93.4% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock

Giratina-O's a great spinblocker, but the tier's two best spinners can beat it with sets that don't ask for much. Defensive Starmie and Tentacruel still struggle, but they can at least fish for burns with Scald.

EDIT: I should probably clarify that Starmie won't actually get the without more damage 2HKO since Analytic deactivates in the 1v1 scenario, but taking half on Tina's health on the switch is certainly something.

 

[Patolegend!]

Wow, a long weekend away and I come back to this! I'd just like to put my original thoughts down after playing a few games in the G-O meta, before actually making up my mind.

First off, I want to say I think it's a brave choice by the council; the community's decision to keep Mega Metagross in the tier meant a stop to the banning path we were on, meaning that the only way to make any changes in the meta would be to allow new threats from the Uber tier.

That aside, I'm not sure G-O was the right choice (if there is a right choice). This 'mon is incredibly versatile, the "prodigal jack of all trades, master of none" 'mon, which we have slated off before. The difference with G-O is a) the sheer number of roles it can fill to a high standard (I won't list them all once more, as they have been mentioned previously in the thread) and b) its sheer, monumental bulk uninvested, and its respectable speed.

The second point is what sets it apart; without a ghost, dragon, or dark move, it's seriously difficult to dent. The issue is that the dark types in the tier need a boosting item to cripple it, and are all out-sped apart from Hydreigon, who doesn't like to have to run timid. Gengar can't KO but doesn't need much damage to check non shadow sneak, UNINVESTED variants; and various dragons can revenge or check it.

Speaking of Hydreigon, and its comparability as a mon without counters, it's not bulky enough to be on the same level as Giratina, and is weak to both u-turn and mach punch, which Giratina just happens to resist. G-O's defensive and offensive typing puts it over the edge when combined with its ridiculous bulk.

Stall teams can pass it wishes easily, as it shares excellent defensive synergy with common wish passers (chansey, 'mola, Clef), while offensive teams can heal it with healing wish, making its lack of recovery less of an issue.

In the few games I've played, 95% of my opponents have had G-O, and it’s a question of who can remove whose first. I am most definitely in favor of a diverse metagame, and believe, based on early samples, that G-O is gonna cause an unhealthy centralization of the metagame.

Geez this post ended up really long!

 

[Halcyon.]

Where did I say they were bad battlers? No where in my post did I say they were bad battlers. If anything I'm knocking the players who can't seem to adjust their skills toward a meta that rewards team building.

Maybe I'm just not understanding how the current meta favors teambuilding so much more than battling. By how much do you figure this is the case? 40/60 in favor of teambuilding? More? Are truly bad players shooting to the top based on matchup alone? I'm not seeing that. The best players are still at the top where they belong. This means that play skill is still very significant in the current meta. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, this meta is not broken whatsoever.

Again, you're missing the point and twisting it to sound like you think it sounds.

I'll refer back to my original example, but more specifc. You can build a team that covers Mega Metagross, Landorus, Lopunny, DD Altaria, Diancie, and Keldeo, but still get rolled over by something like DD Mega Gyarados simply because there are only 6 Pokemon you can choose and literally dozens of powerful sweepers and wall breakers. This is what people mean by matchup. If you choose to cover Gyarados, you might make yourself weaker to Diancie or Metagross or what have you. And should you run up against an equally good player with a Mega Gyarados, there's not that much you can do to stop it from sweeping your team that isn't prepared for it outside of your opponent making a big mistake.

Conversely, in a centralized metagame (for example, the Giratina one), certain Pokemon become realistically less viable. If Giratina were to drop, Keldeo and Zard Y and Serperior and Landorus would undoubtedly drop in usage. Possibly to the point where you wouldn't have to spend 2 slots on your team trying to cover Specs AND SubCM Keldeo. Or maybe Zard Y is forced to start running Dragon Pulse over Roost, which inherently makes it easier to deal with (think how Mega Heracross had to run Earthquake pre-Aegi ban, meaning SD wasn't viable and stall didn't have to prepare for it). But, in exchange for this ease in teambuilding, fewer things are viable. That's the trade off.

Do you understand now? I'm not saying there's a proportional split in teambuilding skill vs battling skill. I'm saying that in the current metagame, how you build your team is extremely important because you have so many threats to cover. In a centralized metagame, there aren't as many viable threats to cover, so how you play with those threats that are viable becomes more important. Rather, I should say these skills become more valuable in their respective metagames, since both knowing how to build and how to play well will always be important.

I am not saying "bad" players are getting good because of matchup. What I am saying is that players who focus more on team building and build teams focusing on obscure yet effective threats while covering as many threats as possible will have more room for error than those who don't have as good a team(matchup).

 

[Mr. Hothead]

I think what people seem to forget that its sets can handle all types of playstyles well.

Sub CM destroys stall, avoiding status and using its great bulk as an advantage. WoW sets and Offensive sets take on HO with Shadow Sneak to cripple MGallade, Starmie, and Gengar, while Shadow Ball does a decent amount of damage to Special Walls like Heatran. WoW hits MAltaria and Azu hard, two mons that threaten Giratina, and cripples attackers like Scizor and Bisharp immensely, making them almost unusable.

Although Giratina is weakest against balance, it sure as hell is still a threat to it.

Acting as a Defogger AND a spinblocker (an amazing combo) and does not fear Bisharp even with its "bad typing" and so on. also it beats like all of the spinblockers too lol.

All i have to say is that im still really not wanting this in OU at all. just for now. No post really put me on the pro unban side because first of Gira walls 2/3s of the meta and sure as hell doesnt balance it for shit. Stall is nearly unusable. It basically beats all of S rank with a certain moveset, and such.

Also, its not Kyu B, with a much more expansive movepool and great supportive movepool too. It has the unheard combination of being a bulky tank with the ability to revenge kill and wall almost 2/3s of the meta while having a phenomenal movepool.

Also im starting to realize that this isnt an April Fools joke and the OU council is real with this, which i dont really understand.

 

[Expert_Occultist]

Again, you're missing the point and twisting it to sound like you think it sounds.

I'll refer back to my original example, but more specifc. You can build a team that covers Mega Metagross, Landorus, Lopunny, DD Altaria, Diancie, and Keldeo, but still get rolled over by something like DD Mega Gyarados simply because there are only 6 Pokemon you can choose and literally dozens of powerful sweepers and wall breakers. This is what people mean by matchup. If you choose to cover Gyarados, you might make yourself weaker to Diancie or Metagross or what have you. And should you run up against an equally good player with a Mega Gyarados, there's not that much you can do to stop it from sweeping your team that isn't prepared for it outside of your opponent making a big mistake.

Conversely, in a centralized metagame (for example, the Giratina one), certain Pokemon become realistically less viable. If Giratina were to drop, Keldeo and Zard Y and Serperior and Landorus would undoubtedly drop in usage. Possibly to the point where you wouldn't have to spend 2 slots on your team trying to cover Specs AND SubCM Keldeo. Or maybe Zard Y is forced to start running Dragon Pulse over Roost, which inherently makes it easier to deal with (think how Mega Heracross had to run Earthquake pre-Aegi ban, meaning SD wasn't viable and stall didn't have to prepare for it). But, in exchange for this ease in teambuilding, fewer things are viable. That's the trade off.

Do you understand now? I'm not saying there's a proportional split in teambuilding skill vs battling skill. I'm saying that in the current metagame, how you build your team is extremely important because you have so many threats to cover. In a centralized metagame, there aren't as many viable threats to cover, so how you play with those threats that are viable becomes more important. Rather, I should say these skills become more valuable in their respective metagames, since both knowing how to build and how to play well will always be important.

I am not saying "bad" players are getting good because of matchup. What I am saying is that players who focus more on team building and build teams focusing on obscure yet effective threats while covering as many threats as possible will have more room for error than those who don't have as good a team(matchup).

Thundurus has game against all those :P But I understand what you're saying. Luckily Der Twist articulated my feelings as to why I value a diverse meta better than I could ever hope too :)

 

[Enki]

Skill in battling should also take into account how one deals with poor match-ups. It was mentioned earlier by someone in a point really anyone can agree with that unless your team is quite abysmal then you're not going to be in a case of loss from team preview. Yes, it does put you at a disadvantage in a bad match-up, but it's not impossible to divert the outcome to your favour by making good plays and of course being prepared for bad match-ups with a game-plan at least. Match-ups are not the be-all and end-all of a battle, I'm sure everyone here has said that at some point or another, but the point I stress is that it does not deter need for actual battling competence. In a centralised metagame it is not going to be a case of every battle is more skilled than an uncentralised or less centralised meta because that is simple not true, it's just pushing the entire focus of what you specifically need skill in in one area, which is of course battling. I disagree with that aspect because teambuilding is in its own right a reliant skill in this game and so is isolating what would fuck you and preparing a game-plan for bad match-ups. It's more complex, and definitely something that makes the game more interesting in my opinion (and in response to the 'it's not about fun, it's about skill' argument, going back to my point of there's equal skill in both a centralised and less centralised meta, but if you have a choice between more or less fun combined with that, you'd pick the former most likely). That's my take on the centralised vs less centralised meta, I like a less centralised meta's more varying aspects of skill and a need to focus on every detail rather than a plain and simple you're either a good battler or you're not, because there's so much more depth to be had than that.
An issue I do have with a less centralised meta is how prone it is to complaints. People do not lose to bad match-ups, they lost because they're either a bad team builder or got outplayed (or hax, but that's universal), whatever the reason, you lost and you could improve. You could have improved your team, you could have improved how you handle and prep for match-ups, you could improve your plays as a whole. A loss is a chance to better yourself, whatever kind of meta.
To not get too far off topic, I don't think the more centralised meta Gira would bring with it is one that would really improve OU by bringing a more centralised meta for all the reasons above.

If you like a more diverse rather than a centralised metagame that's your opinion, and it should be respected, but please, do not act as if the matchup issue can be resolved by a "git gud, scrub" attitude, it is a serious issue, and you can't cover majority (not even all) of the metagame with the six slots you have at your disposal, teambuilding skills is important, as already stated by Halcyon, that does not mean that a player cannot get better as a builder, other than a battler, heck, I have something like 100 ou rates on the RMT Forum, what were the point of them, if I thought that teams cannot improve and blame it all on matchup?
However, there is a limit, which is quite shitty at the moment for how much you can rate/improve teams, and you can't seriously sell it as "if you can't stop 100+ threats with 6 slots you are trash and deserve to lose"