np: XY OU Suspect Testing Round 5 - Ghost of Perdition

[Sergeant Spooky]

^Talonflame is nowhere near as meta-defining as Aegislash, and has a much harder time switching in to them.

The issue isn't that these megas will be impossible to handle; they're all not so hard to RK, after all. The issue is that without their #1 check, their usage will rise and stall will have to face them more often, so stall becomes less viable.

I don't find it a compelling argument though; I don't think their usage will absolutely skyrocket. Their match-up vs. offense is pretty bad, most teams will still be better off running the better megas and handling stall in a different way. Most stall teams have always been weak to one or more of these three, and it's not like Garde and Cham aren't OU.

Also if Mega Maw and X-zard happen to get banned you'll be grateful that these stallbreakers are more viable

 

[SoulRed12]

Speaking of Agent Gibbs's VR post, I think these paragraphs in particular contain especially important points given the recent focus of the discussion on Aegislash's checks vs. its versatility. It says everything I would've wanted to say and more, so I'll just, as they say, leave this here:

There have been many people that have pointed out that there are no universal counters to all Aegislash sets. This is true, but why is this suddenly a huge breaking factor? Face it, the era of being able to run universal counters to the metagame's top offensive threats is long gone. People have been saying things like, "This has become a game of checks instead of a game of counters," for a while now, and for good reason. There are tons of offensive Pokemon that can run certain sets to beat their usual checks and counters. Terrakion can run HP Ice to smash Landorus-T and Gliscor, as well as Earthquake for Aegislash itself. Charizard X can use Earthquake for Heatran and run Outrage to punish Quagsire. Garchomp can use Fire Blast to break Skarmory or Stone Edge to break Togekiss. The ability to change your moves or item in order to beat your usual checks is not unique to Aegislash, nor is it something new that we haven't dealt with in many other Pokemon in the past (Pokemon which are not broken themselves, might I add).

I'd also like to point out that the method by which Aegislash beats some of its usual checks differs from that of some other Pokemon. We're not talking about BW Keldeo here who could run a standard offensive set with its STABs and pick its counters based on the Hidden Power type it picked for that fourth moveslot. Aegislash often has to change up its entire set in order to beat certain checks and thus has to change its role on the team, which comes with an opportunity cost all to its own. Sure, you can run SubToxic for things like Mandibuzz and Chesnaught, but then you give up the freedom to run moves like Iron Head for Fairies, Sacred Sword for Bisharp, or Shadow Sneak to pick off of weakened faster opponents, among the other uses for these moves. You could also run an all out attacker set to make Aegislash virtually impossible to safely switch into on paper, but then you give up significant amounts of bulk and King's Shield, both of which are huge reasons as to why Aegislash is so good.

With that, I think I'm finally done with this toxic and repetitive discussion. There's only a couple days left before voting anyway. I'm actually super curious how this will turn out, because it looks like it's going to be really close.

 

[Starfall11]

I think SoulRed12 summed up the anti-ban side of the argument magnificently. It'd be foolish for us to pretend Aegislash has a universal counter. But the game has changed. Gamefreak gave use Mega-Evolutions and base stats reaching insane potential. Pokémon has become a game of checks, as opposed to counters.

Agent Gibbs has made the best arguments over in the VR forums if anyone's interested. Other than that, good luck voting guys!

 

[Lil YoshiXD]

for the record, i dont care if aegi is banned or not because ORAS is around the corner and could change things completely with move tutors and new megas.

Imo that is a really bad attitude to have. Just because they meta will change relatively soon (few months), doesn't mean we should stop trying to fix it now. Also with all these new things coming we have to get rid of all the current broken stuff now, so we have time to deal with new possibly broken stuff. I doubt Aegis and his other broken comrades will be any less broken come ORAS

 

[Numera]

Imo that is a really bad attitude to have. Just because they meta will change relatively soon (few months), doesn't mean we should stop trying to fix it now. Also with all these new things coming we have to get rid of all the current broken stuff now, so we have time to deal with new possibly broken stuff. I doubt Aegis and his other broken comrades will be any less broken come ORAS

he's not trying to say don't ban it because ORAS. He just doesn't give a shit because ORAS move tutors like Knock Off (if they make it) could completely change the meta.

It wouldn't be the first time the meta has changed drastically due to a new game in the same generation. Remember the weather wars?

 

[9 Tales of Ninetales]

I think SoulRed12 summed up the anti-ban side of the argument magnificently. It'd be foolish for us to pretend Aegislash has a universal counter. But the game has changed. Gamefreak gave use Mega-Evolutions and base stats reaching insane potential. Pokémon has become a game of checks, as opposed to counters.

That's just the thing. the reason that pro-ban has me convinced over anti-ban. If that's all the anti-ban argument sums up to (which it isn't and shouldn't be) then it doesn't dismantle the over all pro-ban reasoning. no one is or should be calling Aegislash broken for not having counters. pro-ban supporters don't lean pro-ban because it has no counters. because yeah, if we focus on Aegislash's traits then we can compare them to other big name OU-mons. No hard counter, insane stats, ridiculously useful typing, huge versatility. Other Pokemon have these traits. But none of them have all of them like Aegislash does.

Pro-ban convinced me because every actually good pro-ban argument (that isn't bickering about how much damage one set does to some possible check) is looking at the big picture. the whole tier and Aegi's impact on it. I've seen very very few people try to dispute Aegi's central influence to OU, I even see anti-ban people admit to it. When someone pro-ban says something broad about what they see as the 'big picture' issue with Aegislash then anti-ban comes back with "ok yeah, but if we get rid of Aegi won't thing be worse?" It's so so rare that I see some one trying to argue that what we have now is balanced, it's mostly the case that they're just afraid that what we will end up having is the worse of two evils.

For Anti-ban to convince me otherwise they need to explain why what we have now is ok. Not why some tiny feature of Aegi isn't broken out of the context of the whole Pokemon, and not why if we change things they might be worse.

 

[InfinityX000]

That, just the thing. the reason that pro-ban has me convinced over anti-ban. If that's all the anti-ban argument sums up to (which it isn't and shouldn't be) then it doesn't dismantle the over all pro-ban reasoning. no one is or should be calling aegislash broken for not having counters. pro-ban supporters don't lean pro-ban because it has no counters. because yeah, if we focus on Aegislashs traits then we can compare them to other big name OU-mons. No hard counter, insane stats, ridiculously useful typing, huge versatility. Other Poekomn have these traits. But none of them have all of them like Aegislash does.

Pro-ban convinced me because every actually good pro-ban argument (that isn't bickering about how much damage one set does to some possible check) is looking at the big picture. the whole tier and Aegi's impact on it. I've seen very very few people try to dispute Aegi's central influence to OU, I even see anti-ban people admit to it. When someone pro-ban says something broad about what they see as the 'big picture' issue with Aegislash then anti-ban comes back with "ok yeah, but if we get rid of Aegi won't thing be worse?" It's so so rare that I see some one trying to argue that what we have now is balanced, it's mostly the case that they're just afraid that what we will end up having is the worse of two evils.

For Anti-ban to convince me otherwise they need to explain why what we have now is ok. Not why some tiny feature of Aegi isn't broken out of the context of the whole Pokemon, and not why if we change things they might be worse.

What we have now is good because Aegislash can cover up flaws in a team, and make players really think when making a team and be creative on how to check aegis with a poke that synergizes with the team. Aegis also weakens other threats just a little. And Aegis drops some very good pokemon and raises some okay ones to make OU teams more versatile. It also fills in the needed slot of a big threat to watch out for that OU would be chaos without. Think about it. If nobody was pressured to check a certain thing, people would just throw together 6 strong pokes with some synergy, and not think as much when making a team. Aegis has some unhealthy qualities, but it has more healthy ones.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

That, just the thing. the reason that pro-ban has me convinced over anti-ban. If that's all the anti-ban argument sums up to (which it isn't and shouldn't be) then it doesn't dismantle the over all pro-ban reasoning. no one is or should be calling aegislash broken for not having counters. pro-ban supporters don't lean pro-ban because it has no counters. because yeah, if we focus on Aegislashs traits then we can compare them to other big name OU-mons. No hard counter, insane stats, ridiculously useful typing, huge versatility. Other Poekomn have these traits. But none of them have all of them like Aegislash does.

Pro-ban convinced me because every actually good pro-ban argument (that isn't bickering about how much damage one set does to some possible check) is looking at the big picture. the whole tier and Aegi's impact on it. I've seen very very few people try to dispute Aegi's central influence to OU, I even see anti-ban people admit to it. When someone pro-ban says something broad about what they see as the 'big picture' issue with Aegislash then anti-ban comes back with "ok yeah, but if we get rid of Aegi won't thing be worse?" It's so so rare that I see some one trying to argue that what we have now is balanced, it's mostly the case that they're just afraid that what we will end up having is the worse of two evils.

For Anti-ban to convince me otherwise they need to explain why what we have now is ok. Not why some tiny feature of Aegi isn't broken out of the context of the whole Pokemon, and not why if we change things they might be worse.

Well, for starters, No feature of Aegislash is definitively broken, but that's not what you're looking for.

If you read the Characteristics of a Desirable Meta Game (there are links all over this thread), you'll see diversity listed as desirable, and that's where a large portion of the pro-ban arguments come from. From my reading of that thread, as well as my knowledge of the metagame last gen, it seems pretty clear to me that while a lack of diversity is inherently bad, diversity itself isn't necessarily good either. Too much diversity is what happens when it becomes difficult to build teams that can realistically handle the majority of threats, and that's what would begin to happen if Aegislash were banned. The posts that convinced me of this were actually Jukain's when he spoke about how stall would have to adapt and start picking its poison at the team building stage. The meta needs some centralizing forces that prevent something like BW from happening, but it's perfectly ok if you think Aegislash does it too much. Personally, cherry picked arguments about Pinsir having to run earthquake didn't do it for me.

 

[Red Cat]

What we have now is good because Aegislash can cover up flaws in a team, and make players really think when making a team and be creative on how to check aegis with a poke that synergizes with the team. Aegis also weakens other threats just a little. And Aegis drops some very good pokemon and raises some okay ones to make OU teams more versatile. It also fills in the needed slot of a big threat to watch out for that OU would be chaos without. Think about it. If nobody was pressured to check a certain thing, people would just throw together 6 strong pokes with some synergy, and not think as much when making a team. Aegis has some unhealthy qualities, but it has more healthy ones.

You could basically say all of the same things about Genesect when it was in OU. Aegislash covering up many of the flaws on a team is not a good thing. Instead of having to use creative teambuilding to check threats, people just throw Aegislash on their team to solve most of their problems. People did the same thing with Genesect, and most good players thought it was unhealthy for the meta.

 

[Lady Alex]

What we have now is good because Aegislash can cover up flaws in a team, and make players really think when making a team and be creative on how to check aegis with a poke that synergizes with the team. Aegis also weakens other threats just a little. And Aegis drops some very good pokemon and raises some okay ones to make OU teams more versatile. It also fills in the needed slot of a big threat to watch out for that OU would be chaos without. Think about it. If nobody was pressured to check a certain thing, people would just throw together 6 strong pokes with some synergy, and not think as much when making a team. Aegis has some unhealthy qualities, but it has more healthy ones.

Aegislash doesn't force people to be creative. It forces people to use one of only a handful of checks and hope that the matchmaking gods don't put them against a set that craps on their answer for it. I would hardly say that the Mawile/Thundurus/Landorus offensive core that Aegislash glues together so well "makes OU teams more versatile. To say that "OU would be chaos without it," isn't a reason for not banning, and is largely an exaggeration anyway, as has been discussed to death. You're making a gross oversimplification by saying "people would just throw together 6 pokes" if they weren't pressured to "check a certain thing," which in this case is Aegislash. There are always going to be top threats as a meta develops, but when you have a pokemon like Aegislash that can fit on nearly any type of team with no drawbacks because the risk in using it is extremely low compared to it's high reward, that's a problem. Aegislash is not a healthy pokemon in this metagame.

 

[Karxrida]

Aegislash doesn't force people to be creative. It forces people to use one of only a handful of checks and hope that the matchmaking gods don't put them against a set that craps on their answer for it. I would hardly say that the Mawile/Thundurus/Landorus offensive core that Aegislash glues together so well "makes OU teams more versatile. To say that "OU would be chaos without it," isn't a reason for not banning, and is largely an exaggeration anyway, as has been discussed to death. You're making a gross oversimplification by saying "people would just throw together 6 pokes" if they weren't pressured to "check a certain thing," which in this case is Aegislash. There are always going to be top threats as a meta develops, but when you have a pokemon like Aegislash that can fit on nearly any type of team with no drawbacks because the risk in using it is extremely low compared to it's high reward, that's a problem. Aegislash is not a healthy pokemon in this metagame.

I've said this like 20 times, but there are more than a "handful" of Aegislash checks that exist, all of them are viable in the current OU metagame, and many synergize so well together you'd be hard pressed to find a team that didn't have 2 Aegislash checks without even trying. The Lando-Keldeo-Bisharp core is a good example of this, as all of them check Aegislash and it's still a very effective core despite technically being "overprepared" for one thing.

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

I've said this like 20 times, but there are more than a "handful" of Aegislash checks that exist, all of them are viable in the current OU metagame, and many synergize so well together you'd be hard pressed to find a team that didn't have 2 Aegislash checks without even trying. The Lando-Keldeo-Bisharp core is a good example of this, as all of them check Aegislash and it's still a very effective core despite technically being "overprepared" for one thing.

The problem is that very few people who are pro-ban side feel these are checks that aren't easily played around or just pitifully unreliable. But the fact that someone would have to bring a core based on dealing with one pokemon OVER it being a decent core in general, is a problem. I bet you would be hard pressed to find very many people that would see that as a core over 3 pokemon that might make a decent check for Aegislash.

 

[TFL]

The problem is that very few people who are pro-ban side feel these are checks that aren't easily played around or just pitifully unreliable. But the fact that someone would have to bring a core based on dealing with one pokemon OVER it being a decent core in general, is a problem. I bet you would be hard pressed to find very many people that would see that as a core over 3 pokemon that might make a decent check for Aegislash.

Nah mang, what he's saying is that the common good mons that see use on every team naturally check Aegislash. They aren't used coz of Aegislash, they are used because they're good anyway. And since they pair/fit/synergies so well, people naturally stack its checks. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Karxrida)

 

[Karxrida]

The problem is that very few people who are pro-ban side feel these are checks that aren't easily played around or just pitifully unreliable. But the fact that someone would have to bring a core based on dealing with one pokemon OVER it being a decent core in general, is a problem. I bet you would be hard pressed to find very many people that would see that as a core over 3 pokemon that might make a decent check for Aegislash.

If Aegislash didn't exist this core would still be used. Why? Because it's a fucking good core.

 

[Arcanine is Regal]

I've said this like 20 times, but there are more than a "handful" of Aegislash checks that exist, all of them are viable in the current OU metagame, and many synergize so well together you'd be hard pressed to find a team that didn't have 2 Aegislash checks without even trying. The Lando-Keldeo-Bisharp core is a good example of this, as all of them check Aegislash and it's still a very effective core despite technically being "overprepared" for one thing.

I mean yes that is a good core, and yes they all check Aegislash(somewhat), but none of them can switch in. But like 9tales was saying I dont want Aegislash banned because he doesnt have any full counters to EVERY set, that is just ridiculous to even say. The reason I want Aegislash banned is because I want the best meta for OU, and I think that meta can be achieved by removing Aegislash and perhaps a few more pokemon that promote matchup based victories. I just think that the antiban side doesnt want to put in the effort to make a perfect meta so they are settling for an alright meta that is being held together by a band-aid(Aegislash)

 

[Karxrida]

I mean yes that is a good core, and yes they all check Aegislash(somewhat), but none of them can switch in. But like 9tales was saying I dont want Aegislash banned because he doesnt have any full counters to EVERY set, that is just ridiculous to even say. The reason I want Aegislash banned is because I want the best meta for OU, and I think that meta can be achieved by removing Aegislash and perhaps a few more pokemon that promote matchup based victories. I just think that the antiban side doesnt want to put in the effort to make a perfect meta so they are settling for an alright meta that is being held together by a band-aid(Aegislash)

That's why I said check. Why don't people understand this?

 

[9 Tales of Ninetales]

IxfinityX000 I won’t tackle your post too much cause other people already did, the main thing that throws me off is:

And Aegis drops some very good pokemon and raises some okay ones to make OU teams more versatile

How does dropping good Pokémon for okay ones add versatility? And isn’t that just another way Aegislash is negatively polarizing the tier?

If you read the Characteristics of a Desirable Meta Game (there are links all over this thread), you'll see diversity listed as desirable, and that's where a large portion of the pro-ban arguments come from. From my reading of that thread, as well as my knowledge of the metagame last gen, it seems pretty clear to me that while a lack of diversity is inherently bad, diversity itself isn't necessarily good either. Too much diversity is what happens when it becomes difficult to build teams that can realistically handle the majority of threats, and that's what would begin to happen if Aegislash were banned. The posts that convinced me of this were actually Jukain's when he spoke about how stall would have to adapt and start picking its poison at the team building stage. The meta needs some centralizing forces that prevent something like BW from happening, but it's perfectly ok if you think Aegislash does it too much. Personally, cherry picked arguments about Pinsir having to run earthquake didn't do it for me.

Again this is the mind set leaving me unconvinced. What you’re arguing is that the new meta, that no one can perfectly predict, will be worse than the existing one not that the existing one is good. It’s weighing a known against an unknown. I’m not goanna take it upon myself to call everyone out for that or something it’s just that you literally quoted my comment on this and then came back with the exact kind of reply that’s in my quote.

Of course it seems not everyone wants to accept the same mindset that we shouldn't compare a known to something more unknown. And people can make educated guesses at what will happen to the tier. I've actually already touched on the majority of what you’re saying a little more specifically if you just scroll up this page to my earlier post. (The first half is me rambling about sucker punch but the second half is actually relevant) One of the many links you're referring to is in that post I made. I've basically asked what groundbreaking huge amounts of variety are gonna suddenly wreck OU if Aegislash is gone? The majority of things Aegislash keeps is in low play is stuff like Starmie or Gengar that has been a part of a well balanced OU for way too long to argue otherwise. The only new things are these few (3 or so) Aegislash checked Megas that 1. Have to compete with other megas for usage still, and 2. Don’t really strike me as being held back ONLY by Aegislash anyway. And don’t forget that (as many people are saying) a number of pokemon are more OU viable simply because of their ability to check Aegislash, it’s removal drops their viability and helps keep the number of OU viable Pokémon more or less the same.

The meta needs some centralizing forces that prevent something like BW from happening

This is the heart of the too much variety concern as far as I see it. I don’t think there is a big risk of this yet though. Aegislash is the most ridiculous central force right now, but there are plenty of fairly central forces besides it (S and A+ ranked guys) and they can maintain the stability and “controlled variety” of the tier after Aegi’s gone. I don't think we can claim that OU without Aegislash doesn't have 4 or 5 specific Pokemon that will be the center of the tier. It'll just be a healthier tier with 4 or 5 central forces rather than 1 or 2.

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

If Aegislash didn't exist this core would still be used. Why? Because it's a fucking good core.

Its an okay core. My point was, and still is, seeing those pokemon will bring to mind "Aegislash checks" before "Good/Great core". Thats the kind of effect Aegislash has on the meta.

 

[Karxrida]

Its an okay core. My point was, and still is, seeing those pokemon will bring to mind "Aegislash checks" before "Good/Great core". Thats the kind of effect Aegislash has on the meta.

EDIT: Oops, wrong one.
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/good-cores-v2.3505075/
A ton of these cores deal with Aegislash just fine.

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

It's one of the cores listed in VR's "Good Cores" thread, so I think it's better than okay.

Its okay to me, because it doesn't fit my play style but still recongnizable. And while you can think its the greatest core in the world, what you are clearly failing to see is that people seem to currently see it as "Aegislash's decent-ish checks first", and "Good/Great core second". Again, that is because of the impact Aegislash has on the meta.

 

[Karxrida]

Its okay to me, because it doesn't fit my play style but still recongnizable. And while you can think its the greatest core in the world, what you are clearly failing to see is that people seem to currently see it as "Aegislash's decent-ish checks first", and "Good/Great core second". Again, that is because of the impact Aegislash has on the meta.

That has literally nothing to do with anything related to banning Aegislash. Just because you see it as a bunch of checks does not automatically mean it's not a core or not good.

 

[MikeDawg]

As mentioned somewhere above, the "promotes creative teambuilding" argument is complete bull. Lady Alex noted that the opponent now has to choose from a handful of (standard) checks, restricting a team.

That being said, I think that the biggest counter to the creative teambuilding argument is that Aegislash itself is a lazy pokemon. By that I mean that you can slap Aegislash on to nearly any type of team, even moreso than Genesect. Not only that, Aegislash also acts as a blanket check to a HUGE part of the meta. If you have issues with Mawile or Thundurus or Azumaril or Clefable or Pinsir or Keldeo or Talonflame or Latias or Latios or Terrakion or Rotom or Breloom or Chansey or Blissey or Mandibuzz or Hippowdon or Skarm or Gardevoir or Medicham or Heracross or Kabutops or Quagisre or Tornadus or Slowbro or Conk or Gothitelle or Kingdra or Manectric or Lucario or Sylveon or Alakazam or Ampharos or Raikou or Staraptor or Aggorn or Alo or Espeon or Ditto or Magneton or Sableye or Starmie or Celebi or Cresselia or Exploud or Goodra or Gourgeist or Venomoth or Hawlucha or Abomasnow or Roserade or Weezing

Then Aegislash is your guy.

Nobody can seriously say that Aegislash keeping (literally) the meta in check is healthy. Perhaps if it was a just a wall, yes. But it also has base 150 attacking stats. If Aegislash is the only thing holding the meta togheter, then the entire metagame needs some serious work (and lucky us! Gen 6 began only a bit over a half of a year ago. We have so much time!)

 

[Shirou Saberfox]

That has literally nothing to do with anything related to banning Aegislash. Just because you see it as a bunch of checks does not automatically mean it's not a core or not good.

You are changing the frame of my argument, to fit your own. Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

The point I've been trying to make is that, because of the threat/overcentralization/50 50's/etc is that when playing in the current meta, everyone is always thinking of Aegislash. That, in and of itself, might not be a problem. But for all of those reasons and arguments that people are making (clearly there are a lot of reasons people think this is broken or doesn't belong on OU) shows there is SOME sort of problem. People all across the spectrum of this thread are trying to either figure out or explain why. And then we have these other arguments that are "Well here is some checks". Okay? That's nice, but we don't see them as that great, and I highly doubt you are going to win anyone over to your side through that logic, no matter how many times your repeat it.

Brushing off all of the arguments just so say "Here are some checks" amounts to very little.

Aegislash is a problem.

 

[Starfall11]

As mentioned somewhere above, the "promotes creative teambuilding" argument is complete bull. Lady Alex noted that the opponent now has to choose from a handful of (standard) checks, restricting a team.

That being said, I think that the biggest counter to the creative teambuilding argument is that Aegislash itself is a lazy pokemon. By that I mean that you can slap Aegislash on to nearly any type of team, even moreso than Genesect. Not only that, Aegislash also acts as a blanket check to a HUGE part of the meta. If you have issues with Mawile or Thundurus or Azumaril or Clefable or Pinsir or Keldeo or Talonflame or Latias or Latios or Terrakion or Rotom or Breloom or Chansey or Blissey or Mandibuzz or Hippowdon or Skarm or Gardevoir or Medicham or Heracross or Kabutops or Quagisre or Tornadus or Slowbro or Conk or Gothitelle or Kingdra or Manectric or Lucario or Sylveon or Alakazam or Ampharos or Raikou or Staraptor or Aggorn or Alo or Espeon or Ditto or Magneton or Sableye or Starmie or Celebi or Cresselia or Exploud or Goodra or Gourgeist or Venomoth or Hawlucha or Abomasnow or Roserade or Weezing

Then Aegislash is your guy.

Nobody can seriously say that Aegislash keeping (literally) the meta in check is healthy. Perhaps if it was a just a wall, yes. But it also has base 150 attacking stats. If Aegislash is the only thing holding the meta togheter, then the entire metagame needs some serious work (and lucky us! Gen 6 began only a bit over a half of a year ago. We have so much time!)

Ummmm... What?!

If you're having issues with Venomoth in OU, then something is definitely wrong with your team. All joking aside though. Aegislash does not check AV Conkeldurr, or Rotom-W (Aegislash doesn't like status.) It cannot check Mandibuzz either. Mandibuzz is KOed by luring it in with an unconventional Aegislash, it doesn't check it.

 

[Karxrida]

You are changing the frame of my argument, to fit your own. Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

The point I've been trying to make is that, because of the threat/overcentralization/50 50's/etc is that when playing in the current meta, everyone is always thinking of Aegislash. That, in and of itself, might not be a problem. But for all of those reasons and arguments that people are making (clearly there are a lot of reasons people think this is broken or doesn't belong on OU) shows there is SOME sort of problem. People all across the spectrum of this thread are trying to either figure out or explain why. And then we have these other arguments that are "Well here is some checks". Okay? That's nice, but we don't see them as that great, and I highly doubt you are going to win anyone over to your side through that logic, no matter how many times your repeat it.

Brushing off all of the arguments just so say "Here are some checks" amounts to very little.

Aegislash is a problem.

The point is that their are numerous checks that synergize very well with each other and do something significant other than dealing with Aegislash. Because its checks are not niche and are all very viable, it is not overcentralizing. You can fill half your fucking team with Aegislash checks and still do well against teams that don't have it.