On Banning Abilities and Ability Combinations

[Miscellaneous]

Rain was clearly a bit much, and it needed a nerf in order to maintain competitiveness. Rain doesn't need 19 bans in what is essentially crippling the strategy. I think we dealt with rain well; it's no longer ridiculous, but it's still viable in OU. There's a distinction that a few people aren't making between dealing with each pokemon on an individual basis and dealing with a strategy collectively. No individual logic can be applied here, partially because rain is a strategy, not just 2 or 3 pokemon and partially because a complex ban must account for more than one aspect. When considering, say hypothetically, a Latios + Ttar ban you have to consider both pokemon, and the metagame on which they are suspect. You can't just consider Latios or just consider how Latios can revenge Ttar's "counters", it's much more of a collective judgement.

And I don't see any rain/ sun analogy. The types cannot be compared; chlorophyll users don't get STAB on fire moves; there is a higher degree of versatility to rain, both in strategies and pokemon available. Especially now that Blaziken is banned I don't see the necessity for any sun ban, and it's ridiculous to ban a strategy on principles because it's a bit like something else.

 

[TM13IceBeam]

Chlorophyll users have to kill their opponents ASAP before they are fried with a fire move that is boosted by the sun.

The only attacks these guys get that are boosted by sun is HP Fire. WTF.

 

[JSND]

i must say water and flying just that awesome compared to Grass AND Fire
Proven by how rain is still dominating the meta after swsw banning.
eat that words people that said rain sucks because boosted water moves isnt enough

 

[TM13IceBeam]

Sniper Kingdra isn't that bad actually. Your crithax just got even better sir.

 

[Thorhammer]

Correction: That boost is a part of every water pokemon with swift-swim. Which leaves Beartic and Armaldo as the ones who do not benefeit from that.

No fire-type pokemon gets chlorophyll, so that bonus is reduced.

The problem is, again, that the more convoluted and complex the bans get, the more difficult it is to initiate new players into the metagame and the community. In that regards, I believe that it is simpler and more effective to make a more accessible and understandable ban (Drizzle + SwSw teams are banned because they're too good) versus (Drizzle is fine as long as you don't have X, Y, or Z). This is simply a matter of opinion.

Indeed it is. but that boost combined with Swift Swim combined with the ability to be broken with those effects in place is only known to be a past of Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops, and that is the only thing that matters here. It's certainly not enough on its own; we know that Luvdisc, Seaking, and Lumineon wouldn't be broken no matter what. And none of this changes that as a result, all of this is part of the Pokemon, not an inherent Drizzle, Swift Swim, or the combination of the two.

Kingdra + Drizzle
Ludicolo + Drizzle
Kabutops + Drizzle

I think it's easier to implement such bans than to explain to every new player just why they can't use the combination of Politoed + Luvdisc. There is no evidence that newer players have some automatic aversion to complex bans or greater numbers of them; in fact, the only thing that's been shown to make newer players dislike Smogon is unnecessarily broad simple bans, such as the simple ban of Blaziken.

Rain was clearly a bit much, and it needed a nerf in order to maintain competitiveness. Rain doesn't need 19 bans in what is essentially crippling the strategy. I think we dealt with rain well; it's no longer ridiculous, but it's still viable in OU. There's a distinction that a few people aren't making between dealing with each pokemon on an individual basis and dealing with a strategy collectively. No individual logic can be applied here, partially because rain is a strategy, not just 2 or 3 pokemon and partially because a complex ban must account for more than one aspect. When considering, say hypothetically, a Latios + Ttar ban you have to consider both pokemon, and the metagame on which they are suspect. You can't just consider Latios or just consider how Latios can revenge Ttar's "counters", it's much more of a collective judgement.

And I don't see any rain/ sun analogy. The types cannot be compared; chlorophyll users don't get STAB on fire moves; there is a higher degree of versatility to rain, both in strategies and pokemon available. Especially now that Blaziken is banned I don't see the necessity for any sun ban, and it's ridiculous to ban a strategy on principles because it's a bit like something else.

There is no strategy; there are no multiple aspects. There are broken Pokemon, and at Smogon, we ban those broken Pokemon. We don't ban strategies; that is something we have never done before, and there is no reason to start now. We may have dealt with rain well, but we can deal with it better by not restricting not-broken Pokemon such as Golduck and Luvdisc for no reason.

Of course there's no need for a sun ban. Arguments for sun bans were always absurd, and that's why it makes such a great example. The similarity is in the individual things that are being banned. Sun functions essentially the same way as rain. Chlorophyll functions exactly the same way as Swift Swim. the only difference is that most Swift Swim Pokemon tend to be better at taking advantage of rain, and they tend to be better overall. Again, that is an issue with the Pokemon, and it is the Pokemon that should be banned or restricted. It is not the weather, nor the ability, nor the combination of the two that are the issue. It is the weather-abusing Pokemon that are the issue.

 

[Eco]

Ban no weather, or ban ALL WEATHER. Simple as that.

 

[Thorhammer]

Ban no weather, or ban ALL WEATHER. Simple as that.

Nothing is ever that simple.

 

[Eco]

Nothing is ever that simple.

Never know unless we try.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

The only reason I have seen that Swiftswim-Luvdisc + Drizzel is banned is precidence. Honestly that seems just silly, right now we are dealing with the OU metagame, and its likely Politoed will stay in OU. SS-Luvdisc does not make any major impact on the metagame at all, and is no where near broken. Just because its supid to use it is not a reason to ban it, just to make the PO code makers happy, no that just flat out lazy. If something is not broken you don't ban it. I guess that goes towards my vote too. I still stand on this because there is no good reason to go banning pokemon with certain abilities, if they are not a problem.

Simply put I don't fear Swift swim Luvdisc, call me a noob, but I don't.

 

[Thorhammer]

Never know unless we try.

False.

We know how much will be lost if all weather will be banned, and we know from Round 2 that not doing anything wasn't a good way to leave the metagame.

 

[RBG]

No one fears Swift Swim Luvdisc at all. In fact, that is not at all what the point of the Drizzle Swift Swim ban is about. It's also really annoying to hear people spout that out as the biggest flaw with the ban and a reason why it is stupid.

The fact remains that it was the bigger and more powerful Swift Swim Pokemon as a group that made Drizzle so dangerous. Kingdra, Kabutops, Omastar, Qwilfish, Gorbeyss, Ludicolo, and Seismatoad were all made that much more powerful with permanent rain. And the fact that they all had the same "counters" meant that all they had to do was to continuously beat down on the opponent until the "counters" were weakened enough to be killed easily. Or you know, since you didn't have to use just Swift Swimmers, you could run Pokemon to easily defeat their counters.

So we reached the point where we were going to make bans. Would we just straight away ban Drizzle, even though as a playstyle, it can clearly survive with out Swift Swim? Do we ban Swift Swim, even though those Pokemon combined with a Rain Dance user can be viable without being overpowered? Or would you rather we choose some arbitrary number of Swift Swimmers that can be paired with a Drizzle Politoed (1? or why not 2)? Aladaron's solution to only ban the Pokemon being used on the same time, while it does have comical bans like Luvdisc and Politoed not being on the same team, makes a much more simple ban list than saying specific pokemon with Politoed can't be used on the same team.

I find the ability combo ban served it's purpose. It allows Rain to still be in the metagame, without being a supremely over powering force as it was, it is still a top tier threat, but it doesn't destroy everything that gets in it's way as easily as it used to.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

Ban no weather, or ban ALL WEATHER. Simple as that.

Ban no legendaries, or ban ALL LEGENDARIES. Simple as that.


Never know unless we try.

 

[Thorhammer]

No one fears Swift Swim Luvdisc at all. In fact, that is not at all what the point of the Drizzle Swift Swim ban is about. It's also really annoying to hear people spout that out as the biggest flaw with the ban and a reason why it is stupid.

The fact remains that it was the bigger and more powerful Swift Swim Pokemon as a group that made Drizzle so dangerous. Kingdra, Kabutops, Omastar, Qwilfish, Gorbeyss, Ludicolo, and Seismatoad were all made that much more powerful with permanent rain. And the fact that they all had the same "counters" meant that all they had to do was to continuously beat down on the opponent until the "counters" were weakened enough to be killed easily. Or you know, since you didn't have to use just Swift Swimmers, you could run Pokemon to easily defeat their counters.

So we reached the point where we were going to make bans. Would we just straight away ban Drizzle, even though as a playstyle, it can clearly survive with out Swift Swim? Do we ban Swift Swim, even though those Pokemon combined with a Rain Dance user can be viable without being overpowered? Or would you rather we choose some arbitrary number of Swift Swimmers that can be paired with a Drizzle Politoed (1? or why not 2)? Aladaron's solution to only ban the Pokemon being used on the same time, while it does have comical bans like Luvdisc and Politoed not being on the same team, makes a much more simple ban list than saying specific pokemon with Politoed can't be used on the same team.

I find the ability combo ban served it's purpose. It allows Rain to still be in the metagame, without being a supremely over powering force as it was, it is still a top tier threat, but it doesn't destroy everything that gets in it's way as easily as it used to.

Or we could have addressed the problem exactly the same way we addressed every other problem. We figure out what Pokemon are overpowered as sweepers, and we ban them. Or we otherwise restrict their use in combination with Drizzle.

Swift Swim + Drizzle is no more complex than Kingdra + Drizzle, Ludicolo + Drizzle, and Kabutops + Drizzle. Are you saying we should make generalized bans rather than specific, equally complex bans to keep the ban list small? That's never been a priority; small ban lists have only important when they mean banning less actual content rather than more. We could shrink the ban list to about a third of its current size with a generalized ban of all Pokemon with 600+ BST, but we won't. There's no reason for the Swift Swim abusers to be addressed any differently.

 

[Redjar]

Ban no legendaries, or ban ALL LEGENDARIES. Simple as that.


Never know unless we try.

Ban no dragons, or ban ALL DRAGONS. Simple as that.

Never know unless we try.

 

[RBG]

"Tradition for tradition's sake is folly."

Just because we have done things a certain method in the past doesn't mean we have to stick to them if there is a better or easier way to solve the problem. The problem is not Kingdra(@Swift Swim) + Drizzle, or Ludicolo(@Swift Swim) + Drizzle or Kabutops(@Swift Swim) + Drizzle, the problem was clearly that all Swift Swim Pokemon also had their STAB moves boosted. Having a series of Drizzle + Pokemon/ability bans is much more complex and unnecessary than just a simple Drizzle + Swift Swim.

 

[Thorhammer]

"Tradition for tradition's sake is folly."

Just because we have done things a certain method in the past doesn't mean we have to stick to them if there is a better or easier way to solve the problem. The problem is not Kingdra(@Swift Swim) + Drizzle, or Ludicolo(@Swift Swim) + Drizzle or Kabutops(@Swift Swim) + Drizzle, the problem was clearly that all Swift Swim Pokemon also had their STAB moves boosted. Having a series of Drizzle + Pokemon/ability bans is much more complex and unnecessary than just a simple Drizzle + Swift Swim.

It's not for tradition's sake; it's for the sake of not banning things that aren't broken.

Swift Swim + boosted STAB isn't enough to make a Pokemon broken, as evidenced by Luvdisc, Seaking, and Lumineon. It takes more than that to make a Pokemon broken, and we only know that three Pokemon have that. And it's not true that it applies to all Swift Swim Pokemon; both Armaldo and Beartic have Swift Swim without their STAB moves being boosted.

It's not a series of Drizzle + Pokemon/ability bans; it's a series of Drizzle + Pokemon bans, which is precisely as complex as a single ban of Drizzle + Swift Swim, and I already explained why the greater number of bans is not an issue. And it's very much necessary to ban the individual Pokemon rather than the entire ability, as it prevents other Pokemon from being restricted unnecessarily, when many of them could otherwise be viable and balanced in OU.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

Again all I see is lazyness for keeping swift swim-Luvdisc banned. Each pokemon with swift swim should be reviewed and prooved to be broken, and not just banning the whole lot. For simiplicty sake is just plain aweful, thats like saying, "You know Garchomp is banned, so lets just ban all the dragons to make it easier for me to code and work through."

 

[Quixim]

What about sand veil and Garchomp? It breaks only 1 pokémon, yet it's enough to guarantee a win most of the time...

Garchomp with rough skin is much easier to counter.

Sand Veil and Sandstorm (even with a brightpowder, which I believe is now banned) holds a very small miss chance, definitely not most of the time.


Thorhammer: In light of your recent comment, I have to disagree with you. Drizzle + Sniper Kingdra is not broken, so why ban it? You'd be banning something that is not broken, which is something you've stated you don't want to ban.

Furthermore, under your ban rules, it wouldn't take long to find out whether a rain dance swift swim team featuring kingdra, kabutops, and ludicolo would be better or worse than a drizzle team with a few lesser dwift swimmers on it.

I really do like your stance, because you can have a drizzle team with some relatively mediocre swift swimmers to add some sweeping power, and other pokemon to round it out, I think that would be a fun team to balance.

However, I don't think there's a ban to get there that I'm comfortable with. Banning drizzle and a few of the top pokemon would ignore their alternative abilities which wouldn't be broken in the rain (Neither sniper kingdra or shell armor kabutops are particularly frightening, in rain or on land), which would ban something that is not broken. Banning drizzle, those pokemon, and that ability feels a bit too nitpicky for me, although I think it's the most balanced option (The downside is that they would almost never be used).

I also think that it's too early to really decide on this. If non-swiftswim drizzle teams become outrageously popular (Albeit probably not on th scale of sand in Gen IV OU), then teams could pack themselves full of otherwise broken swift-swimmers on a team with a rain dance and bank on the likelihood of the opponent setting up rain. And if people do that, then drizzle will become much less popular (Why have an ability if the rules do not permit you to take full advantage of it?)

For this reason in particular I feel that, most simply, an outright ban of kabutops, kingdra, lucidolo, and Omastar should be enacted. Drizzle and swift-swim would be fine, and the lack of hugely powerful sweepers would let pokemon such as Starmie shine.


And since Blaziken is banned regardless of ability (Speed boost off of its attacks means that it sacrifices a move slot for Protect and suddenly begins to outspeed everything), then clearly that sets a precedent for banning the too-powerful swift swimmers out of hand.

 

[Galactic Boss Cyrus]

There is absolutely nothing holding the player base from banning any move, ability, move combination, or item on any Pokemon. I think I lot of people who are against banning moves/abilities/combinations aren't letting themselves realize that.

For instance, if Spiritomb could have Wonder Guard, but so could Shedinja, there would be no point in banning Wonder Guard from a Pokemon that isn't Spiritomb. If a move, ability, item, or combination of those things is breaking Pokemon X, do something to make Pokemon X reasonable; there's no need to go after Y and Z.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

There is absolutely nothing holding the player base from banning any move, ability, move combination, or item on any Pokemon. I think I lot of people who are against banning moves/abilities/combinations aren't letting themselves realize that.

For instance, if Spiritomb could have Wonder Guard, but so could Shedinja, there would be no point in banning Wonder Guard from a Pokemon that isn't Spiritomb. If a move, ability, item, or combination of those things is breaking Pokemon X, do something to make Pokemon X reasonable; there's no need to go after Y and Z.

I can't express how much I agree with this.

The only good reason, anyone might go against, this is the "fear" that you then could theorically ban all the good moves on something like Mewtwo, then it would be OU. Same thing with maybe Tyranitar, if you ban all its good moves then it could be UU. But thats just silly, and we aren't asking them to go that far, all most of us want is for smogon just too look at some abilties and items specifically, don't have to go over the top.

 

[Quixim]

There is absolutely nothing holding the player base from banning any move, ability, move combination, or item on any Pokemon. I think I lot of people who are against banning moves/abilities/combinations aren't letting themselves realize that.

For instance, if Spiritomb could have Wonder Guard, but so could Shedinja, there would be no point in banning Wonder Guard from a Pokemon that isn't Spiritomb. If a move, ability, item, or combination of those things is breaking Pokemon X, do something to make Pokemon X reasonable; there's no need to go after Y and Z.

I suppose you're right!

However, since there is a guiding philosophy on which Smogon/Starfleet is based, certain types of bans that may be requested go against those principles so strongly that they could almost never pass.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

What Philosophy, where can I find this? And any philosphy that bans drizzle + swiftswim-Luvdisc, is odviously flawed.

 

[Galactic Boss Cyrus]

Just as a game designer can make anything do anything, a competitive guideline designer can, too. For instance, it's unnecessary to ban Blaziken when Speed Boost on Blaziken could be banned, Drizzle on Politoed, etc.

 

[XienZo]

Or Sacred Fire/Brave Bird on Ho-oh, if we're talking about making "anything" do "anything". :/

 

[Quixim]

What Philosophy, where can I find this? And any philosphy that bans drizzle + swiftswim-Luvdisc, is odviously flawed.

You're being very disingenuous here. No philosophy specifically states that Mewtwo should be banned either, but the philosophy guides the banning of specific things.

Stop bringing up swiftswim-luvdisc, it's a stupid argument and you look foolish parroting it, and you haven't added anything to the conversation other than complaints and gripes.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66515

This is the relevant thread where the ideals and philosophies of Smogon's community are laid out.