On Banning Abilities and Ability Combinations

[Gneiss is nice]

Politoed is no longer a mediocre Pokemon. He is now a top-tier support Pokemon with arguably the best ability in the game, with the exception of the banned Moody.

However, I will state again that if something must be banned in combination with Drizzle, there is no reason whatsoever for that something to be the entire Swift Swim ability. Such a ban is not justified, and there are better alternatives.

Politoed is a top-tier support Pokemon because of Drizzle support for other players, and in Ubers, would be outclassed by Kyogre in every way. Politoed himself is nothing special, is what I meant.

And what are your better alternatives? Banning the Drizzle + Swift Swim combo lets you still use Drizzle for other Rain things, and still lets you Swift Swim with manually set up Rain, without removing either ability outright. In quelling the major Swift Swim threats (Kabutops, Ludicolo, and Kingdra), perhaps we also hit some Swift Swim users who weren't particularly overpowered, but it's better than outright banning those Swift Swim threats, banning your Rain inducer altogether (which would cripple every other Rain team that's not focused on Swift Swim), or banning certain combos; for the last one, in my opinion, if we start allowing certain pokemon without certain abilities or moves, that opens a can of worms for banning other combos and I don't know if that's a good idea.

 

[Thorhammer]

Politoed is a top-tier support Pokemon because of Drizzle support for other players, and in Ubers, would be outclassed by Kyogre in every way. Politoed himself is nothing special, is what I meant.

And what are your better alternatives? Banning the Drizzle + Swift Swim combo lets you still use Drizzle for other Rain things, and still lets you Swift Swim with manually set up Rain, without removing either ability outright. In quelling the major Swift Swim threats (Kabutops, Ludicolo, and Kingdra), perhaps we also hit some Swift Swim users who weren't particularly overpowered, but it's better than outright banning those Swift Swim threats, banning your Rain inducer altogether (which would cripple every other Rain team that's not focused on Swift Swim), or banning certain combos; for the last one, in my opinion, if we start allowing certain pokemon without certain abilities or moves, that opens a can of worms for banning other combos and I don't know if that's a good idea.

Drizzle is part of Politoed now. Kyogre certainly does his job better, but that doesn't change what it is in the slightest.

I have already stated my alternative many times, including this thread: Ban Kingdra + Drizzle, Ludicolo + Drizzle, and Kabutops + Drizzle. While we're at it, we should unban Manaphy, and instead ban Manaphy + Drizzle, at least long enough to see if that would be enough.

Actually, the restrictions on Ludicolo and Kabutops might not even be necessary. It could be that all of the problems with Drizzle could be solved simply by banning Kingdra + Drizzle, and it's worth a shot. Either way, this would allow for us to solve the problems associated with Drizzle without banning or restricting any Pokemon that isn't broken, and without restricting the ones that are broken any more than we have to.

 

[XienZo]

I have already stated my alternative many times, including this thread: Ban Kingdra + Drizzle, Ludicolo + Drizzle, and Kabutops + Drizzle. While we're at it, we should unban Manaphy, and instead ban Manaphy + Drizzle, at least long enough to see if that would be enough.

Actually, the restrictions on Ludicolo and Kabutops might not even be necessary. It could be that all of the problems with Drizzle could be solved simply by banning Kingdra + Drizzle, and it's worth a shot. Either way, this would allow for us to solve the problems associated with Drizzle without banning or restricting any Pokemon that isn't broken, and without restricting the ones that are broken any more than we have to.

Why not just ban Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops altogether though?

If you include the Drizzle-part, you end up with the same problem with the current proposal, except you'll have threads called "Ability On Banning Abilities and Pokemon Combinations" instead. It has nearly the same effect without opening up the way for more complex bans.

Politoed is a top-tier support Pokemon because of Drizzle support for other players, and in Ubers, would be outclassed by Kyogre in every way. Politoed himself is nothing special, is what I meant.

Smeargle is also nothing special, it's only Sketch and the derived movesets that are top-tier. :/

 

[Lightning Tiger]

^^Id rather keep things the way they are now instead of banning those three pokes. 2x speed and x1.5 boost to water stab is just ridiculous. People really want Sealing and Quilfish to be viable that bad? Screw those guys. Besides Omastar would definitely be broken, specs rain boosted hydropump from that things is beyond retarded.

 

[Thorhammer]

Why not just ban Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops altogether though?

If you include the Drizzle-part, you end up with the same problem with the current proposal, except you'll have threads called "Ability On Banning Abilities and Pokemon Combinations" instead. It has nearly the same effect without opening up the way for more complex bans.




Smeargle is also nothing special, it's only Sketch and the derived movesets that are top-tier. :/

Because they aren't broken outside of Drizzle. Outside of Drizzle, Kingdra remains a solid OU Pokemon, and Ludicolo and Kabutops remain good UUs that are viable in OU.

The only problem with the current proposal is that it restricts Pokemon such as Quilfish and Omastar, which are not broken at all, and would be very much OU-viable if they were allowed to use Swift Swim in Drizzle. We've managed to keep the door closed against increasingly complex bans so far, and additional bans of the same complexity aren't a problem as long as they're justified.

Also, Smeargle isn't top tier.

 

[KurashiDragon]

Why not just ban Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops altogether though?

(I have a feeling you were only being sarcastic but I'm responding to it anyway)

There'd be no point though. Apart from Drizzle Kingdra and the gang really arent that useful. It's actually been proven this metagame that these pokemon need Rain to stay viable. Soon as the proposal took place these pokemon either faded from the metagame or took place on non-drizzle rain teams. There's no reason to talk about these pokemon anymore as they aren't as nearly part of the mainstream as they were last suspect round.

At the same time though it seems almost disgusting that every single Swift Swim pokes would be banned from drizzle. Floatzel is an example of an otherwise crappy (I use that term with a wierd taste in my mouth as I like Floatzel very much) pokemon with swift swim who I think would function adequately in Drizzle but wouldn't be broken. It's faster than Exadrill in sand but doesn't have viable set up options apart from bulk up to really abuse Rain so badly. How much would a +1 drizzle Waterfall do compared to a +2 earthquake?

 

[WarriorPrince]

Why not just ban Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops altogether though?

Because they aren't broken themselves. Drizzle is what makes them top-tier sweepers and without it, they are far from broken.

 

[khz]

Does Smogon even need a policy for this, and just do it on a case by case basis based on what sort of ban will be better for the metagae in each circumstance? It's not as if we've always been philosophically consistent in terms of what we do and don't do and I highly doubt a generalised policy will help the metagame in every instace where it is applied.

 

[XienZo]

Because they aren't broken outside of Drizzle. Outside of Drizzle, Kingdra remains a solid OU Pokemon, and Ludicolo and Kabutops remain good UUs that are viable in OU.

But do we care about how un-broken a pokemon is when it's used sub-optimally? When we see if a pokemon is Uber, we don't look at how powerful a sub-optimal set with sub-optimal support is. We see if the best set with the best support is broken. No one cares if a special-sweeping Groudon with rain support is OU; we look at when its performing its best when we're tiering.

The only problem with the current proposal is that it restricts Pokemon such as Quilfish and Omastar, which are not broken at all, and would be very much OU-viable if they were allowed to use Swift Swim in Drizzle.

Agreed.

We've managed to keep the door closed against increasingly complex bans so far, and additional bans of the same complexity aren't a problem as long as they're justified.

"Justified" is subjective, though, and doesn't actually place any concrete bounds on what bans can and can't be proposed.

Also, Smeargle isn't top tier.

I meant relatively top tier compared to a non-Sketching version.

 

[PIABox]

Specific combinations are a bit much, they make it too complex and too hard to keep track of. I know that if the list starts to get lengthy I won't know all of them off by hand. I'm sure a lot of people will be like that. Not to mention a lot of other sites complain about the Smogon tiers as it is, other sites are making their own lists(even Serebii is working on one) and by making ours over-complicated we're going to push people away and with all of the other options nowadays we can expect another list to gain popularity. One thing you have to admit is that the reason Smogon got it's initial popularity is because it was the only real metagame around. Now there's the threat of losing our popularity and we're just pushing people away more and more. I personally have decided to just switch to VGC until all of this settles, it's getting ridiculous and is too hard to keep track of.

Just an opinion.

 

[Thorhammer]

But do we care about how un-broken a pokemon is when it's used sub-optimally? When we see if a pokemon is Uber, we don't look at how powerful a sub-optimal set with sub-optimal support is. We see if the best set with the best support is broken. No one cares if a special-sweeping Groudon with rain support is OU; we look at when its performing its best when we're tiering.

Agreed.

"Justified" is subjective, though, and doesn't actually place any concrete bounds on what bans can and can't be proposed.

I meant relatively top tier compared to a non-Sketching version.

According to Aldaron's proposal, we do. That is to say, if using a Pokemon optimally means using it in a specific permanent weather, we care how un-broken it is outside of permanent weather. As long as Aldaron's proposal stands, that is a fact.

Alright then. So is there a better way you suggest to address that issue?

Whether or not a ban is justified is always subjective, and for that reason, it is always argued. These specific complex bans are no different from any other bans in that respect.

 

[XienZo]

According to Aldaron's proposal, we do. That is to say, if using a Pokemon optimally means using it in a specific permanent weather, we care how un-broken it is outside of permanent weather. As long as Aldaron's proposal stands, that is a fact.

And Aldaron's proposal stands on the assumption that weather can't be treated like anything else. But it CAN be treated like any other support.

Alright then. So is there a better way you suggest to address that issue?

Simply suspect test Kingdra, Kabutops, and Ludicolo. Just like how we've resolved every other suspect threat without any need to go through all of this complex ban fiasco. Rain Dance Kingdra / Rain Dish Ludicolo / w/e Kabutops are just suboptimal sets that aren't competitive.

Whether or not a ban is justified is always subjective, and for that reason, it is always argued. These specific complex bans are no different from any other bans in that respect.

Of course, with that being the main problem; they take as long of a time to resolve as any other ban. However, there are FAR more possibilities of complex bans that could be proposed and legitimately argued, each of which would consume more time and resources.

IIRC, Aldaron created his proposal to simply allow players to calm down so they wouldn't become ban-happy and ban Drizzle. His proposal isn't necessarily and end-all solution. While it could, in the end, be the best idea, when the proposal was implemented, the overall debate was far from finished.

 

[Nanoswine]

According to Aldaron's proposal, we do. That is to say, if using a Pokemon optimally means using it in a specific permanent weather, we care how un-broken it is outside of permanent weather. As long as Aldaron's proposal stands, that is a fact.

Alright then. So is there a better way you suggest to address that issue?

Whether or not a ban is justified is always subjective, and for that reason, it is always argued. These specific complex bans are no different from any other bans in that respect.

No. According to Aldaron's proposal, we only care if the complexity exception (which allows us to go against such policies) applies. Fortunately, it cannot in the current metagame because none of the weathers are imbalanced. So unless people suddenly have a mass turnaround and begin to believe that one of the weathers is imbalanced, for all intents and purposes we don't care about a Pokemon being used sub-optimally.

 

[TheValkyries]

According to Aldaron's proposal, we do. That is to say, if using a Pokemon optimally means using it in a specific permanent weather, we care how un-broken it is outside of permanent weather. As long as Aldaron's proposal stands, that is a fact.

No, no, no, no, no.

Aldaron's proposal was at it's very core a meeting half-way between those who wanted to ban Swift Swim, and those who wanted to ban Drizzle, because each party felt their ability was the cause of the problem. Aldaron came in and said that each part requires the other to hit this broken status (A status I still question) and therefore the combination should be broken. He then goes on to say that the proposal can't create a slippery slope because the way Weather abilities interact is vastly different from normal abilities.

NEVER did he say that we should care about a Pokemon's viability outside of weather. Not ONCE did he mention that we should ignore the exceptions to his rule. If a Pokemon is broken with it's best set and with the best support, and other Pokemon with extremely similar components is not broken, why the hell are we banning the components, and not the individual broken Pokemon?

 

[Thorhammer]

No, no, no, no, no.

Aldaron's proposal was at it's very core a meeting half-way between those who wanted to ban Swift Swim, and those who wanted to ban Drizzle, because each party felt their ability was the cause of the problem. Aldaron came in and said that each part requires the other to hit this broken status (A status I still question) and therefore the combination should be broken. He then goes on to say that the proposal can't create a slippery slope because the way Weather abilities interact is vastly different from normal abilities.

NEVER did he say that we should care about a Pokemon's viability outside of weather. Not ONCE did he mention that we should ignore the exceptions to his rule. If a Pokemon is broken with it's best set and with the best support, and other Pokemon with extremely similar components is not broken, why the hell are we banning the components, and not the individual broken Pokemon?

The more and more you post about Aldaron's Proposal, the more I think that you actually have never read it with any significant comprehension.

I have read Aldaron's proposal many times, and from all angles. I found no reason whatsoever why banning Swift Swim + Drizzle would be a more appropriate response to the problem than banning Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops + Drizzle - not there, nor in any post anyone else has made discussing the subject.

If you believe you know of such reasoning, please share it, as it would be the only thing that has any relevance in favor of your argument. Nothing in your post has stated anything to that effect.

 

[XienZo]

I have read Aldaron's proposal many times, and from all angles. I found no reason whatsoever why banning Swift Swim + Drizzle would be a more appropriate response to the problem than banning Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops + Drizzle - not there, nor in any post anyone else has made discussing the subject.

If you believe you know of such reasoning, please share it, as it would be the only thing that has any relevance in favor of your argument. Nothing in your post has stated anything to that effect.

What about suspect testing Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops instead of either of the complex bans?

 

[Thorhammer]

What about suspect testing Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops instead of either of the complex bans?

That's another alternative, and I would still support it over the current arrangement.

However, the only reason for it to be an option is if the principles of Aldaron's proposal are rejected, which does not appear to be the case here. PR has accepted the principles of Aldaron's proposal once; it's certainly possible that, given the chance to vote on it again, they might turn around and reject them. But there's no reason to assume that will happen until it does.

 

[taziathegreat]

that brings up a question

Manaphy wasn't broken outside of the rain at least to me, so why was he banned ? Because of hydration (which should of caused several other bans)

What about manaphy made it different then kingdra or kabutops in the rain ?

 

[Thorhammer]

that brings up a question

Manaphy wasn't broken outside of the rain at least to me, so why was he banned ? Because of hydration (which should of caused several other bans)

What about manaphy made it different then kingdra or kabutops in the rain ?

It shouldn't have been banned. Not outside of Drizzle, at least.

But that's the second part of the matter. The first part is removing the restrictions on the Pokemon that were never broken under any conditions.

 

[taziathegreat]

So basically we have two different rulings for pretty much the same sitiuation.

One where it was banned out right
One where it was limited


So either AP needs to get more complex and include manaphy or kingdra kabutops and possible ludicolo need to be banned as well.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

You do realize people may have voted for Manaphy to be banned because they believed it was broken even outside of Rain, or abusing the opponent's Drizzle, right...

 

[Thorhammer]

You do realize people may have voted for Manaphy to be banned because they believed it was broken even outside of Rain, or abusing the opponent's Drizzle, right...

Some people may have voted for that reason, but there is no indication that a majority of the people voted based on that view.

At the very least, we should test allowing Manaphy into OU with Manaphy + Drizzle banned. The most dangerous thing it could do previously was HydraRest, which is impossible to do to anywhere near the same effectiveness without Drizzle. If it runs Rest regardless, which is unlikely, it'll do well against opposing Drizzle teams, but that's an issue they'll need to deal with. Just like how performance against Stall alone was not enough reason to ban Reuniclus, performance against Drizzle alone is not enough reason to ban Manaphy.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

Swift Swim+Drizzle made entire teams broken; Manaphy+Drizzle only makes Manaphy broken.

 

[Nanoswine]

I have read Aldaron's proposal many times, and from all angles. I found no reason whatsoever why banning Swift Swim + Drizzle would be a more appropriate response to the problem than banning Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops + Drizzle - not there, nor in any post anyone else has made discussing the subject.

If you believe you know of such reasoning, please share it, as it would be the only thing that has any relevance in favor of your argument. Nothing in your post has stated anything to that effect.

All bans are arbitrary to some extent, but trying and pick out the individual Pokemon that "break" weather would just be too much. How do we know Kabutops would be broken without Kingdra and Ludicolo to back it up? Outside of doing numerous rounds of testing, we can't possibly know. And once we sort those three out, what if SD Qwilfish is too much to handle as well?

Sure SwSw Luvdisc isn't broken, but do we really have to spend 3 or more rounds of testing just to draw the (extremely arbitrary) line between the "broken" Swift Swimmers and the balanced ones? Given the fact that we already have a system in place that works incredibly well, I would say no. Pretty much every ban we have in place could be mediated with the outcome being a metagame that is arguably "better," but seeing as the bans that are in place already work it's not worth the effort.

 

[TheValkyries]

Swift Swim+Drizzle made entire teams broken; Manaphy+Drizzle only makes Manaphy broken.

That's an exaggeration. Broken Pokemon made teams broken. I'm fairly certain that a Swift Swimming core of Luvdisc, Lumineon, and Mantine isn't going to be smashing it's counters and tearing teams apart.