Ladder ORAS Monotype Discussion

[Where'dTheseDucksComeFrom]

I agree with Argus and Kammi here, this is completely ridiculous no matter how you slice it you're banning one of the best pokemon and a cornerstone of a typing just because people will have difficulty processing that its part of an arguably broken core on one type and is a huge part of another?

You disregarded the public while making this decision, you hit a fairly mediocre typing for the sake of "balance" and all of this so that the tier can have a title that the majority of people dont even care about? Ghost is already having troubles as it is, banning aegi is kicking someone while they're down it does nothing to balance the meta. It does the exact opposite by making psychic, one of the most overused types, not need to worry about aegi. Getting rid of complex bans and simplifying the meta is so dumb considering that this is a strategy game at core.

tl;dr This is a step backwards in balancing the tier

 

[scpinion]

To those of you complaining about diversity in the more recent meta I encourage you to look at the usage stats on the mono site or here on smogon.

We have had 10 types over 5% usage in every month October 2015, when the philosophical change really started affecting the usage stats.

Prior to changing the tiering philosophy? It was exactly the same...

ORAS Monotype has always been centralized around a couple types. Changing our tiering philosophy did not cause centralization. It has only changed what types the meta is centralized around.

 

[Where'dTheseDucksComeFrom]

I still don't understand, what does banning aegi do to help de-centralize or balance the meta?

As far as i see, psychic and flying are still going to be top used, and ghost is gonna get kicked down a few ranks in usage even though its already pretty low

 

[BlackJak]

This is literally the job of the council. It's not suspicious that the people in charge of things make decisions. If the council decided to remove type bans to make the tier more accessible, that's entirely their prerogative. I assume somebody else will respond to this, but in the meantime what you think a council is for? On that note, while I'm not arguing for either side, how does this unbalance the metagame or make a significant change to the meta? I like Aegislash too but this seems like it's being blown way out of proportion.
edit: idm posts like the one below but attacking the council for making a decision is ridiculous

Ok sure it's the job of the council, but as stated above how come the council couldn't tell people about this decision or ask for a vote instead of banning Aegislash out of the gate for basically no current reason or discussion. It's being blown out of proportion because a staple of ghost is being gone, basically crippling ghost a bit. I'm not going to list the reasons again as why Aegi helps out ghost, you can look at my first post to bad wolf. Ghost is leading in a downward spiral from a type that got no usage in BW, to some usage in XY, to decent/better in ORAS. I completly agree with argus, Kammi, and Arifeen.

 

[Whydon]

I still don't understand, what does banning aegi do to help de-centralize or balance the meta?

This wasn't their goal. Their goal was to follow the tiering philosophy that they hope to establish for Monotype, and just as a Smogon tier in general.

I personally do not agree with this ban. An already struggling type is just going to become even weaker because it has lost one of its best 'mons. This change will only lead to more centralization of types like Psychic, Dark, Bug, Flying, and Water. I think the tiering philosophy needs to be re-thought over. Do we want an appealing metagame or a balanced metagame? An appealing metagame is, of course, a nice thing to have, but above all I think a sense of balance needs to be established first.

I honestly don't think type-only bans are that complex. I mean, I think a new person will understand what we mean by "you can use X mon on Y type, but not on Z type." Sure, it makes managing the metagame a little bit more complex, but type-only bans are what will keep Monotype balanced. All of these global bans will only deliver more power to centralizing types that already dominate the ladder and metagame.

I do agree that the council should have made this a public matter. A group of people does not make up a tier -- they represent it.

In the end, an appealing metagame is not always balanced, and honestly I can't wait for Sun and Moon to be released and hopefully balanced out Monotype a bit more, because seeing the same generic Flying/Water/Bug/Steel team at the top of the ladder is getting tiring, and something like this is what will drive newer players away.

I understand that Monotype will always be dominated by a group of types. Believe me, I'm fine with that. But I think it is unhealthy to work towards that, when rather we should be working away from a centralized metagame. Type bans are the first step towards a not-so centralized metagame. Again, maybe the future of Monotype will consistently be plagued with centralization, but at least it will be more manageable.

 

[The Immortal]

I'm completely appaled by this decision. I agree with Kammi and Argus2Spooky 100%. Diversity should always beat out complex bans or no complex bans. What makes me the most suspicious is that this decision was unanimous, how come the community couldn't have a say in such a game changing decision like that? Not to be rude, and not to sound mad, but I am very disappointed with the actions done here. I sincerely hope the decision is reconsidered. I'd rather not make a giant essay over something that's already widely implied, but I thought I should say something about this. That's all I have to say.

LOL. When one person is running Monotype, there's an issue. When a council of not three, not five, but seven very capable individuals are running Monotype, there's an issue.

My thoughts are this. Monotype has always been looked upon as a joke, partly because the way it was being ran and partly because of the community. The first part has been (or continues to be) solved by the council; however, the second part is on your shoulders. Type bans was the dumbest idea ever to exist. If there was a council back then and not one person making decisions, I highly doubt it would have ever even happened.

I guess scpinion is allowing this discussion so I'll say keep it nice and your post won't be deleted. Make snarky comments or show attitude, you'll get infracted.

 

[1 True Lycan]

LOL. When one person is running Monotype, there's an issue. When a council of not three, not five, but seven very capable individuals are running Monotype, there's an issue.

My thoughts are this. Monotype has always been looked upon as a joke, partly because the way it was being ran and partly because of the community. The first part has been (or continues to be) solved by the council; however, the second part is on your shoulders. Type bans was the dumbest idea ever to exist. If there was a council back then and not one person making decisions, I highly doubt it would have ever even happened.

I guess scpinion is allowing this discussion so I'll say keep it nice and your post won't be deleted. Make snarky comments or show attitude, you'll get infracted.

I guess I'm missing something here, why were type bans the dumbest idea to exist? Seems to me like type bans are a good way of balancing the metagame while keeping a good measure of diversity. It does make things slightly more complicated but in all honesty I don't think it is so difficult to learn.

 

[DEG]

Since we're allowing discussion let me voice my opinion here and explain my side;

It's probably time to revise Monotype's banning philosophy to create a more balanced environment. First weeks it was implemented the philosophy was kind of controversial, side that liked it and side that didn't want that to happen. I think it's still a mistake. First months, everything was fine with new banlist and philosophy, but later, everything changed. I was a fan of such decision but the more I dived deeper the move I found problems and how it fissured the metagame slowly slowly.

Starting with Type-bans. Two month ago we attended the suspect of Mega Sableye, and this time it's Hoopa-Unbound's turn. Both are seem broken by a party and not broken by another party but what makes the conflict noisier is the fact that both of these Pokemon aren't broken in one type but are broken in another due to team support and what it brings to the type, short story long bad decisions were taken just because Ghost needed it, even though it's a reckoning force on dark and should be banned. On the other hand, Aegislash is not banned in Monotype for some unknown reasons. Ghost is already a good type with Mega Sableye and we can all agree, I fail to see how why is Aegislash given an exception but not Mega Sableye or Hoopa-Unbound? .Type-Bans are only complicating stuff for the only reason that global bans make thing easier, but that's like saying let's fix the hole on that team but keeps the other one open and get wider. I know that stuff like this are in the council's hand and they don't like being talked talked about but it's time to open our eyes and see that we are doing more harm than good. I know that you want to get closer for being an official tier but would that even be realizable if we do not balance the tier in our own method instead of following the traditional one that doesn't even work in OMs? Before getting interested in the philosophy, let's not forget that Monotype is an OM, a kind of restricted field that mean it needs more complex banning more than the official tiers. In official tiers, a team can contain a mix of types, a plethora of Pokemon that can be used but that isn't the case in Monotype where a team is limited to the same type and use Pokemon to patch their weakness. On another hand, I believe it was decided because of newcomers being able to adapt better if there's no type-bans, well that's probably right but it's not healthy for the metagame and wouldn't attract them more. I don't see how hard is it to understand that X is banned in Y-Type but not in Z-Type, that helps in creating a more diverse metagame and a less dull one. How would a newcomer feel if all he sees on ladder are the same 3 types with the same Pokemon repeating themselves just because they have overpowered Pokemon that aren't banned because a lower tier type would suffer before of it, or because such type has better Pokemon than the other type. And with no type-bans we are only hurting the lower tiered type and not even hitting the high tiered type effectively since they have a plethora of Pokemon that can replace it, that's why in the first place it's a High tiered type. How can removing boulders from our metagame make it better? How can we make a our tier more fun and diverse by either allowing top tier types overpowered Pokemon and let low tier types suffer?

Secondly, the banning philosophy isn't explained correctly. On one side you suspect what 6-0s types on the other hand you do it because the Pokemon is ''unpredictable'' and has a good matchup against some Pokemon. What was even the reason of suspecting Hoopa-Unbound, if it doesn't 6-0s types and doesn't create unfair advantage against a plethora of types, was it just to nerf psychic? And if we're following the first philosophy, I fail to see how Pokemon such as Mega Gyarados which destroys just like Mega Altaria types (Ground-, Rock-, Fire-, Ghost-, Psychic-) isn't charged guilty? Even if it's predictable, wasn't mega altaria also predictable? What about Mega Pinsir? It's just a second Talonflame. The banning philosophy should be more clarified because if we follow it, we will see a lot of Pokemon that fits the criteria.

If we need to witness a more diverse metagame, a more balanced metagame and even get closer to being an official tier we need to change our banning philosophy because it's contradicting itself. We have to allow Type-Bans for a more fun metagame, it sure wouldn't be too hard to adapt.

 

[The Immortal]

I guess I'm missing something here, why were type bans the dumbest idea to exist? Seems to me like type bans are a good way of balancing the metagame while keeping a good measure of diversity. It does make things slightly more complicated but in all honesty I don't think it is so difficult to learn.

Being difficult to understand isn't the issue. Let me give you a comparison. Type bans in Monotype is equivalent to banning a Pokemon on a certain playstyle in standard. For example, how do you think players would react to Mega Sableye being banned from only stall teams? It's a joke. Monotype isn't a joke; Monotype can be great. I get that such a ban would make the meta more balanced; however, it's below the threshold of reasonability. The community needs to change its mindset. Instead of treating Monotype as a joke, they need to treat it with the same respect the council and the OM Leaders / Smogon are treating it.

Complex bans are fine in very special cases. This isn't a complex ban. It's much much worse.

ANYWAY, you should probably discuss Monotype instead of responding to me. This thread is derailed enough. Feel free to pm me on PS! if you have a response.

 

[Funbot28]

I get that this decision was put it in place so that Monotype can grow into an official tier and thats fine and all, but unlike the usage base tiers (ie: OU, UU, RU, etc...) that dislike complex bans such as banning Speed Boost on Blaziken and such, having type bans does not equate to that complexity imo. When playing Mono, you have to take into consideration the viability of the mon on both types and I don't feel it should just be combined as one to determine whether or not the mon is broken. When I voted on the Mega Sableye suspect, I felt that it was a bit OP on Dark, but not that broken (but rather essential) on Ghost, and I felt torn when I had to submit my vote, so I voted DNB because there was no option to just ban it on Dark. Same could be applied to Hoopa-U currently (OP on Psychic but iffy on Dark). I believe it is more vital to distinct the different viability of mons according to the type they are being used in to determine their effectiveness, rather then using the current system that does not take that into consideration just to be clean and "more official".

Edit: TI's post contradicts mine, oh boy :)

 

[Azelea]

Since i will probably get infracted if i even say a word about type bans, ill leave that topic alone. Im here to talk about how the new ban of Aegislash effects ghost type and monotype as a whole.

If i would have to describe how this new ban effects Ghost with a one word it would be: Demolished. There is no way around the fact that Ghost just got destroyed. A solid middle tier type just turned in to a bottom tier one. Aegislash was really a vital part of every ghost mono and there is really nothing that can replace it. Doublade will probably rise in usage but its no Aegislash. I could also see Ghost turn into a more defensive type, since most of the doublades are going to be defensive anyways. I could also see Shedinja rise in usage since it works well on defensive teams.

Monotype as whole changes a bit. Ghost of course will go down in usage a lot (maybe bottom 3). Psychic will rise EVEN more in usage which is amazing am i right? Totally not tired of seeing a psychic team every single time when i click search. but hey just me! This again will most likely result in poison and fighting going down in usage, creating a even BIGGER gap between the top types and bottom tier types.

What comes to positives about this change.. idk really. Maybe we wont have that question about; "Why is Aegi allowed on Ghost" anymore. So if you hated answering that question or are a psychic user, You're in luck!

 

[Whydon]

I don't think the Aegislash ban will do much other than let Psychic rise and Ghost fall to maybe even Grass or Electric levels in terms of usability. Psychic obviously gets a huge buff since it no longer has to worry about dealing with it, since Psychic's best answer to it was probably SubVictini or something like that, or AV Meloetta.

 

[DoW]

I had a rough day today, it would have been nice to just sit down with a beer and a pizza and play pokemon as I often do. But today, I've been attacked by multiple people for making a decision that I stand by, and it seems that many people don't understand our (or at least, my) thought process behind the decision.

I have a few points to make.

Firstly, the initial backlash. As I pointed out in the mono council chat, "People are never happy with any decision we make ever". Look at when we made the major update, removing the majority of type-bans:

I might finish this post after I've cried for a few hours. In my opinion (not that it's ever going to matter) it's way too much way too quickly, makes psychic incredibly powerful, hugely cripples bug, and brings back stalling flying. I see it as going against the old philosophy of creating a fair meta-game where diversity is encouraged, creating an even wider gulf between the better and worse types, and it's just sad things like for the sake of 'going by an ethos', banning damp and smooth rock on other types in my opinion is only discouraging creativity even more, because no-one can claim that something like a sandstorm steel or a rain dragon is broken. Oh well, I'm sure it suits alot of people other than myself. v_v

Do you think psychic is incredibly powerful? That bug is unusable? Is Stall Flying OP?
Right now, the tier is pretty damn balanced, compared to how it's been in the past. And more than that, we've got our own subforum. Some people still disagree with the decision, perhaps, but I think it's pretty clear the overall opinion that we were doing something wrong is gone. It happens pretty much whatever we do, the amount of arguments I made over Talonflame at the time is just insane tbh. And I'd be amazed if this wasn't the same.

Next, I'd like to bring up the following point: The mono council doesn't agree on much. For example, there was some very heated debate over whether to suspect M-Sab. We had a lot of argument over the tiering philosophy, and the original removal of type-bans. Pretty much whatever it is, there'll be some level of disagreement and discussion, be it what to suspect, what our tiering philosophy is, who we want to replace someone in the council, etc.
I'd also like to put forward this point: That the council is comprised of intelligent, unbiased people who want what's best for monotype as a whole.
When we put these two things together, and see that despite this there was a 7/7 agreement on banning aegi within a very short timeframe, I think you have to understand that "But I think it's silly" isn't that great an argument. We have reasons for what we're doing, so please at least try to understand our explanations before flaming us for those decisions.

Finally, onto the type-bans, and aegi in particular. Ghost isn't exactly the greatest type in any case, AFAIK it hasn't been used in monopl and while it was neat for ghost to have it, I'm honestly unconvinced that it makes a large impact on the tier as a whole. That said, it not making much difference isn't a reason to ban it, so onto the real point here:
The reason we got rid of type bans was that they are complex. Yes, mono is different from other tiers, but that doesn't stop them from being complex. No, we don't dislike complex bans because we think you all have a mental age of two and a half. If you want a whole argument on complex bans, feel free to take a trip down to Policy Review and dig up some of the old threads there, there's plenty of discussion.
Now, what will we gain from getting rid of type-bans? Well, the tier's position within smogon, really. Monotype keep its room on Showdown? Can't argue with that. Monotype part of OMGS? Yes please. Monotype get its own subforum? Monotype actually start to become respected by people on smogon? Get more good players coming in because they realise it can actually be a fun meta? Quite frankly, if you're arguing that aegi on ghost is more important than this progression of mono being accepted by smogon then I don't see where you're coming from.

Anyway, that's my long, rambling, drunken post out the way. Please attack these points if you want to continue flaming me ^_^

 

[Eien]

I think this highlights the problem with how suspects are being discussed. The problem, and something I had been internally struggling with for the Hoopa-U suspect, is how much the collateral types should weigh in on banning.

I would like to quote the tiering philosophy: "2. Ban elements of the metagame that are broken, uncompetitive, or unhealthy." And noted under this point is: "Included in this is the mindset that some matchups are going to be skewed and some types are going to be bad because of the inherent game mechanics such as: the type chart, priority move distribution/weakness, stat distribution among types, number of viable 'mons, and so on."

This makes it clear the goal is not to have all types be usable and that some types simply will be inferior. Relying on Pokemon like Aegislash and Mega-Sableye, one Pokemon considered broken and the other unhealthy, to make one type viable reflects poorly on us. Further, this is a type that is at always in the bottom 3rd of usage and has some of the worst matchup numbers. The philosophy is not to make eighteen types viable, but to ensure no one type is overpowered. Why are we introducing Pokemon that are known to be bad for the metagame just for this one type?

That's not to say collateral shouldn't be avoided and minimized or that certain types should not be viable at all, but at what point is it that the collateral is not enough to justify keeping unhealthy elements of our metagame? I think complex bans are more a sign of an undeveloped tier that refuses to try to adapt and analyze.

While complex bans inherently lead to a more balanced metagame by construction, they feel like a lazy way out and are a go-to when we don't want to think harder. Early discussion on Hoopa-U's suspect was filled with a desire to type-ban it, instead of discussing its actual qualities on Psychic and Dark. During the Mega-Sableye suspect, there was even some talk about complex banning Sablenite only when it was used with Calm Mind. That's not a sign of a balanced and strong tier. People ended up voting no ban on Mega-Sableye because of Ghost. This type is apparently a repeat offender when it comes to disrupting balancing. Not to say that making Ghost an even weaker type is a good thing, but we are giving it a truly ridiculous amount of control over our actions considering this is a bottom usage type.

I think being a tier that can make cost/reward decisions and continue to abide by our own tiering philosophy makes us all the more legitimate. Keeping around an exception that puts a hole into our philosophy and introduces discussion of more exceptions is clearly against any goal for any tier. Further weakening Ghost's presence in the metagame might make us seem unprofessional, but I would argue failing to uphold our own philosophy uniformly and weakening our own metagame's legitimacy for the sake of that type is the worse choice.

 

[Ridley]

With the recent queries on type bans and Aegislash's unique status in our metagame resurfacing all across this forum (and in the council's pm boxes), the council decided to vote on how we would like for the metagame to move forward. I don't think any of us are excited to announce this, but it is clear we need to remove the inconsistencies in the philosophy and banlist.

The council unanimously voted to continue with the policy of no type-only bans in the standard Monotype metagame.

In response to this, the council unanimously voted to globally ban Aegislash to remove the final inconsistency between the banlist and tiering philoshophy. We all know Aegislash is an unhealthy presence on Steel teams from the XY metagame, so we felt a suspect test was not needed.

The ban will go into effect when the Hoopa suspect ends. i.e. If Hoopa-U is banned, the Aegi and Hoopa-U ban will be implemented at the same time.

We're announcing the change early so the queries about type bans will have a definitive response. Also, the early announcement allows everyone a chance to discuss how these changes will affect the ORAS meta moving forward so the suspect voters in the Hoopa-U suspect may make an informed decision.

Votes

Acast: No type bans
All Falls Down: No type bans
Anttya: No type bans
Barian: No type bans
Death on Wings: No type bans
Paleo: No type bans
scpinion: No type bans

Acast: Ban Aegislash globally
All Falls Down: Ban Aegislash globally
Anttya: Ban Aegislash globally
Barian: Ban Aegislash globally
Death on Wings: Ban Aegislash globally
Paleo: Ban Aegislash globally
scpinion: Ban Aegislash globally
Acast: Ban after Hoopa-U suspect
All Falls Down: Ban after Hoopa-U suspect
Anttya: Ban after Hoopa-U suspect
Barian: Ban after Hoopa-U suspect
Death on Wings: Ban after Hoopa-U suspect
Paleo: Ban Immediately
scpinion: Ban Immediately

Does this mean that we can ban Mega Sableye to nerf Dark now that Ghost is already completely unusable with the Aegislash ban???

 

[scpinion]

Does this mean that we can ban Mega Sableye to nerf Dark now that Ghost is already completely unusable with the Aegislash ban???

A couple people have asked about this. In the long run, I'm not opposed because I think some people would vote differently. However, I'd rather focus on the hoopa suspect and how that will shape the metagame for now.

Just my thoughts, not the councils.

 

[Isza]

I believe I am the only council member that has yet to respond to this thread. Its about time I did, I'll make this short because I have to leave in a few:

As you can see in the votes, yes I was one of the council members who voted ban on Aegislash. However earlier (about a few weeks ago) I stated in this post http://www.smogon.com/forums/thread...week-1-pk-kaiser-barian.3565253/#post-6675241 that the only type ban I supported was Aegislash. Seems like a bit of a contradiction, so why did I vote towards an Aegislash ban? This is because of the fact, that removing type bans were never anything new. In fact this was all stated during the time period in which Gallade and a few others got dropped, it's just that Aegislash was the 1 exception, because keeping it or removing throws the meta out of wack. I agree on the fact that removing type bans would be greater overall for the future of Monotype, as for moving foward, slowly drifting from an Other Meta to something even more someday maybe! Who wouldn't want something like that? Closer to other tiers, things like our suspects would count towards a badge, all the things Scpinion mentioned in his previous post. However....


I have to side with the community on this 1. Monotype is unique, and it's not like other tiers so the same philosophy does not fit. Monotype NEEDS type bans to function well. removing type bans in general is not healthy for Monotype, and makes the metagame more centralizing. I understand the councils logic in the risk/Reward over Monotype moving foward>Aegislash. I get it completely, but it's not the way to go, not with this format at least.

Last but not least, I would like to say sorry for anyone who has asked me more on my input earlier and never got a solid answer. This topic was a little overwhelming over all and I had other stuff to deal with and I was just really out of it. Not really an excuse I know but yea.

Conclusion? Type bans need to stay in order for the metagame to be balanced, healthy, and most of all, fun! After all that's what we all play for right? Keeping type bans keeps us in the "OM' category, but if even the better player base of players don't really care about that, then that says something. I am in FAVOR of type bans, for a healthier, and happier meta.

(Sorry for any bad spelling on mobile)

 

[DoW]

Ok guys, we had our week or so of open discussion, so the council are going to return to setting a topic periodically. As always, you can still pm the council as a group if you would like to discuss something with us or suggest a topic for future discussion.

New topic is just going to be the Hoopa suspect test, so we're going to lock this thread until the suspect is over. Discussion on the test should occur in the suspect test thread.

 

[scpinion]

The February usage stats are up on the Monotype Website. Note that Smogon now tiers mega-evolutions separately from their base form.

Pokemon usage stats and sprite gallery: http://monotypeps.weebly.com/sprite-gallery.html
Type Matchup Table and Imbalanced Matchups: http://monotypeps.weebly.com/matchup-tables.html
Metagame Trends/Type Analyses/Lead Information: http://monotypeps.weebly.com/type-analyses.html

As always, make sure to let me know if you need any help understanding something, or if you find any bugs!

I'm going to open this thread back up for discussion on the usage stats. Please stay on topic.

 

[Dece1t]

Looking at the stats I don't see huge changes other than Psychic rising in usage. I also noticed some mons used in a few Core Challenges rose a fair amount. Looks balanced atm, I don't rly have much more to comment about it.

 

[Wanka]

I've always been a firm believer in ground being the best mid tier type and I was pleased to see all of the green in the matchup table. At a glance it seems to have picked the most type advantages with 7 green slots and only recorded 1 poor matchup which was against water. Now, obviously stats aren't everything and ground still struggles with some things that may not be prominent in the matchup table. fighting will always be an uphill battle against keldeo and breloom and psy will also be pretty challenging against mew without camel. But needless to say, it is a pretty underrated type that is extremely effective against a majority of the meta so I was really pleased to see how well it did on the table.

 

[sceeeeeenes]

I've always been a firm believer in ground being the best mid tier type and I was pleased to see all of the green in the matchup table. At a glance it seems to have picked the most type advantages with 7 green slots and only recorded 1 poor matchup which was against water. Now, obviously stats aren't everything and ground still struggles with some things that may not be prominent in the matchup table. fighting will always be an uphill battle against keldeo and breloom and psy will also be pretty challenging against mew without camel. But needless to say, it is a pretty underrated type that is extremely effective against a majority of the meta so I was really pleased to see how well it did on the table.

Thundurus/Mega gyra/gliscor cause ground issues too

 

[Azelea]

Poison dropping from the 9th most used type spot to bottom 3 with only 0.03% difference to rock. Like huh?? Did we have a poison CC in January or something because this is a huge drop in usage. Psychic taking the top spot isn’t really a suprise. Probably will go up even more because of the Aegi ban. Steel rising is a suprise to me. Looking at the sprite gallery it clearly seems that the type is going to more offensive direction.

 

[Jyph]

Pretty sure they did a ladder thing for the lower tier types in January, which is why poison was so high up in the first place

 

[scpinion]

Steel rising is a suprise to me. Looking at the sprite gallery it clearly seems that the type is going to more offensive direction.

Steel going this offensive is a surprise to me too. It looks like there are 2 offensive builds that are trumping the bulkier teams. I wouldn't be surprised if someone brings back some of the old hazard stack + Bish (+ Doublade) with a bulky Skarm and Ferro/Emp. That stuff was good and I don't think the meta has changed enough to invalidate the build.