It's kind of ridiculous how adamantly you defend your Mence opinion. Always ready to jump on an opposing opinion. Wasn't this type of thing for the Council Thread?Honestly, that is really bad logic and I'm glad people like you don't get to influence tiering decisions.
We saw two instances in which Pokemon had to sacrifice themselves to beat Salamence, both of which are easily prevented with a switch. Explosion killing Salamence doesn't make it balanced. Using a nearly-dead Pokemon's Intimidate to nullify a DD's attack boost doesn't mean Salamence isn't destroying teams on a regular basis. This battle does not gage Salamence's tiering position in any way, and it definitely doesn't refute the years of experience players have accrued to determine that it was indeed overpowering the standard metagame.
The thing is, I don't think that the majority of players would have played Salamence the same in that situation, which is why there is discussion about how things went.It's kind of ridiculous how adamantly you defend your Mence opinion. Always ready to jump on an opposing opinion. Wasn't this type of thing for the Council Thread?
Anyway, excellent warstory.
No, the warstory illustrates salamence isn't broken if players say it illustrates their experiences and they agree he isn't broken. Salamence being "meh" is my personal opinion, which again is obvious by my use of "meh," a value judgement phrase.So this battle illustrates that Salamence isn't broken because this one dude had a max Sp. Def Heatran with a Shuca Berry lying around just to suicide itself on Salamence? Or because the other dude had a dying Gyarados with Intimidate so he wouldn't OHKO his Machamp the second it got in? lol
If Salamence was "meh", as you put it, it wouldn't even be a suspect. Maybe everyone else is wrong and we should all play our games like this?