This honestly should've been banned months ago because it's just straight up cheese, but there has to be an overwhelming outcry from the community for any sort of action to happen because the council will not just wake up one day and decide to vote on a quickban for Quick Claw if there isn't any noise.
That one Quick Claw team from Home was popping off which sparked this debate and never again. It just hides in the shadows before the council has time to react.
Hold up, we might finally have found an actual viable corviknight set
You can't say "Whether it's on cart or not is irrelevant" and "Smogon's tiering policy states that the goal is to remain as close to cart as possible"; those are two statements that are factually incompatible with each other. You haven't refuted this - there is no "minimum number" established nor is there a provision that allows for modification of the simulator because "people like it". And btw, "as close to cart as possible" would be exactly replicated cart mechanics - to imply this is outside the realm of possibility is absurd. According to the interpretation you provided, there is no justification to including it. It easily opens up the door to other modifications. So while there is no burden of proof to suggest that correctly simulating the cart mechanics is more competitive than modding it (& it's quite ridiculous to suggest that there is), the solution for anyone worried would be pretty simple. Sleep moves have already been problematic in multiple generations even with the sleep mod so I don't think banning them makes the game worse. As for freeze, the chances of getting multiple freezes in a single battle is miniscule. There are far more likely RNG-based events that will turn a battle in favor of the previously losing player far more often. Of course, if you continue to think the idea that playing with correct cart mechanics is irrelevant, I would press you to elaborate on why you think this.
Thats not a bad idea tbh. Ice/electric coverage is at a premium sans ice spinner on tusk which does nothing, so it could do quite well. I'll try it out
, another arguably overpowered mon. It should really be the 7 brokens
and 
, but I'd also put 
here since I saw somebody say a big reason you need to run boots on non ho-offence is because you get smashed by webs otherwise. Not sure if this is true, but I thought I'd mention it.
I've been thinking a lot about why it's so hard to find a good direction for balancing the current metagame. Because while there is a lot of consensus that the metagame is in a bad spot, there is a lot of argumentation on what the cause of the problem is, and hence what is the correct course of action. Pretty much any set of suspects or quickbans in any order would raise more complaints then consensus. Admittedly, I'm not a great player, so everything I'm about to say is a parroting of various more experienced player's opinions (whose forum posts I have read).
I think this dynamic of "what is the real issue" is highlighted in the current roaring moon suspect. Most people admit moon is strong, rather centralizing, and isn't some sort of keystone holding the meta together. But there is still a sizeable DNB camp, and all of their arguments seem to fall back either explicitly or implicitly on the idea that moon isn't the core issue. Some variant of, "sure, moon is strong, but it's only conditionally strong because the meta is broken/over-centralized due to X." I'd say this is a valid line of reasoning because of the current state of the meta.
Usually suspects are pretty linear. Most of SS's suspects were fairly clear cut before and after scenarios (is the meta more or less centralized without Urshifu-S or not? Vote accordingly). Even when there were multiple overpowered threats at a time, it seemed pretty straightforward to test them one at a time since their broken-ness didn't seem contingent on anything else. This is not true in SV, and I'd argue the main reason SV feels so hard to fix is because there are three core architypes of broken that each contribute differently to the over-centralized nature of the tier, and each must be dealt with mostly independent of the other tiers.
Those different architypes are as follows.
The Three Axis of Evil in SV OU
1. The 6 Brokens
The six brokens are
These are the Pokemon that may be broken in the traditional sense. Too strong, too fast, too low opportunity cost, too difficult to reliably check, etc. You may disagree that all or any of these are strong to the point of being banworthy, at least by themselves. Or you may argue some other pokemon not listed needs to be banned as well. The point I'm trying to make here is that there are at least 6 pokemon I have seen or heard at least one good player want banned/suspected or eventually banned/suspected. At the same time, for each of these pokemon there is a sizeable contingent of players who will vouch for them to remain in SV OU, even kingambit.
2. Hazard Stacking
The main culprits are
This is pretty straightforward. As the argument goes, hazard stacking is so strong that you must run HO to prevent spikes and make games short or run boots fat to ignore spikes because hazard control is so bad. Since we can't add more hazard control, we should ban the setter or the blocker to alleviate hazard pressure.
3. Tera
Banning tera is actually talked about a lot less now than it was before DLC 1, but the point still stands that a tera ban or restriction could make a lot of the 6 Brokens and maybe even a couple of banned pokemon balanced again.
Why it Matters (And why fixing SV is so complicated)
The reason I split the broken elements of the metagame into these three categories is to illustrate that there are three fundamentally different forces that could be the cause of SV OU's centralization. And one of the reasons its so hard to balance is because nobody knows which one to prioritize first. For example, most people would say ban Kingambit, but a fair few people don't want a Kingambit suspect and instead want a tera one, with teras ban removing the necessity to ban Kingambit. Some people want the hazard elements gone first to see if balance is still chocked out of existence without constant hazard pressure, and if it isn't perhaps most of the 6 brokens don't need to be banned. And some want most or all of the six brokens banned, because maybe then there will be more opportunities to spin and thus hazards won't be so oppressive. There is no objective or clear right answer about what to prioritize, complicating matters.
What makes matters worse is that all three of these solutions (banning broken mons, hazards, or tera) could work. I want to emphasize that fact, because most people argue that another solutions to theirs won't lead to a balanced metagame and so we should go along with their solution. But it's also possible that banning either the brokens, or the hazards, or tera, or some combination of the three leads to a balanced and competitive metagame, entirely different than another balanced and competitive metagame that could've existed if a different combination of things had been banned. What this means is that the current suspect criteria of "is X too strong for OU" may not be sufficient for future suspects, since multiple different paths could lead to a balanced result.
I want to emphasize that everything I said in that last paragraph is ENTIRELY HYPOTHETICAL and by no means probable, but it is POSSIBLE. And I think it should be considered, because something like Gen 5 OU exists in its current state because a balanced metagame was pursued by complex banning weather as opposed to something else.
To complicate matters even further, within each of these subgroups the way in which to alleviate the problem is unclear. Tera is no simple thing to ban, since some people just want a restriction, which would alter the metagame in different ways. Banning Gholdengo versus banning Gliscor would both hurt the hazard game, but in drastically different ways. And as seen in the roaring moon suspect, there is almost no consensus on which of the six brokens is the most deserving of the next suspect, and which ones deserve a ban.
I write this post to try and put to words what I think a lot of people implicitly know about SV OU and why it's so hard to fix, hopefully so there can be a more productive forum about how to solve the Gordian knot that is this metagame.
Any critiques about my analysis are welcome, as it's hardly comprehensive and is comes from a complication of forum posts I've read rather than some tangible firsthand knowledge of the game.
Have a good day.
Valiant, Zamazenta and Sneasler... almost nobody who plays the tier thinks these guys are broken (I think sneas is dumb but I'm in a small minority). Ogerpon and Roaring Moon are the closest to brokens, but even then Ogerpon has significant flaws holding it back (very predictable, 4mss in having to be pretty mid into offense or defense, checked by grasses and dragons defensively and faster mons/prio spam offensively).The six brokens are
This, this is the best explanation for what is wrong with the DLC 1 metagame, one thing I feel should be mentioned is that we do not have enough time to properly balance this metagame. DLC2 is set to release in winter this year, which could range from end of November to anywhere in December, which given that DLC1 released mid September, gives us at minimum 3 months for this meta, 4 months if we're lucky. And we are already a month into the meta, with only 2 mons banned and potentially a third at the end of the RM suspect test. We simply do not have the time to properly address everything in the current meta before DLC2 releases. And that isn't even considering that it will take time for the community and council to think of what mon to target next.I've been thinking a lot about why it's so hard to find a good direction for balancing the current metagame. Because while there is a lot of consensus that the metagame is in a bad spot, there is a lot of argumentation on what the cause of the problem is, and hence what is the correct course of action. Pretty much any set of suspects or quickbans in any order would raise more complaints then consensus. Admittedly, I'm not a great player, so everything I'm about to say is a parroting of various more experienced player's opinions (whose forum posts I have read).
I think this dynamic of "what is the real issue" is highlighted in the current roaring moon suspect. Most people admit moon is strong, rather centralizing, and isn't some sort of keystone holding the meta together. But there is still a sizeable DNB camp, and all of their arguments seem to fall back either explicitly or implicitly on the idea that moon isn't the core issue. Some variant of, "sure, moon is strong, but it's only conditionally strong because the meta is broken/over-centralized due to X." I'd say this is a valid line of reasoning because of the current state of the meta.
Usually suspects are pretty linear. Most of SS's suspects were fairly clear cut before and after scenarios (is the meta more or less centralized without Urshifu-S or not? Vote accordingly). Even when there were multiple overpowered threats at a time, it seemed pretty straightforward to test them one at a time since their broken-ness didn't seem contingent on anything else. This is not true in SV, and I'd argue the main reason SV feels so hard to fix is because there are three core architypes of broken that each contribute differently to the over-centralized nature of the tier, and each must be dealt with mostly independent of the other tiers.
Those different architypes are as follows.
The Three Axis of Evil in SV OU
1. The 6 Brokens
The six brokens are
These are the Pokemon that may be broken in the traditional sense. Too strong, too fast, too low opportunity cost, too difficult to reliably check, etc. You may disagree that all or any of these are strong to the point of being banworthy, at least by themselves. Or you may argue some other pokemon not listed needs to be banned as well. The point I'm trying to make here is that there are at least 6 pokemon I have seen or heard at least one good player want banned/suspected or eventually banned/suspected. At the same time, for each of these pokemon there is a sizeable contingent of players who will vouch for them to remain in SV OU, even kingambit.
2. Hazard Stacking
The main culprits are
This is pretty straightforward. As the argument goes, hazard stacking is so strong that you must run HO to prevent spikes and make games short or run boots fat to ignore spikes because hazard control is so bad. Since we can't add more hazard control, we should ban the setter or the blocker to alleviate hazard pressure.
3. Tera
Banning tera is actually talked about a lot less now than it was before DLC 1, but the point still stands that a tera ban or restriction could make a lot of the 6 Brokens and maybe even a couple of banned pokemon balanced again.
Why it Matters (And why fixing SV is so complicated)
The reason I split the broken elements of the metagame into these three categories is to illustrate that there are three fundamentally different forces that could be the cause of SV OU's centralization. And one of the reasons its so hard to balance is because nobody knows which one to prioritize first. For example, most people would say ban Kingambit, but a fair few people don't want a Kingambit suspect and instead want a tera one, with teras ban removing the necessity to ban Kingambit. Some people want the hazard elements gone first to see if balance is still chocked out of existence without constant hazard pressure, and if it isn't perhaps most of the 6 brokens don't need to be banned. And some want most or all of the six brokens banned, because maybe then there will be more opportunities to spin and thus hazards won't be so oppressive. There is no objective or clear right answer about what to prioritize, complicating matters.
What makes matters worse is that all three of these solutions (banning broken mons, hazards, or tera) could work. I want to emphasize that fact, because most people argue that another solutions to theirs won't lead to a balanced metagame and so we should go along with their solution. But it's also possible that banning either the brokens, or the hazards, or tera, or some combination of the three leads to a balanced and competitive metagame, entirely different than another balanced and competitive metagame that could've existed if a different combination of things had been banned. What this means is that the current suspect criteria of "is X too strong for OU" may not be sufficient for future suspects, since multiple different paths could lead to a balanced result.
I want to emphasize that everything I said in that last paragraph is ENTIRELY HYPOTHETICAL and by no means probable, but it is POSSIBLE. And I think it should be considered, because something like Gen 5 OU exists in its current state because a balanced metagame was pursued by complex banning weather as opposed to something else.
To complicate matters even further, within each of these subgroups the way in which to alleviate the problem is unclear. Tera is no simple thing to ban, since some people just want a restriction, which would alter the metagame in different ways. Banning Gholdengo versus banning Gliscor would both hurt the hazard game, but in drastically different ways. And as seen in the roaring moon suspect, there is almost no consensus on which of the six brokens is the most deserving of the next suspect, and which ones deserve a ban.
I write this post to try and put to words what I think a lot of people implicitly know about SV OU and why it's so hard to fix, hopefully so there can be a more productive forum about how to solve the Gordian knot that is this metagame.
Any critiques about my analysis are welcome, as it's hardly comprehensive and is comes from a complication of forum posts I've read rather than some tangible firsthand knowledge of the game.
Have a good day.
Everyone who has been at least 100 meter near me knows I am of the belief Corviknight is the most overrated mon in the meta, and I genuinely believe to be a C- in OU and S+ in UU (untill dengo drops) And while BU Power trip corv is fun, I decided to try another experiment, offensive corv, and came up with this
The people are hurting for a Skarmory replacement lol
GameFreak added nearly three dozen new Pokemon with BST +550. BST isn't everything, but it goes a long way towards determining a Pokémon's overall strength especially when stats are a lot more deliberately allocated. This is on top of some truly insane signature moves and abilities. If you were to pick a generation to build a team with and only limit yourself to Pokemon that are first playable in that gen, 9 is the easy front runner for best choice. And this is all on top of the game being over all weaker since some of the best Pokemon aren't even available as well as access to some of the best moves in the game being stripped from a bunch of older Pokemon.
I don't know how to make this simpler for you. I'm sorry if I sound condescending but I laid everything out very clearly in my post, and your posts read like they're only looking at the first half of my sentences. Therefore, I'm going to elaborate on everything to make sure nothing is misunderstood.
here's the reasons why there are so many bans happening so quickly this gen:
I wouldn't call the game's power level overall weaker when so many high BST mons were introduced this gen often with minmaxed Base Stats, many with powerful signature abilities/moves/items, and this is before going into how Terastal artificially inflates the power level of the tier and has a higher impact in battle than Z-Moves did. This gen, in part due to Terastal, has notable offensive AND defensive power creep with Roaring Moon, Ogerpon-Wellspring, Gholdengo, Kingambit, Walking Wake, an improved Manaphy, Iron Moth, Great Tusk, a buffed Gliscor, nerfed Zamazenta-Hero, Ting-Lu, Sneasler, Cinderace freed due to a nerf, Samurott-Hisui, Enamorus, Glimmora, Dondozo, Garganacl, Skeledirge, Clodsire, Ceruledge, Sandy Shocks, Ursaluna, Meowscarada, and even a buffed Alomomola alongside other mons with more niche uses.
I really appreciate you highlighting this. I think when people talk about "Oh shit, there's been so many bans in Gen 9, things must be worse than EVER" they're... kind of right admittedly, but I guarantee if SV dropped ten years ago we would only have half the banlist we do now. No disrespect to the efforts of prior councils, but that way of doing things would absolutely not work now, and the fact that we've been able to ban so much problematic stuff is a sign of things working as well as they can. Bit of a positive mindset to keep and all that.
When I say weaker I mean as a result of the number of Pokemon. The more of any game pieces you add into a system the more it raises the power level and with half of all Pokemon missing from Gen 9, including TONS of extremely powerful ones such as Megas or Ultra Beasts, the power level we have now can easily be raised. As I said, this generation probably introducing the strongest collective of Pokemon of any generation and when they don't need to compete with the best stuff from earlier generations it only makes things even more problematic.
After trying to make NG Weezing-G work for the longest time, I agree that Levitate fits the meta more. However, I feel that there has to be some sort of combination that can turn NG Weezing-G into a dedicated Gliscor counter, maybe SubProtect with Air Balloon? How do you feel about it? Neutralizing Gas shutting down Poison Heal feels HUGE, although it might not be.As usual I'd like to take discussions off course and bring spotlight to a cool pokemon I've had major success with
Smokey boi
neutralizing gas is incredibly anti meta and i ran it for a while. shutting down weather, terrain, defogging on gholengo switches, really good. But honestly after playing around, a simple levitate set has turned out to be a lot sturdier. most kingambits lately are bulky so you can run max defense and still outrun and wisp but the 80 evs into speed hits 176 which outruns most gambit sets that arent max speed. you can also tank any hit and wisp on ogerpon, great tusk, roaring moon (non iron head variants), rillaboom, dragonite, samurott-h, sneasler, landorus, physical dragapult, weavile. effectively every relevant physical attacker fears poison/fairy stab or will-o-wisp, barring maybe ceruledge. combined with any unaware pokemon this creates a nearly unbreakable physical core. Thanks to levitate, poison typing and defog it also sits on gliscor and doesnt allow it to stack spikes. The set with special defense cops a hit from valiant fairly well and OHKO with sludge bomb in a pinch.
Weezing-Galar @ Leftovers
Ability: Levitate
Tera Type: Grass
EVs: 252 HP / 176 Def / 80 Spe OR
EVs: 252 HP / 176 Def / 80 SpD OR
EVs: 252 HP / 252 Def/ 4 SpA
Bold Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Will-O-Wisp
- Strange Steam
- Sludge Bomb
- Defog
This was just a little spotlight i might collect some replays and hit up the VR its definitely not C rank at the moment with all the Physical attackers running around.
Gliscor's probably going to switch out the moment it sees Neutralizing Gas, so I think it might be better to build around getting that one free turn and punishing what comes after. Switch in after Gliscor's been out for a while, chunk them with accumulated damage to encourage a switch, then get up a layer of Toxic Spikes or go for a Will-o-Wisp. Air Balloon for sure is the play since it's fairly common for Gliscor to run Earthquake as its only attacking move.
To add on to what others have said about power creep, here are the stats for each gen of OU in terms of the % of pokemon that were introduced that gen/total pokemon:
