The purpose of the tiers

[ODDish]

@tennisace0227

A number of the more seasoned UU players have expressed similar concerns regarding the more problematic NFE's (Haunter, Kadabra, Chansey, Dusclops, Rhydon), so it is unlikely that they would automatically be included in UU/NU play and would likely end up the equivalent of BL.

 

[Chris_Hansen]

I have a question that might become very important in the near future:

How will the Platinum Metagame be decided?

Will it be by the process you said, in which everything goes for a while (probably 3 months) and then everything broken get's banned and everything under a certain usage gets downtiered?
Or will it be by gessing and theorizing? "Ho-oh is probably broken because of it's stats", "Wobbuffet is probably too strong for OU", and then, some months later, we finally decide to test things out.

PS- Sorry for my terrible English. And I'm also sorry for questioning Smogon's methods, but I would like some enlightment.

 

[Kittymew]

The problem with only usage-based tiers is this: people will gravitate towards the pokemon already in a given tier, especially the newbs. This will greatly impact the statistics, and give you something that is not whatsoever a measure of balance. We need to start doing some proper analysis, which will take some work but will turn out better in the end, to create some power cutoffs.

 

[Bam]

I understand that Tentacruel is OU for usage and usage only, and I have for a long time. I've personally never had any trouble understanding the tiers and how they work; it's just a pretty simple system. However, since the general population of Smogon agrees that Tentacruel is pretty much the only OU Pokemon that most certainly would not overpower the UU tier, that complicates things.

Should Tentacruel (and any other Pokemon that happens to jump from a main tier to another, main tier = UU/OU) be given a special status so that it can be played in both tiers? Perhaps before you started using Tentacruel, it was a powerful asset to somebody's UU team, but now they're unable to use it. It could be argued fairly that since Tenta does not overcentralize or overpower the UU tier in any way that it should also be allowed to be used in that tier.

I personally don't care right now as I don't use Tenta and don't plan on it in the near future, but I can see it becoming an issue in the future if any other such occurence happens (and I believe it will; UU teams are becoming more and more prevalent today, even on the OU ladder). With the tier system designed the way it is (I think it's a great system, though), there are bound to be problems like this.

Ugh, didn't see you touched on my q with this:

The purpose of UU is to have Pokemon that you don't see in OU, hence the name "Underused". If a Pokemon ceases to be underused, it cannot be used in a tier based entirely on that Pokemon being underused.

I still think it's a fair question, though. Maybe it may have not been before, but with the main tier/limbo tier system (NU/Limbo, UU/BL, OU/Ubers) I could see it happening. Or is NU the other "main tier", of which "limbo" is a limbo tier, UU is a limbo tier, and BL is a limbo tier of UU (so a limbo tier of a limbo tier of a limbo tier). If UU isn't being separated from NU by usage, than what's the point of having three different limbo tiers, and if it is, then why not allow Pokemon to be in multiple tiers if the community doesn't have a problem with it?

 

[obi]

I don't see Tentacruel being banned from UU as a problem.

 

[the_artic_one]

The point of UU is to have a tier that's completely different than OU, how can it be different if we allow a very common OU (Tentacruel)? Maybe Tentacruel doesn't overpower UU, but he still outclasses some things that will get more use if he's gone. The ultimate goal of UU should be to be as different from OU as possible, otherwise there's no point to playing it.

 

[Tangerine]

The point of UU is to have a tier that's completely different than OU, how can it be different if we allow a very common OU (Tentacruel)? Maybe Tentacruel doesn't overpower UU, but he still outclasses some things that will get more use if he's gone. The ultimate goal of UU should be to be as different from OU as possible, otherwise there's no point to playing it.

Sorry, but I'm not going to buy the "point of UU is to be different from OU" argument mostly because this is the same argument people use when they use BL and UU in OU.

Sure, you can try to be as different as possible, but by attempting to be "different" you're making a tier that is just so dependent on OU. This means that UU is simply a reaction to OU, not an independent, competitive, tier. I say that it is not independent because UU is defined by "Not OU and BL" which is something that's going to change constantly (at least for a while) and i say not competitive because you are inherently lowering competition by taking away viable strategies.

If of course, UU players are fine with the idea of that then I won't push it any further

 

[umbarsc]

The ultimate goal of UU should be to be as different from OU as possible, otherwise there's no point to playing it.

That is not the goal of UU. I don't play UU so I can say "hey cool, I'm not using Garchomp/Blissey!" I'm sure some people do, but one man's highly subjective opinion should not be law.

Actually, Obi you are being rather hypocritical here. You are all for allowing NFEs in UU, but then ban Tentacruel because it's usage is slightly above the arbitrary cut-off point. If the "purpose" of UU is to not use Pokemon that are used in OU, why would you allow Pokemon that are nearly identicle to them? Are people going to think "Haunter is way different than Gengar because Gyro Ball has less power against it"?

 

[Chou Toshio]

I estimate that we would end up with between 4 and 7 sub OU playable metagames, complete with their own ban lists. I know many people will say "its too much effort" well really if you give people a ladder it will happen on its own. It may take a few months, or even a year but we would have a much more satisfactory system at the end.


thats my first wall of text in a while... hope it makes sense.

What the hell, we don't even have enough players to keep 3 metagames truly alive and healthy (current OU, Uber and UU), let alone 7.

@Obi's NFE arguments: There comes a point in time where logic and common sense are not on the same page.

Logically, yes Monferno's inferior speed gives it an advantage over Infernape.

But use your common sense, and you realize no one is ever going to play trick room Monferno, or "bring in my team mate safely" Bulky U-Turn Monferno. (bulky monferno, lol)

I say it's perfectly fine for us to tier and treat NFEs as full-fledged pokemon, but in terms of trying to build healthy metagames, I think we can get good, aggressive formats for Ubers through NU if we just try to make as many of the fully evolved pokemon playable as possible. Making a metagame for pidgeotto and nuzleaf sounds pretty unimportant in my book.


One more argument against NFE

. . . and yes, this uses common sense rather than pure logic.

Since we are trying to emulate the in game as much as possible where it makes sense, think about in game-- if your goal is to be a pokemon master, are you planning to leave your monferno as a monferno forever? No! You're going to evolve the sucker and rape the elite four everyone else with your infernape.

In order to bring a pokemon to its greatest potential, there are very few pokemon you would leave in its unevolved state, which is why there are currently very few NFEs considered separately from their evolved forms in regards to tiering (like scyther).


I'd also say that Obi's Azelf-Unknown example is wrong in one regard

As to why, this is actually a logic argument, not common sense. The difference between Monferno-Infernape and Unknown-Azelf, is that monferno has the option to evolved into Infernape, where as Uknown cannot evolved into Azelf.

In pokemon, we act as trainers, bringing out the strongest potential in our pokemon. Like I said before, this means we take that monferno, evolve it, give it the mix-ape set, and rape. We work to bring out the best potential in pokemon.

For an individual pokemon, for a trainer, evolution is just one more option, just like picking moves and attaching items. You wouldn't send Monferno into a serious battle any more than you would send Infernape into battle carrying scratch/leer/ember/fury swipes. Infernape does not appear from no-where as its own individual pokemon, the trainer chooses to evolve his monferno in
infernape. Seen this way, allowing monferno into UU makes as much sense as allowing scratch/leer/ember/fury swipes infernape. A level 100 monferno isn't a different pokemon, it's a really crapily trained infernape.

Meaning once's monferno evolves into infernape it's not a different pokemon, it's the same pokemon that's just gone through one more part of its training.

Though, (and this is a comment, not a negative accusation at anyone) I guess this is easy to forget for people who don't actually train pokemon.

 

[umbarsc]

ChouToshio, your "evolution" argument started well, but it lacked a key word: association. "Evolution" is a good basis for an argument, but you took it in completely the wrong direction. By stating that a pre-evo is an inferior version of the final evo, you are giving direct evidence as to why it could be acceptable in UU.

However, I think association is a better argument to make. People don't associate Unown with Azelf due to its lack of a common evolutionary line. People won't say "Oh man, I play UU to get away from Yanmega and now I'm seeing Venomoth?", but they will if you replace "Yanmega" and "Venomoth" with "Blissey" and "Chansey". Why? Because they are associated with one another due to their common evolutionary line. People don't think of Unown as an inferior Azelf, but rather as a unique, crappy Pokemon.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Umbarsc, if that's what you think than you didn't understand my argument.

I believe you would you agree that scratch/leer/ember/fury swipes infernape is an inferior version of infernape, correct?

If I say that monferno is an inferior infernape,

and you say that being an inferior infernape is a direct proof of why monferno should be considered for UU, than by that logic you are also saying that scratch/leer/ember/fury swipes infernape should also be considered for uu. Which is just silly, as you your self would agree that tiering down to the moveset like that would be ridiculous.



Thus I am saying that because evolution is an option for a pokemon, just like move selections are options for pokemon, it is ridiculous to tier a pokemon differently just because it chose crappier options.

We tier a pokemon based on it MAX potential, not its crappiest potential.

For that reason monferno is stuck in OU because it has the potential to become infernape.

On the other hand Unown does not have the option to evolve into azelf, so obviously it's greatest potential is . . . very crappy.

 

[Kietharr]

I have a question that might become very important in the near future:

How will the Platinum Metagame be decided?

Will it be by the process you said, in which everything goes for a while (probably 3 months) and then everything broken get's banned and everything under a certain usage gets downtiered?
Or will it be by gessing and theorizing? "Ho-oh is probably broken because of it's stats", "Wobbuffet is probably too strong for OU", and then, some months later, we finally decide to test things out.

PS- Sorry for my terrible English. And I'm also sorry for questioning Smogon's methods, but I would like some enlightment.

We don't know enough about platinum yet to say whether anything will change drastically with its introduction. Move tutors will probably be back, we'll have to see who gets what to judge if any tier movement is needed. By default I think the new Giratina form will end up in ubers unless it can prove that it is not too powerful (unlikely) and the new Shaymin will be in OU/BL until it proves itself too powerful (possible). Platinum is not a new generation so I don't think anyone will be totally reformatting a tier list for it.

I don't think many major tier changes will result from platinum unless something absolutely ridiculous like an aura sphere/nasty plot tutor for gengar happens to be included.

 

[obi]

Should we ban Blaziken because it plays similar to Infernape? Should we ban Altaria because it's a worse Salamence? Maybe toss out Vigoroth because people associate it with Slaking?

My argument isn't "remove the BL tier", but rather, empty it out now and slowly fill it up. I'm fine with certain Pokemon being removed for reasons not necessarily related to power. However, I'm not fine with assuming certain Pokemon need banning, and then acting on those assumptions. If we do get a large Monferno presence, and those Monferno play like Infernape, then maybe it should be banned. However, this is only a reasonable argument if we apply the same logic to Blaziken, Charizard, and Pinsir. If they play the same way, then get rid of them.

I don't think many major tier changes will result from platinum unless something absolutely ridiculous like an aura sphere/nasty plot tutor for gengar happens to be included.

Just like no major tier changes resulted from the transition between RS 200 and full advance. I mean, I know Slaking and Regice were top-OU Pokemon in all of ADV, Protect was everywhere, and few things could Substitute.

 

[Deaga]

Should we ban Blaziken because it plays similar to Infernape? Should we ban Altaria because it's a worse Salamence? Maybe toss out Vigoroth because people associate it with Slaking?

Yeah, because Infernape gets Baton Pass and Agility, while Salamence gets Natural Cure and Heal Bell.

I'm actually in favor of banning all of the "identical" NFE's from UU (that means stuff like Poliwhirl, Vigoroth, Scyther and friends may or may not be allowed, depending on how powerful they are) simply because that's how it's been since always.

People have pretty much learned to play UU like that by now, so why the hell do people want to change it? It's not like anyone is going to use Vulpix over Ninetales because it's better in Trick Room and makes a better switch-in on Leech Seed, really. So who the hell cares if it's allowed?

This whole discussion seems like an attempt at overcomplicating the game rather simplifying it. Shouldn't the rules be "as simple as possible"? That doesn't seem to be the case this time around. =/

 

[Blln]

Sorry to interject into the discussion with a somewhat unrelated point, but this has bothering me for a little while. I don't think Overused is really a good name for the standard metagame, because it implies that the pokemon in the tier are used too much, which is not accurate. I've always thought Most Used would be a more fitting name, because it actually describes the tier, but still goes along with the --used trend.

But I guess the term itself isn't really too important, and it is so ingrained in the competitive pokemon community that it is probably impossible to change it and futile to even try, I just felt like mentioning that it seems like kind of a bad name choice

 

[Pneuma]

I'd love some wholesale renaming to finally end this pointless confusion.

Uber -> "All" or "Top banlist"
OU -> "Top"

BL -> "Middle banlist"
UU -> "Middle"

Limbo -> "Bottom banlist"
NU -> "Bottom"

Though I agree with the futility sentiment. Then again, as obvious as this whole deal is, I'm glad Obi said it.
Also it would do us ALL a favor if we stop referring to BL as a tier and not a banlist. I'd say the same for ubers but it gets "tier play".

 

[umbarsc]

Should we ban Blaziken because it plays similar to Infernape? Should we ban Altaria because it's a worse Salamence? Maybe toss out Vigoroth because people associate it with Slaking?

Hence why I used the argument of "association".

Slaking is not OU, so I don't know why you would use that argument.

 

[Slobroking]

why the hell shedinja bl?

 

[cim]

Finally, people will stop making BL/UU teams, I hope.

Anyway, thanks for making this Obi. Now I have one less thing to be mad about and I can get back to being completely stupid.

 

[umbarsc]

Why would this stop people from playing BL?

 

[Chill]

I don't really understand that either. By that I mean the Tentacruel situation.

Why would Tentacruel be banned from UU when he's OU even though nothing about him has changed? And to then be unbanned when people stop using him even though nothing about him has changed? Maybe someone can help me to understand this.

I fully understand what the tiers mean "pokemon x is too powerful for the tier below it" but I never quite understood why some pokemon are in each tier. Shuckle is probably one of the most common UU pokemon that I have personally seen in OU. So why is Shuckle UU? I know it's because he isn't "too powerful for UU" but if he can be used in OU it just seems so strange to me that he would be in UU. I think that's the only thing about tiers that I've never been able to really wrap my head around.

 

[obi]

I fully understand what the tiers mean "pokemon x is too powerful for the tier below it"

This isn't what the tiers mean.

I know it's because he isn't "too powerful for UU" but if he can be used in OU it just seems so strange to me that he would be in UU. I think that's the only thing about tiers that I've never been able to really wrap my head around.

Every Pokemon that isn't uber can be used in OU. You could use Kricketot in OU. It's not used enough to be OU. Tentacruel is used too much to be underused.

 

[Droideka88]

I'd love some wholesale renaming to finally end this pointless confusion.

Uber -> "All" or "Top banlist"
OU -> "Top"

BL -> "Middle banlist"
UU -> "Middle"

Limbo -> "Bottom banlist"
NU -> "Bottom"

Though I agree with the futility sentiment. Then again, as obvious as this whole deal is, I'm glad Obi said it.
Also it would do us ALL a favor if we stop referring to BL as a tier and not a banlist. I'd say the same for ubers but it gets "tier play".

You're somewhat applying Brawl tier names into this discussion. I'm not sure how Smogon would appreciate those tier names but your names are, I'll admit much simpler than other tier names that people have attempted to make up like MU (Mainly used..instead of Overused), FU (Fairly used), Limbo, etc.

I don't think Overused is really a good name for the standard metagame, because it implies that the pokemon in the tier are used too much, which is not accurate. I've always thought Most Used would be a more fitting name, because it actually describes the tier, but still goes along with the --used trend.

Don't worry you're not the only one who is concerned regarding the current metagame names. Most Used or Mainly Used are probably good, appropriate, and overall respectable names (Pokemon that are used a lot in non uber competitive fights). The problem with the current tier names is that some of the names, while true for some Pokemon (Unown in Nu for example), are literally too "insulting".

P.S.: When can we get any official approval to create a topic that discusses changing the names of tiers such? I would personally like to start one but I'm not sure if it would get locked immediately...

 

[Pneuma]

You're somewhat applying Brawl tier names into this discussion.

wat

I just came up with that on the fly.
And not sure how this is even a criticism.

 

[Instinctive]

I think all we have to do regarding NFEs is to determine whther they are different enough to be played without just being inferior to their final stages of evolution.

For Example: Vigoroth, while an NFE, can be played totally different from Slaking because it doesn't have Truant, which opens up new strategies, playstyles, and its own seperate niche. It is not just an inferior Slaking.

Other examples include Scyther, Onix, and Porygon2, which have different roles than their evolutions (except maybe Onix).

On the other hand, pkes like Mamoswine/Pilowsine and Yanmega/Yanma are played exactly liek their final forms, and thus should not be considered as seperate pokemon. Do you see what I am getting at?