Data Usage-Based Tier Update for January 2018 (Feb @ #263) (Mar @ #696)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a question for the anti-ban people, and I’m not trying to be hostile or anything, I’m just legitimately wondering: What percentage would Lando-T reach before you would say “yeah, that’s definitely a problem”?
Seeing how Tauros reached 94% in Generation 1 last month, and nobody cared, I don't think they'll ever say "yeah, that's definitely a problem" to a usage statistic.
 

alephgalactus

Banned deucer.
Seeing how Tauros reached 94% in Generation 1 last month, and nobody cared, I don't think they'll ever say "yeah, that's definitely a problem" to a usage statistic.
On one hand, you may be right, but on the other hand, it would probably be quite a different matter if something reached 94% in modern OU, rather than Gen 1, which has (unless I’m reading it wrong/something was off with the program) a single-digit number of OU battles recorded for last month.
 
On one hand, you may be right, but on the other hand, it would probably be quite a different matter if something reached 94% in modern OU, rather than Gen 1, which has (unless I’m reading it wrong/something was off with the program) a single-digit number of OU battles recorded for last month.
I think Antar said something about screwing up the total battle counts, but I can't seem to find that post.
 

earl

(EVIOLITE COMPATIBLE)
is a Community Contributor
On one hand, you may be right, but on the other hand, it would probably be quite a different matter if something reached 94% in modern OU, rather than Gen 1, which has (unless I’m reading it wrong/something was off with the program) a single-digit number of OU battles recorded for last month.
We've already said why usage rlly doesn't matter here, why are u so fixated on it?

good and useful =/= broken
 
Many people seem to be agreeing that usage and the concept of "broken" are independent, so why hasn't "They are broken because they almost dictate / require usage" been deleted on the tiering policy?
 
I swear there should be a thread in OU just to discuss Lando-T to keep it off other boards. It says nowhere in any policy that *high* usage is ban worthy.
Many people seem to be agreeing that usage and the concept of "broken" are independent, so why hasn't "They are broken because they almost dictate / require usage" been deleted on the tiering policy?
Due to to numbers of counters Lando has, as repeatedly pointed out, (Gren, KyuremB, Keldeo, Weavile, Bulu, I mean any SpAtker with higher base speed); it doesn't dictate the usage of mon, something dictating usage would be like Icium Z Blissey for Naganadel, all these Lando counters would still be viable without Lando in the tier. Lando also doesn't *require* usage, there are other viable Rock Setters, Scarfers, Pivots etc Lando just happens to be very good in these roles and is therefore often picked to fill one of these roles. It also doesn't help that Lando is a counter to itself with it's typing, decent enough SpAtk to effectively run HP Ice and also that the most common sets often don't use max speed, so you can speed creep whatever Lando set is currently at the top of it's smogon page.
 
Don't compare Lando with Tauros, it's so common in RBY because 1) RBY's OU meta just begs for it to be dominant and 2) There wasn't a lot of choice for "Fast Normal-Type Attacker" anyway (Dodrio couldn't get past Rhydon or Golem at all, Tauros had Blizzard for them)
 

dhelmise

everything is embarrassing
is a Site Content Manageris a Battle Simulator Administratoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Programmeris a Community Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Top Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnus
Social Media Head
Don't compare Lando with Tauros, it's so common in RBY because 1) RBY's OU meta just begs for it to be dominant and 2) There wasn't a lot of choice for "Fast Normal-Type Attacker" anyway (Dodrio couldn't get past Rhydon or Golem at all, Tauros had Blizzard for them)
you could use those same points for lando-t now; it's so common in USM because 1) OU begs for it to be dominant and 2) not a lot of choice for versatile ground/flying setup sweeper/hazard setter/etc (landorus is banned and gliscor cant afford to run a z crystal)
 
The powers that be would never let this happen cos they’re a bunch of pwussybois let’s be honest lollllll

Better to have a shit stale meta game where the mon that’s been #1 in usage for like 3 gens now and gets better with each isn’t considered busted
Landorus-T only became the best in mid/late ORAS though.

Also in ADV and DPPt Tyranitar had and has similar usage to Landorus now, sometimes higher. The top usage being more evenly spread is a characteristic of Generation V and VI, so if anything Gen VII is returning to a state slightly more reminescent of older metagames.
 
Last edited:
Edit: Removed parts of post I didn’t want to post.
I have a question for the anti-ban people, and I’m not trying to be hostile or anything, I’m just legitimately wondering: What percentage would Lando-T reach before you would say “yeah, that’s definitely a problem”?
Usage doesn’t mean something is broken, otherwise Donovan in RU would be busted.
 
Last edited:
Ok, so I don’t think lando is broken, at least right now. I define broken as essentially running the Mets and bending the entire game around something, like taking out a certain threat akin to the Aegislash and Naganadel metas. Lando, on the other hand, despite what usage may imply, does not do this. If anything, the reason it is so consistently used and so good is that it just has enough solid sets at its disposal to deal with whatever meta trends may come its way.
For example, lando was running a lot of z- move variants just a few months ago, to break some of its checks at the time. Then it’s checks and counters were able to adjust accordingly and play around it. That one role became less viable as a result, and so it goes ahead and fills another role, that may be more effective or necessary in the current meta. It’s “best set” is constantly fluxuating because it needs to adapt to the meta beating out certain sets, not the other way around.
Even now, scarf was nigh unviable pre-USM, but now it’s one of lando’s best sets because that was what it had to change to stay viable. It is not the one big controller of meta trends because it’s sets and their separate viability are all affected by these meta trends, unlike the two previous examples, who simply warped the meta around themselves and barely, if ever, needed to adjust.

Those are just my thoughts though, feel free to point out where I’m wrong, I’m very new here.
 
There’s a difference between required usage and being so good at what it does that there isn’t really a reason not to use it. There’s playstyles that don’t need Lando at all (AFAIK it’s never been a regular feature of stall) and even though 50% usage is obviously high relative to other mons, it’s still only half, ie half of the meta is finding ways to play without it. That’s hardly an argument for it being “required”.

Overall, I struggle to finish the sentence “Lando is required because if you don’t use him, ______”. If someone can actually explain what in the meta makes his usage required rather than assuming that must be the case based on stats (rather than it just meaning he’s good in a variety of roles and therefore can easily feature on a variety of builds) then I might start to be more convinced of this argument. The required usage argument usually applies more to potential counters for broken mons (eg AV Ttar was basically required if you didn’t want to lose to Naga) so it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me here arguing for why a mon itself is broken.
 
Lando-T is Very Not Broken, unlike Broken Pokémon® Toxapex and Hawlucha
Toxapex can be debated, Hawlucha is balanced. It is very hard to stop after it gets both Swords Dance and Unburden boosts, but not impossible. Pinsir's Quick Attack and Weavile's Ice Shard deal a lot of damage. It is quite weak without SD boosts, so keeping it from setting up is already a good thing. It can also get only one Unburden boost that wears off after switching out, use this knowledge to your advantage. With some preparation and good playing it should be manageable. Its teammates that pave the way for its sweeps are another story.
 
3 out of 4 tapus agree, Toxapex is not broken!
Boy, the "Tapu Lele is broken!!!!1!!" hype is largely over. Back when we thought that it just was something that would dominante the ORAS meta, but now that the metagame has settled it's actually not as broken as we thought. We just didn't really have something to deal with a mon like that.

Thank god most people use special Koko instead of abusing its 115 Atk. Oh well, Koko is a serious threat to a lot of teams (especially offense) but not necessarily broken.

Bulu is held back by its speed. Nuff said. Strong, but easily RKilled.

Fini is not broken at all.

Tapus are also pretty good at keeping each other balanced. Terrain bothering you? Send out your own Tapu, assuming it isn't the same one. The Tapus were dominant forces when first introduced, but the metagame managed to adapt to them.
 

alephgalactus

Banned deucer.
Boy, the "Tapu Lele is broken!!!!1!!" hype is largely over. Back when we thought that it just was something that would dominante the ORAS meta, but now that the metagame has settled it's actually not as broken as we thought. We just didn't really have something to deal with a mon like that.

Thank god most people use special Koko instead of abusing its 115 Atk. Oh well, Koko is a serious threat to a lot of teams (especially offense) but not necessarily broken.

Bulu is held back by its speed. Nuff said. Strong, but easily RKilled.

Fini is not broken at all.

Tapus are also pretty good at keeping each other balanced. Terrain bothering you? Send out your own Tapu, assuming it isn't the same one. The Tapus were dominant forces when first introduced, but the metagame managed to adapt to them.
I never said the tapus were broken, I was making a joke about how they keep Toxapex in check. I personally think the tapus are completely fine as they are, and anyone who thinks they’re not is kidding themselves.
 
Landorus being over centralizing is an interesting debate, but something people seem to neglect about landorus is how potent his offense Z-move sets are.
Landorus's Z-Fly + smack down set has only two defensive countermeasures in the game being Protect Quagsire and Mega Slowbro. Now the common counter argument to this is "but a lot of Pokémon can revenge kill it" however the same thing could be said for Landorus-I. For both Landorus forms a lot of the things that revenge kill can't switch in and they both have Rock Polish to outspeed those Pokémon anyways.
I could go on but I feel like this is enough for now, but I'll leave with two points
1. Suspect Tests =\= Ban, if a Pokémon that is without a doubt the best in the tier, used on 50% of teams, and has an offensive set that only has two counters isn't suspect worthy then I don't know what is.
2. If landorus-T and nagandel switched when they were released do you honestly think it would get a suspect test?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 2)

Top