1. Post all suggestions for Pokemon Showdown in this thread. Do NOT post them in the Suggestion Box!
  2. New to the forums? Check out our Mentorship Program!
    Our mentors will answer your questions and help you become a part of the community!
  3. Welcome to Smogon Forums! Please take a minute to read the rules.

Voting

Discussion in 'The Suggestion Box' started by Shurtugal, Jan 13, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Shurtugal

    Shurtugal The Enterpriser.
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,301
    There should be a restrictions, as in the Pokemon you can nominate. Last time I voted [during the Exca era], people nominated Pokemon such as Caterpie, Zubat, and even to an extent Jiracih [which, you cannot ban something because of hax, not even going to go into details on why it isn't broken considering EQ + Sun teams demolish it] In anyways, I think we should have certain restrictions, and here they are:

    Certain Pokemon Cannot Be Nominated: Such as, Zubat, Caterpie, ect [the pokemon depend on the tier, as even though I disagree with Jirachi it can be nominated, its just fail .____., while Oddish voters are literraly trolls >.>]

    If anyone ever nominates a Pokemon, they most have at least some kind of explanation: If not, kick them out, unless, someone has provided an accurate explanation and the person is simply agreeing.

    Time Requirment: At least 5 months, as I understand it would be harsh to ask for year-rounders. Like 5 months to grasp the metagame, so we know they have some kind of knowledge before voting.

    Uber Pokemon: For example, prevent ubers such as Manaphy from being nominated back into OU, I see it everytime, Garchomp, Blaziken, ARCEUS. I understand some, but the council would do best to come up with certain pokemon that stay in ubers [Arceus, Requazza, ect.

    Also, PREVENT ABILITY NOMINATIONS! Swift Swimers are annoying, although Pokemon like Omastar are argueably not broken, its too complex, we only went over this 10000000000000 times.


    Thats it from me, I just was annoyed that last time, as people nominated Pokemon like Jirachi, simply because they don't want to deal with it. Its like saying; I don't want to run SR, so we should ban Volcarona [with the uprising of the MOST COMMON WEATHER IN RAIN, and the rock types in sand, it is managable, not to mention there is a considerable amount of OU that can stop it.] Ok, now I am done, please consider my suggestion,

    ~ Shurtugal [Anthonias]
  2. Moo

    Moo Professor
    is an Artist Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,446
    People who nominate Pokemon like Tropius are clearly trolling, and let's face it: none of those Pokemon will ever be banned. The system works. As for Jirachi, it's an OU Pokemon, and hax can be overpowering for unprepared people. Most of the hate towards it is rage fuelled, but if someone makes a powerful arguement with legitimate evidence, you can understand the reasoning (Shaymin-S is banned because of serene grace and Seed Flare + Air Slash, iirc.).

    Time means nothing. Just because someone isn't signed up on the forums, doesn't mean they can't be experienced at the game.

    If a Pokemon wasn't brought back to Ubers in a previous Metagame, there's a slim chance it'll be brought back now, with even less of the strong Pokemon in OU.

    Most of your concerns seem to be based on users nominating things, but really, someone nominating something that you don't agree with really isn't set in stone, and in the end, they don't have any sort of influence.

    I agree with you on ability bans though, I think it's stupid to be that specific
  3. Shurtugal

    Shurtugal The Enterpriser.
    is a Pre-Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,301
    Legitamate explanations should be required, or, they should be banned from the voting section, so we can clear these trolls. Time Requirent, you are right about that, so we should drop that. Also, the certain Pokemon thing, can be condridicted by the explanation, so we can drop that too.

    However, we always get a group of ppl who try to bring things from ubers down. Deoxys-S is the only quesitonable Pokemon atm, so I really do want to implant this rule, along with the ability thing, as we should prevent people from spamming the I WANT SWIFT SWIM back shit. Go to another server if thats the case, honestly, this ban has only been there for a good solid [year?]. On top of that, we continually repeat ourselves on the voting section, so this clearly slows our pace with the votes/bans. In conclusion, we should at least go with the Ability/Uber Pokemon Rule, and, The Explanation

    HOW THIS WILL BENEFIT SMOGON: by implanting these changes, us voters/discussion people will have a better time explaning why something is/isn't broken and proving the person wrong rather than going off of something like this; "Jirachi is broken, ban it". Nothing to work with there. Ability/Uber bans allow us to stop trolls/spams all together.
  4. Omicron

    Omicron
    is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    3,042
    If you haven't noticed, people who manage to get on the new council-style voting must give extensive reasoning for their decisions. Also, we have discussion threads for each stage of the metagame, where people can openly discuss what is broken, what isn't, and the general gist of the metagame. There is no need for such drastic changes like this.
  5. Haunter

    Haunter 100% avocado
    is an official Team Rateris a Battle Server Administratoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris an Administratoris a Tutor Alumnus
    Líder máximo

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    5,651
    Suspect tests have been abolished for the OU and UU metagame. People don't make nominations anymore. This thread serves no purpose.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)