-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Which aspect of Dragons is more broken: Pokémon or Moves?
- Thread starter RBG
- Start date
Salamence is OU right now. There is, however, discussion in PR and Stark Mountain on whether it should be a future suspect or not.
Maybe a quick test is in order, kind of like the Berry Juice test in Little Cup. Nonetheless, this seems to be a deeply philosophical question based on questions like the following:
1. How many Pokémon being banned due to a move, item, etc. are "too many"?
2. (As said before) Is the ban worth directly nerfing perfectly fine Pokémon?
3. What differences would there be between a metagame with DM/O Kingdra/Flygon/Dragonite and non-DM/O Lati@s/Garchomp/Salamence that would make one objectively "better" than the other?
4. Would the cascading effects of banning these moves be worth the undoing of much of the testing process thus far, and the prospect or more tests of other, similar situations?
To be honest, I don't think four Pokémon are "too many". I don't know how many Pokémon had to be banned during the Berry Juice test, but I'm fairly certain that it was more than four. We could also consider that the four suspects do happen to have legendary-caliber stat distributions/movepools, as well as the "right" combination of stats/moves/typing unlike, say, Articuno. Maybe we should just accept that Game Freak simply succeeded in making these suspects ridiculously powerful, maybe even too powerful, and not mess with the decidedly non-uber dragons for their sake.
That said, I suppose a test couldn't hurt because it might turn out that one side or the other doesn't turn out to hold much weight in that test. (i.e. Either most of the suspects are broken even without the moves, or the non-suspect dragons don't suffer that much without the moves.)
1. How many Pokémon being banned due to a move, item, etc. are "too many"?
2. (As said before) Is the ban worth directly nerfing perfectly fine Pokémon?
3. What differences would there be between a metagame with DM/O Kingdra/Flygon/Dragonite and non-DM/O Lati@s/Garchomp/Salamence that would make one objectively "better" than the other?
4. Would the cascading effects of banning these moves be worth the undoing of much of the testing process thus far, and the prospect or more tests of other, similar situations?
To be honest, I don't think four Pokémon are "too many". I don't know how many Pokémon had to be banned during the Berry Juice test, but I'm fairly certain that it was more than four. We could also consider that the four suspects do happen to have legendary-caliber stat distributions/movepools, as well as the "right" combination of stats/moves/typing unlike, say, Articuno. Maybe we should just accept that Game Freak simply succeeded in making these suspects ridiculously powerful, maybe even too powerful, and not mess with the decidedly non-uber dragons for their sake.
That said, I suppose a test couldn't hurt because it might turn out that one side or the other doesn't turn out to hold much weight in that test. (i.e. Either most of the suspects are broken even without the moves, or the non-suspect dragons don't suffer that much without the moves.)
I would say that it depends on the situation. Dragon type moves are no doubt the dominating force of the metagame, seeing as the only resist (steel types) will still be hit hard by an STAB Draco Meteor. Coupled with the fact that few steel types have access to instant recovery, and you truly see why Pokemon such as Latias and Salamence shine. It's just another reason that this is such a Dragons and Steels-centralized metagame (though none of us here can pretend that Latias dropping down to OU didn't add to that theme). Outrage from a +1 Salamence rips into everything, dealing almost 50% damage to bulky physical steels such as Metagross. Other Pokemon can't even stand up to them. It would certainly be a treat to play in a metagame with no Outrage or Draco Meteor, but at the same time, it would be a problem. Seeing as the metagame is so centralized around moves such as this, removing even those two moves would cause a total shift in the metagame.
That isn't to say that the Dragons themselves aren't the real threat. At one time or another, most of the OU (or once OU Dragons) were complained about and received a nomination for a suspect test. Hell, with all the "Salamence for a test" threads popping up now in the policy review and Stark, histroys trend is repeating itself. The thing is that Dragons' raw stats are just too much to handle. Garchomp didn't exactly have a stellar movepool (but the Dragon-Ground dual STAB combo was pretty sweet), but what it did have was raw base stats. With its base 108 / 95 / 85 Defenses, it was by no means a frail Pokemon. If Garchomp existed in the metagame today, Pokemon such as Scizor wouldnt be able to check it like they check Salamence today. More terrifying, though, was its base 130 attack and base 102 Speed stats (coincidentally having just enough speed to outpace competitors Salamence and Flygon). With a combination of Earthquake, Outrage, and Band / Scarf sets, Garchomp was a monster. Add in the fact that it had access to Swords Dance, and you can see why it was nominated.
Latias and Salamence both have fantastic movepools and stats. While Latias is chiefly a special beast, Salamence can hit hard from both sides of the spectrum. No Dragon is by any means a slow Pokemon, and seeing as most have access to Dragon Dance, their speed (not to mention attack) are boosted to new levels. Latias's nice base 130 Special Defense and good support movepool are enough to grant it a special niche on stall teams that fellow Special-wall Blissey can't fulfill. Salamence even has access to Wish. If these Pokemon were removed, Scizor would probably have difficulty retaining the number one spot in usage, due to its important utility to counter both of these Pokemon. Other Pokemon cannot rival the Dragons in terms of base stats, hence the extreme usage of these Dragons. Dragon moves and Dragon types are both a threat, and while they can be played around, it would be interesting to see a test of both the moves and the mons.
That isn't to say that the Dragons themselves aren't the real threat. At one time or another, most of the OU (or once OU Dragons) were complained about and received a nomination for a suspect test. Hell, with all the "Salamence for a test" threads popping up now in the policy review and Stark, histroys trend is repeating itself. The thing is that Dragons' raw stats are just too much to handle. Garchomp didn't exactly have a stellar movepool (but the Dragon-Ground dual STAB combo was pretty sweet), but what it did have was raw base stats. With its base 108 / 95 / 85 Defenses, it was by no means a frail Pokemon. If Garchomp existed in the metagame today, Pokemon such as Scizor wouldnt be able to check it like they check Salamence today. More terrifying, though, was its base 130 attack and base 102 Speed stats (coincidentally having just enough speed to outpace competitors Salamence and Flygon). With a combination of Earthquake, Outrage, and Band / Scarf sets, Garchomp was a monster. Add in the fact that it had access to Swords Dance, and you can see why it was nominated.
Latias and Salamence both have fantastic movepools and stats. While Latias is chiefly a special beast, Salamence can hit hard from both sides of the spectrum. No Dragon is by any means a slow Pokemon, and seeing as most have access to Dragon Dance, their speed (not to mention attack) are boosted to new levels. Latias's nice base 130 Special Defense and good support movepool are enough to grant it a special niche on stall teams that fellow Special-wall Blissey can't fulfill. Salamence even has access to Wish. If these Pokemon were removed, Scizor would probably have difficulty retaining the number one spot in usage, due to its important utility to counter both of these Pokemon. Other Pokemon cannot rival the Dragons in terms of base stats, hence the extreme usage of these Dragons. Dragon moves and Dragon types are both a threat, and while they can be played around, it would be interesting to see a test of both the moves and the mons.
If you mean the defense Forme, that's been considered as a possible suspect on a number of occasions. It's not THAT good a wall. It does have a good range of support moves though.
Deoxys-E is the Speed Forme, and was previously OU, until it was found to vastly outclass everything else as a suicide lead.
Are you sure you didn't get your Deoxys Formes mixed up?
It's definitely the moves that are more broken. Salamence wasn't even remotely near Uber in ADV, when it didn't have neither Draco Meteor nor a 120-power Outrage (it was 90 power in ADV and was Special typed). So much so that the standard Salamence in ADV didn't even have Dragon Claw, instead usually sticking with Dragon Dance/Earthquake/HP Flying/Fire Blast (remember HP Flying was physical in ADV), or CBMence with HP Flying/Earthquake/Fire Blast/filler. Dragon moves were considered mediocre in ADV because the strongest Dragon move was a (special-typed) Dragon Claw.
Personally, I think that it is utterly wrong to even consider banning moves.
Moves, firstly, are part of the pokemon. When you start takeing away moves, you are changeing the pokemon themselves. The only moves that could even fall into being acceptable are Double Team, Minimise and Sand-Attack-Like moves, because they turn the game into pure luck, more so than it already is. The banning of these moves directly effected almost every pokemon, as almost everything can learn Double Team viva TM. Hence, the ban was even for all pokemon. It's not like something gets STAB from Double Team.
However, if Outrage gets banned, certain pokemon will be hit harder than others. Feraligar will hardly feel it, Salamance will be crippled. Same with Draco Meteor, Flygon won't care, Latias will.
The simple fact that pokemon have these moves, and are not broken, is proof the moves are not broken. If the moves themselves were broken, then every pokemon capable of using those moves with some viability would be Uber. If that was the case, then maybe it could be considered banning the moves. However, there are just a few individual cases here, and, it's quite clear, when you look at the 'Uber Dragons', that Outrage and Draco Meteor are NOT the reason for their banning.
Garchomp: Great Stat spread for sweeping, Sand Veil, Swords Dance + Dragon Claw makes Outrage and it's drawbacks cry. STAB Earthquake, good typeing.
Rayquaza: Massive Stats in attacking. Without it's Dragon STABS, it'll just act like a more powerful Lucario, SD + ESpeed.
Latios/Latias: Dragon Pulse, Calm Mind, Wide movepools regardless. Draco Meteor will just lower the hit + run aspect. Defensive, support and Calm Mind sets will still run around. Again, great stats, and type. Levitate as well.
Salamance: Included due to being 'debateable'. Intimidate, Dragon Dance, Wide Movepool, the fact that before Draco Meteor, it was still a massive threat in RSE OU.
Dialga and Palika: Not really debateable at all. Without the nukes, they would still be Uber.
Plus, there are SEVERE drawbacks to Outrage and Draco Meteor. Outrage locks the pokemon who used it in, and then confuses them. This means if you kill something with Outrage, odds are, you'll be revenge killed. If you use Draco Meteor, that's all your Special Attacks effectivly knocked off your moveset until you switch out. Explosion and SelfDestruct are FAR more powerful, albeit, with an even bigger drawback, but no-one considers them 'Broken'. (Come Shoddy 2 and Doubles, this might change)
Then, there are other moves that could be considered. Scizor is top of OU by a mile, because of one move, that is capable of tearing OU apart, despite dreadful typing. Bullet Punch. Should Bullet Punch be banned, because Scizor could arguably fall under the 'Offensive' or 'Support' Charactersitic easily right now, with Bullet Punch? Dragon Dance opens up sweeps! It makes Gyarados hard to stop! Should we ban Dragon Dance?! That's the direction this could easily head, if we start down this path.
If we start banning moves, we'll be changeing the game, effectivly playing a modded version. If we start banning moves to change the metagame to our convenience, we aren't playing Pokemon, we're playing Smogonmon. If we ban Outrage, simply because we want Garchomp back (Don't deny it, there's been enough changes to the Suspect Voting System as it is to give Garchomp another chance, the way I see it), things have gone TOO FAR. Ban one move, and another one will be banned to keep a different pokemon in the metagame.
The suspect tests have proven it's the pokemon that are broken as it is. Leave it at that. Not every set of Garchomp ran Outrage, in fact, one of the largest threats, SubSD Chomp, dosen't even consider Outrage usually, and ScarfChomp dosen't like it massivly either (Another major set), due to the lock-in ruining the hit-and-run nature.
Want further proof? Dragon Claw was on 72% of Garchomp sets. Outrage, supposedly 'Broken' was only on 52%. Earthquake was on 96%, just to put another move that 'could be banned' under this idea into the picture.
I am HIGHLY AGAINST even considering banning moves, except Double Team and co, for their specific reasons, and I see no logic in doing so.
Do not take this post the wrong way, it's just that I see many flaws with this plan, and, I feel strongly against it.
Moves, firstly, are part of the pokemon. When you start takeing away moves, you are changeing the pokemon themselves. The only moves that could even fall into being acceptable are Double Team, Minimise and Sand-Attack-Like moves, because they turn the game into pure luck, more so than it already is. The banning of these moves directly effected almost every pokemon, as almost everything can learn Double Team viva TM. Hence, the ban was even for all pokemon. It's not like something gets STAB from Double Team.
However, if Outrage gets banned, certain pokemon will be hit harder than others. Feraligar will hardly feel it, Salamance will be crippled. Same with Draco Meteor, Flygon won't care, Latias will.
The simple fact that pokemon have these moves, and are not broken, is proof the moves are not broken. If the moves themselves were broken, then every pokemon capable of using those moves with some viability would be Uber. If that was the case, then maybe it could be considered banning the moves. However, there are just a few individual cases here, and, it's quite clear, when you look at the 'Uber Dragons', that Outrage and Draco Meteor are NOT the reason for their banning.
Garchomp: Great Stat spread for sweeping, Sand Veil, Swords Dance + Dragon Claw makes Outrage and it's drawbacks cry. STAB Earthquake, good typeing.
Rayquaza: Massive Stats in attacking. Without it's Dragon STABS, it'll just act like a more powerful Lucario, SD + ESpeed.
Latios/Latias: Dragon Pulse, Calm Mind, Wide movepools regardless. Draco Meteor will just lower the hit + run aspect. Defensive, support and Calm Mind sets will still run around. Again, great stats, and type. Levitate as well.
Salamance: Included due to being 'debateable'. Intimidate, Dragon Dance, Wide Movepool, the fact that before Draco Meteor, it was still a massive threat in RSE OU.
Dialga and Palika: Not really debateable at all. Without the nukes, they would still be Uber.
Plus, there are SEVERE drawbacks to Outrage and Draco Meteor. Outrage locks the pokemon who used it in, and then confuses them. This means if you kill something with Outrage, odds are, you'll be revenge killed. If you use Draco Meteor, that's all your Special Attacks effectivly knocked off your moveset until you switch out. Explosion and SelfDestruct are FAR more powerful, albeit, with an even bigger drawback, but no-one considers them 'Broken'. (Come Shoddy 2 and Doubles, this might change)
Then, there are other moves that could be considered. Scizor is top of OU by a mile, because of one move, that is capable of tearing OU apart, despite dreadful typing. Bullet Punch. Should Bullet Punch be banned, because Scizor could arguably fall under the 'Offensive' or 'Support' Charactersitic easily right now, with Bullet Punch? Dragon Dance opens up sweeps! It makes Gyarados hard to stop! Should we ban Dragon Dance?! That's the direction this could easily head, if we start down this path.
If we start banning moves, we'll be changeing the game, effectivly playing a modded version. If we start banning moves to change the metagame to our convenience, we aren't playing Pokemon, we're playing Smogonmon. If we ban Outrage, simply because we want Garchomp back (Don't deny it, there's been enough changes to the Suspect Voting System as it is to give Garchomp another chance, the way I see it), things have gone TOO FAR. Ban one move, and another one will be banned to keep a different pokemon in the metagame.
The suspect tests have proven it's the pokemon that are broken as it is. Leave it at that. Not every set of Garchomp ran Outrage, in fact, one of the largest threats, SubSD Chomp, dosen't even consider Outrage usually, and ScarfChomp dosen't like it massivly either (Another major set), due to the lock-in ruining the hit-and-run nature.
Want further proof? Dragon Claw was on 72% of Garchomp sets. Outrage, supposedly 'Broken' was only on 52%. Earthquake was on 96%, just to put another move that 'could be banned' under this idea into the picture.
I am HIGHLY AGAINST even considering banning moves, except Double Team and co, for their specific reasons, and I see no logic in doing so.
Do not take this post the wrong way, it's just that I see many flaws with this plan, and, I feel strongly against it.
The mere fact that the dragon moves have only one type resist is the main reason we are even questioning it. Dragon typed Pokemon have always been notoriously powerful. The fact that Salamence, Latias and co. receive STAB on moves that already have 120 and 140 BP and have over 100 in the base stats required to use these moves is what makes the moves so devestating. The dragons without these overpowered moves however, whilst still powerful are nowhere near broken, leading me to believe the moves are the more broken element.
Defense Form Deoxys has the near equivalent Defense capabilities of Skarmory, and the near equivalent Special Defense capabilities of Latias. On top of this, it has 90 Base Speed, and base 70 attack stats. Admittedly it may not wall whole teams by itself based on stats alone, but in terms of walls, it's definitely one of the best OU could consider. I don't want to derail the discussion however, so I'll leave it at that.
And to clarify, I was referring to current banned Uber pokes, of which Speed Deoxys happens to be a member of.
In ADV, Salamence lacked the ability to take full advantage of the now present Attack and Special Attack move separation. Because Salamence had to rely on a Special Attack based type, he couldn't slam incoming walls or checks with both sides of the offensive spectrum. Even assuming Draco Meteor and Outrage absent, Salamence didn't have a physical based Dragon STAB move in the form of Dragon Claw the way he does now.
No one is arguing that rayquaza, Palkia, and Dialga, would suddenly become uber. What I am saying is that 4 of our current suspects could potentially be less suspect with these removed. And I'm not even yet advocating for testing them for banning. I am just bring up, up as a dicsussion, that it might in fact be the moves that break the pokemon and not the Pokemon themselves.
Those drawbacks are not as big as you make them out to be. Draco Meteor is mostly used as a hit and run, which means that the -2 SpA is not going to bother you much at all. And most people are smart with the use of outrage, enough to use it when there is a very small chance that they will be revenge killed.Raikaria said:
You obviously have not read my other posts in this thread. No one is realistically arguing that those pokemon are suspects or even close to being broken. The ONLY reason that these moves were the ones chosen was because they are very frequently used on pokemon that are deemed to be suspect.Raikaria said:
This is changing the game no more than a ban on OHKO, Evasion moves, or even Sleep Clause. And I am not suggesting this for "convince" or to bring back garchomp. I am suggesting this because I truly believe that their is a chance that the metagame might be more balanced with moves gone.Raikaria said:
I will agree, that Dragon Claw was more popular on Garchomp then Outrage. But Outrage being on 52% of garchomp (and at least 24% of all Chomps having both moves), it is still a popular choice that could very well change people's opnions about it.Raikaria said:
And PLEASE STOP with this "x move is used by pokemon a 90%+ of the time it should be banned." You did not fully understand the points I was making in this thread. There are major flaws with this that don't exist with my arguments.
1) Earthquake isn't one of the defining moves on multiple suspects.
2) The ratio of Pokemon that are suspect to Pokemon that know the move is MUCH higher for Outrage and Draco Meteor than Earthquake
Please reread some of my other posts in this thread to see my points, because I clearly did not make them all in the original post and you didn't seem to read much beyond that.
Edit @ PokeN3rd_Pwnz0r: The 4 Dragon suspects I am talking about are Garchomp, Latias, Latios, and (potentially) Salamence. Those are the only dragons that have been suspect this generation.
RB Golbat, would you mind posting the popular suspects? I haven't been around Smogon that long but I sure enough can't do anything without knowing which Suspects you're referring to. I can see Garchomp, Lati@s, and Salamence (who is always being called Uber by people) as some you may be referring to, but are there others than just that?
Also, X-Act:
Salamence can have 405 Atk and hit with a 120 Base Power STAB move.
Salamence could have had 350 Atk and hit with a 120 Base Power STAB move.
The reason Outrage is so powerful on Salamence is because of Salamence's stats, not because of Outrage's power. Outrage is not nearly as powerful on Flygon, Kingdra, or Altaria. It's just another move for their movepool there. The power of the user makes the move that powerful.
As for Draco Meteor, it's about the same way. It takes power to use that move. Latias and Salamence can use that 140 Base Power STAB move quite well, but the other Dragon users cannot. Altaria's power is much too lacking, Dragonite falls from 350 to 328, Kingdra dropping down to 317. They aren't as threatening as the base 110 Pokemon.
I'll admit the moves played a small role in the Dragons power, but not much. It's their own stats that made them that powerful, not the moves, really.
Also, X-Act:
The first thing you didn't take into consideration was that one of the reasons it wasn't Uber in ADV was that it lacked a Physical Stab outside of HP Flying, which would probably account for why it wasn't near Uber. It couldn't use moves with base power over 100 really on the physical side.
Salamence can have 405 Atk and hit with a 120 Base Power STAB move.
Salamence could have had 350 Atk and hit with a 120 Base Power STAB move.
The reason Outrage is so powerful on Salamence is because of Salamence's stats, not because of Outrage's power. Outrage is not nearly as powerful on Flygon, Kingdra, or Altaria. It's just another move for their movepool there. The power of the user makes the move that powerful.
As for Draco Meteor, it's about the same way. It takes power to use that move. Latias and Salamence can use that 140 Base Power STAB move quite well, but the other Dragon users cannot. Altaria's power is much too lacking, Dragonite falls from 350 to 328, Kingdra dropping down to 317. They aren't as threatening as the base 110 Pokemon.
I'll admit the moves played a small role in the Dragons power, but not much. It's their own stats that made them that powerful, not the moves, really.
What dragons? There are no dragons that don't get Draco Meteor and Outrage. NONE! Even Arceus gets them!
The fact that even considering only dragons, the majority of non-legendaries (or, if you prefer, the majority of Pokemon with a 600BST or lower) who learn Outrage and Draco Meteor are NOT suspect, indicates the moves are not the problem.
So what exactly is your point? His still stands to reason.
That means you're actually agreeing with me, then!
Are you absolutely sure about this? Outrage is obviously less powerful on Flygon, Kingdra and Altaria, but it doesn't make those Pokemon unplayable. Last time I checked, two of those Pokemon are solidly OU. I'm sure the fact that they have access to Outrage has something to do with it.
Altaria is the only Dragon Pokemon that is not OU or better, and that's because it has only 70 Atk and SpA. Still, UU players can attest that even from 70 base Atk, Altaria's Outrages are actually very powerful. Just read the very first sentence of Altaria's analysis: "Even with its mediocre Attack stat, Altaria can cause havoc with its Dragon Danced Outrages." Also read the first sentence of the CB set: "The thought of a STAB Choice Band Outrage is rather frightening, even more so when you consider it 2HKOs many of the standard UU physical walls." That surely isn't down to the 70 base Atk, right? Exactly my point.
I agree latias is only uber because specs draco meateor can tear through steels. garchomp i do not think needs outrage to be classed by many as uber. While salamence and latias are considered to be ou by the majority of people.
Asking whether a Pokemon or its moves is more broken is not a valid or fair question. A Pokemon can not be broken without moves, and a move can not be broken without a Pokemon. They can only ever be broken in combination with each other. The question in the title and poll creates a non-existent distinction.
The two questions that should be asked if a Pokemon/move combination is indeed broken are:
1. Would banning the move or the Pokemon result in a "better" metagame?
Defining better is hard, but we can take several reasonable measures. For one most people agree that a decentralised metagame is preferable, and that the metagame should be enjoyable. This would be quite hard to justify from theorymon either way in the case of banning Dragon moves or Dragon suspects, but testing would give us a reasonable idea.
2. Would banning the move or the Pokemon result in a less complicated ruleset?
This is a very valuable question to ask. Without it we would be overwhelmed with ideas to allow level 74 Dialga or Darkrai without Dark Void, and have to argue only on purely competitive grounds. Competitive arguments may lower the level Dialga is allowed to 68, or force Darkrai to also not use Life Orb, but could never say "no, this is pointless complexity", only "no this is too strong, make it weaker".
In the case of banning moves verses banning Pokemon, I think that with the current precedent banning even a relatively large number of Pokemon would result in a more simple ruleset.
There is also the question of how you weight the two previous questions to be considered, but that is down to your own philosophy. Personally, I really don't like the idea of banning moves unless the move causes a huge number of Pokemon to be overpowered or otherwise harms the metagame. From what I have seen, Outrage does not fit these criteria.
Edit: As was pointed out earlier in this thread this situation is somewhat like the situation with Berry Juice in Little Cup. However, unlike they assumed, the LC Juice testing is not over, it will be retested when SB2 comes out and the item is implemented correctly.
The two questions that should be asked if a Pokemon/move combination is indeed broken are:
1. Would banning the move or the Pokemon result in a "better" metagame?
Defining better is hard, but we can take several reasonable measures. For one most people agree that a decentralised metagame is preferable, and that the metagame should be enjoyable. This would be quite hard to justify from theorymon either way in the case of banning Dragon moves or Dragon suspects, but testing would give us a reasonable idea.
2. Would banning the move or the Pokemon result in a less complicated ruleset?
This is a very valuable question to ask. Without it we would be overwhelmed with ideas to allow level 74 Dialga or Darkrai without Dark Void, and have to argue only on purely competitive grounds. Competitive arguments may lower the level Dialga is allowed to 68, or force Darkrai to also not use Life Orb, but could never say "no, this is pointless complexity", only "no this is too strong, make it weaker".
In the case of banning moves verses banning Pokemon, I think that with the current precedent banning even a relatively large number of Pokemon would result in a more simple ruleset.
There is also the question of how you weight the two previous questions to be considered, but that is down to your own philosophy. Personally, I really don't like the idea of banning moves unless the move causes a huge number of Pokemon to be overpowered or otherwise harms the metagame. From what I have seen, Outrage does not fit these criteria.
Edit: As was pointed out earlier in this thread this situation is somewhat like the situation with Berry Juice in Little Cup. However, unlike they assumed, the LC Juice testing is not over, it will be retested when SB2 comes out and the item is implemented correctly.
Alright, let me see if I understand. It's the moves that put the Pokemon where they are is what you're saying? I agree with that completely. Without the moves, they wouldn't be anywhere. But also without the Pokemon, the moves would be nowhere.
Man I'm having a hard time putting my thoughts into words. Had to backspace this paragraph like 4 times.
From what I understand, RB Golbat wants to ban the moves because they are the defining moves on Suspects and could improve the diversity/balance/whatever of the metagame. Now, the justification I'm seeing from you is that the moves should be banned because they caused the Pokemon to get that high. This almost seems like an unarguable point, mostly because it's true. The Pokemon are where they stand because of the moves. But so are the other Pokemon who have those powerful 120, 140 Base Power STAB moves. Without them they wouldn't be used as much.
I don't recall saying they were unplayable, I was merely saying that they lacked the power to become as threatening as the other Dragons. (Other dragons refers to and will continue to refer to Garchomp, Lati@s, and Salamence.) We have Flygon counters, and I'll pull these from the analysis: Cresselia, Vaporeon, Suicune, Hippowdon, Gliscor, and Gyarados. We have Kingdra Counters: Bulky Waters, Blissey, Snorlax, Empoleon. We can handle these Pokemon in the metagame.
Now, we can't handle Salamence as easily. I can see what you're saying though, that the moves made him this powerful. The moves caused him to get powerful. The moves cause us to not have counters for him. But the moves only do that for him and the Lati twins. Other people have already mentioned that Garchomp could use Dragon Claw, I won't delve into that.
Key words: UU Players. Altaria is a beast in UU but I'm sure it has its counters, or it would be Suspect perhaps. Also, I don't take those kind of sentences to be literal. There are others just like it, although not written like that.
Heatran: For example, even Blissey risks being 2HKOed by a Flash Fire-boosted Fire Blast after Stealth Rock damage, and anything that doesn't resist Fire will be permanently destroyed.
Metagross: Meteor Mash is your primary attacking option as it is capable of dealing great amount of damage to most Pokémon regardless of whether they resist the hit or not.
Tyranitar: Choice Band Tyranitar is one of the most monstrously powerful physical threats in the fourth generation.
Scizor: Choice Band Scizor is a real force, being able to revenge kill many threats with Bullet Punch, or even tear through whatever switches in with its 591 Attack stat (with Choice Band).
It would be great if you could tell me the premier walls of UU that Altaria menaces. I know nothing of the UU metagame so I can't say anything about Altaria. From what I can see after looking at the tier list though, is that high HP Pokemon tend to lack Defense, while high Def Pokemon tend to lack HP. Exceptions I found were Rhyperior, Tangrowth, Slowbro and Umbreon. All I can say is that in OU, it really isn't that good, meaning I can pin it down to the 70 base Atk in standard play.
I would like to say I wish I knew how to conclude this, but I don't. I agree the moves played some part in determining how powerful the Pokemon were, but not so much so that the banning is necessary to make a better metagame of some sort. I think that these moves should be left, as truly we're looking at it affecting 4 Pokemon, and not necessarily for the better. These stats of the Pokemon have made them menacing. We also need to remember while this may take away from the Offensive Characteristic of Ubers for some suspects, it wouldn't take away from Support or Defense. And I can't end my post so Ill stop here.
Honestly, banning moves of a Pokemon is going too far. Honestly, no Pokemon is unstoppable with having DM/Outrage, it's not that hard to switch in a steel type to take the blow. I think the whole banning process is going out of proportion, especially with the rebanning of Garchomp.
For all you people who keep citing other pokemon with 120/140 BP moves. The difference here is that Dragon is a MUCH better attacking type than any other type in the metagame. Comparing Outrage to Flare Blitz does not work because the type advantage Dragon has over Flare Blitz makes them 100% different attacks.
The truth is that neither is broken. Nor the pokemon themselves in case of all not uber pokemon , and not their moves in case of not uber pokemon.
The combination is , in the case of the two (and not three until a test proves otherwise) uber pokemon that may without those Dragon moves be eligible for the OU metagame.
I don't have any power to do anything about it , but if people decide to ban Outrage and Draco Meteor from all Dragon pokemon that get it , then it appears to me that it's a bad idea. And i can't understand why anyone would agree with it. Because those not broken pokemon already have Dragon Pulse and Dragon Claw already , so it's not too bad of a Nerf appears to me to be faulty logic. Maybe Gross doesn't need BP to be OU. If ever in a hypothetical future Scizor without BP is the only Scizor allowed in the OU should we ban Gross BP as well ?
I disagree with the logic that we should nerf OU pokemon which are not broken because we want to nerf ubers as well so that they can be used in the OU metagame.
You either nerf the ubers only or you don't do anything at all in that case if for some unknown reason , to use the dragons without the moves in OU , you have to ban the move from every Dragon that get's it in the OU metagame.
The combination is , in the case of the two (and not three until a test proves otherwise) uber pokemon that may without those Dragon moves be eligible for the OU metagame.
I don't have any power to do anything about it , but if people decide to ban Outrage and Draco Meteor from all Dragon pokemon that get it , then it appears to me that it's a bad idea. And i can't understand why anyone would agree with it. Because those not broken pokemon already have Dragon Pulse and Dragon Claw already , so it's not too bad of a Nerf appears to me to be faulty logic. Maybe Gross doesn't need BP to be OU. If ever in a hypothetical future Scizor without BP is the only Scizor allowed in the OU should we ban Gross BP as well ?
I disagree with the logic that we should nerf OU pokemon which are not broken because we want to nerf ubers as well so that they can be used in the OU metagame.
You either nerf the ubers only or you don't do anything at all in that case if for some unknown reason , to use the dragons without the moves in OU , you have to ban the move from every Dragon that get's it in the OU metagame.
The Dragon-type is resisted only by Steel. Therefore it is a superior type to say, Fire because Fire has one immunity (Flash Fire) and resisted by 4 types.
Also, RB Golbat, if that was at any way directed towards my statement I was merely saying that some Pokemon would be lower ranked if they lacked higher base power moves.
However, Dragon only hits one type for super effective damage, whereas Fire hits 4. That's why I asked what makes an attacking type good.
I think it is more important to note here that to have more viable OU Pokemon is certainly ideal, and that should banning the moves themselves result in Salamence and Latias remaining OU, and potentially result in Latios and Garchomp being retested, that may fit under your ideals of a "better" metagame in that regard, as clearly we can only speculate how the meta itself will evolve from the decision alone.
Leveling specific Pokemon differently to allow them to attend OU is a different subject all together. But with regards to banning moves within the Uber realm, I've already covered that point on the last page. But I do understand your point.
Unfortunately, the more rules and policies we implement, the more complicated our ruleset becomes. That's just how it is.