Metagame Champions OU Metagame Discussion

my opinion is irrelevant but i feel like rambling so imma do that

the only mod to the game should be allowing for 6v6 battles because what is even the point of a champions ou otherwise, thats just what an ou is.
item clause kinda has to exist tho, like thats just the availability of items in the game. if you could only get one lefties in sv and couldnt trade a new one in, you would be limited to one lefties in sv ou. and that logic applies here.

on potential ubers:
mega gengar is obviously banned
i do not think we need to witness mega blastoise clicking shell smash and killing everything. like we already know its going to do that. not like this format has grassy glide rilla or thunderclap raging bolt or... ferrothorn... (and idk how much those help anyway)
mega alakazam feels safer to me but if it has nasty plot its still probably dumb. idk i never got to see this guy do stuff with plot and idk how much psyterrain was important for that
mega lucario is still mega lucario and this guys checks are all rocks fodder
palafin is palafin! idk this guy was broke in the crack format i dont exactly feel like it needs to be set free.
they gave mega lopunny sd + mach punch man idk if this rabbit is a fair player. hasnt been broken before so it should be let free but i doubt that itll last
mega starmie is fast as balls and has huge power bruh we are NOT safe from that demon


on the topic of pokemon who have been ubers and may not here
sneasler is still an absurd pokemon with that speed and attack and sd but it has no reliable way of getting unburden going that isnt going to let it die to prio. i think it might be fine
mega kang doesnt have seismic toss anymore (nor pup) so its just a strong bulky pretty fast normal type. it has 51% body slam paras and 36% crunch defense drops so it might get sent away for that rng stuff but on its own this mon isnt really anything crazy imo
archaludon got shot lmao rip bozo
i dont trust that matchup moth but no hdb no hidden power no tera maybe its fine
 
Mewthree69 said:
I'm against Champions OU being 6v6. I'm not questioning that 6v6 is (probably) better, but I have no interest in playing a literal fanfic meta for a fantasy version of Champions that doesn't exist. If we're gonna engage in blatant larping, then I'd much rather play a "Champions Plus" format with more pokemon, more items and maybe even custom nerfs and buffs. It's not logically consistent to selectively mod in only 6v6 and not continue modding the game further. The moment you start larping in mechanics that don't exist in official software, you open this format to being criticized for not fixing everything wrong with the game. This format looks DOA either way, let it have a peaceful death like BDSP and LGPE OU
Click to expand...
Then don't play it, this was the exact same thing with ZA OU and this format is just made for people who want to play it. I don't get the point of calling it "blatant larping", this tier is just as real as SV OU is lol.
 
Mewthree69 said:
I'm against Champions OU being 6v6. I'm not questioning that 6v6 is (probably) better, but I have no interest in playing a literal fanfic meta for a fantasy version of Champions that doesn't exist. If we're gonna engage in blatant larping, then I'd much rather play a "Champions Plus" format with more pokemon, more items and maybe even custom nerfs and buffs. It's not logically consistent to selectively mod in only 6v6 and not continue modding the game further. The moment you start larping in mechanics that don't exist in official software, you open this format to being criticized for not fixing everything wrong with the game. This format looks DOA either way, let it have a peaceful death like BDSP and LGPE OU
Click to expand...
This is a very weird point in my opinion, given that you could say the same thing about stuff like sleep clause or the entire tiering system or even stuff like the timer. Showdown has really never tried to be 100% accurate to the original game, and I don't see why this should be the exception. 6v6 doesn't exist in the main game, sure, but its always been the most used format for pokemon battles in the mainline games for forever, so I don't really see why this is so much larger of a jump than any of the other changes smogon makes. Also given how 3v3 is generally very niche/disliked and this is a third party battle simulator anyways, I don't see why we shouldn't change this for the vast majority of people who play 6v6 singles on this site.
 
I'm making this post to say I am STRONGLY in favour of not having "item clause" as in: do not lock in teams to have only 1 of each item. Doing this will completely destroy balance teams, as they will not be able to have more than 1 leftovers items at a time, making balance almost impossible to play (and it's already gonna be really hard to do so since the power creep is tru the roof) I do no think we need to keep the "purity" of this meta, as we are already playing a meta that DOES NOT exist on the actual game, there is no point in limiting ourselves to exclusively what the game does, as we have already broke that rule. The only thing we need to do is decide "where" to draw the line. But I fully believe the line should NOT be drawn at the item clause, and multiple of the same items should be allowed. We should not actively make this a worst meta for the dumb decision GF takes, even more so since we are already making our OWN rules, there is no point in keeping a purity in the metagame that doesn't exist and unfortunately will never exist. I fully believe allowing repeating items in team will only bring us a better meta and more variety, for that I believe it should be implemented.
 
Kibo said:
I'm making this post to say I am STRONGLY in favour of not having "item clause" as in: do not lock in teams to have only 1 of each item. Doing this will completely destroy balance teams, as they will not be able to have more than 1 leftovers items at a time, making balance almost impossible to play (and it's already gonna be really hard to do so since the power creep is tru the roof) I do no think we need to keep the "purity" of this meta, as we are already playing a meta that DOES NOT exist on the actual game, there is no point in limiting ourselves to exclusively what the game does, as we have already broke that rule. The only thing we need to do is decide "where" to draw the line. But I fully believe the line should NOT be drawn at the item clause, and multiple of the same items should be allowed. We should not actively make this a worst meta for the dumb decision GF takes, even more so since we are already making our OWN rules, there is no point in keeping a purity in the metagame that doesn't exist and unfortunately will never exist. I fully believe allowing repeating items in team will only bring us a better meta and more variety, for that I believe it should be implemented.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this. 6v6 is not available in Champions and that means that unlike previous gens we have the opportunity to go beyond Gamefreak's limitations (to a certain extent). An item clause would kill the meta imo. It is too limiting on a dex that is already limited enough by a lack of pokemon and no offensive items except for choice scarf. I hope that this won't be implemented because while I will probably still play the tier anyway I don't believe I will find it nearly as fun.

Edit: Technically there are other offensive items like silk scarf and scope lens but silk scarf is probably only going to be used on Dragonite and scope lens is terrible imo.
 
Item clause sucks, but it's coded into champions in a way it hasn't been coded into previous ones. As a community we make efforts to diverge from the games as little as possible within reason (ex. overruling sleep clause for sleep ban), and I think this is an obvious change to implement to continue with that alignment. That being said, gamefreak has created a metagame that will be close to unplayable without a heavy hand with the bans, so I would encourage the council to do that. I wouldn't mind auto-banning all the obvious stuff like mega gengar and blastoise, palafin, espathra, basculegion etc.

To all the people who are saying "if it's not 1:1 with champions we should feel free to change everything" I say you're going too far. Besides the ONE change to implement 6v6 as opposed to BSS, let's not make our own petmod. We never said "let's allow multiple mega evolutions because we want them, we've modified the game before, and it would make more mega evos viable". We said "That's how gamefreak is doing it, and let's roll with that".
 
Last edited:
i'm gonna preface this by saying -- i'm not good at this game at all, so if i'm wrong on anything that's my bad throw rocks at me

that aside, i think the Item Clause situation is tough: i could see it later down the line when there's more than 3 good items available, but as it stands:
- bulky teams are hit extremely hard by no boots + 1 Leftovers user per team, on top of a good chunk of their best Pokémon being gone or losing moves -- Sitrus Berry  technically works but like... really?
- offensive teams are a little less hurt -- they get to keep Choice Scarf, at the very least -- but there's no Orb or Band/Specs, meaning unless your name is Pikachu your best damage option item-wise is one of the 20% items (on the bright side, Gatr is free from all the "Sheer Force + Orb hits harder" comments)
- if you're mourning stall, A) cat_pointing_laughing.jpg B) just most of the same issues brought up with bulkier teams, no Boots, 1 Leftovers, no Toxic Orb for that stupid scorpion

...so Item Clause with all this going on doesn't seem like a great decision for anyone who isn't excited for "Battle Stadium Singles but bad"
 
VGC and BSS rulesets have clearly been hard coded into Champions rather than implementing the full battle system and applying teambuilder restrictions.

There is clear precedent that our competitive singles rulesets have never had item clause while the official formats have. If we're capable of reverting one change (6v6), other reversions (removing item clause) should also be on the table. There is a large difference between well-defined changes with historical context and just modding the game for the fun of it.

Attempts to introduce item clause to singles (e.g. Freezai's Freedom Cup) have shown that item clause reduces teambuilding options, overwhelmingly benefits certain team styles, and limits creativity.

For those who care about "gamefreak's vision": go play SS with a fully accurate in game timer. We've made far more egregious mods in the past to keep the series playable; no reason to stop now.
 
Runo said:
y'all what item is even used on multiple mons enough that warrants modding the game? It's sounding like just leftovers.
Click to expand...
And leftovers is the best item in the entire game, especially now that boots and most good offensive items are gone. It is going to be gen 3 OU all over again where most mons are running the same 4 items because everything else is bad or specific. If we were to have an item clause teambuilding would be so much more limited due to only being able to run the same few combinations that prove to be the most viable. I personally don't find that very fun especially in the long run.
 
idt its that deep this is a live service game, things will be added back in, even if teambuilding sucks for a few weeks that might just be the weight we bare to not just already do this kind of thing imo

since ik some people here havent installed the game (fair), even the item shop menu icon has items not officially available

its gonna happen
 
It has not even been a full day of champions being released, there isn't even a ladder on Showdown yet. I don't understand how people will continue to speculate that having Item Clause will not be fun and advocate for arbitrarily modding the game. Hell on that end, I'm more confident than before that modding the game to have 6v6 allowed was nothing more than a kneejerk reaction because it has just given way to people advocating to mod the game further. I do not think it is wise to be appealing to comfort and familiarity and "muh precedent" at all. I would rather give cart accuracy a chance here, nothing about Smogon tiering is impeded because of the Champions mechanics.
 
Item clause should definitely be removed. Its existed in the past for BSS and VGC formats but never for 6v6 battles in prior gens. This creates a healthier metagame and allows a wider breadth of playstyles.

If we are looking to stay "as close to the game as possible", then we shouldnt even be having this discussion since 6v6 isnt even playable. But if were looking to have a healthy and playable metagame then I think this is an adjustment we can afford to make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top