Metagame Champions OU Metagame Discussion

[Crazeysman]

What are people's thoughts on Ape? I'm doing my own assessment of it and it feels mixed. https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9championsou-2646722169-lmy9q78vw01gmp14a24drnluhm6sit8pw

Click to collapse...

I’m not gonna lie to you, this replay is a bad example. You kinda made some bad plays that led to that loss, switching a Mon weak to drain punch on ape that already has one bulk up is a free heal,

Still after sacking Sammy, you could have come back with meganium, I figure you were trying to predict but against a Mon that can 6-0 your team you gotta do damage first worry about predicting later. I assume you are max special attack max hp so dazzling gleam would have been the move.

32+ SpA Meganium-Mega Dazzling Gleam vs. 32 HP / 32 SpD Annihilape: 138-164 (63.5 - 75.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

Had you sacked slowking maybe get a future sight or went hard meganium without attacking the ape you could have survived two rage fists even after hitting ape once and killed it or forced it out.

 

[Moisture99]

This metagame just doesn't have enough defensive guys and especially items to handle a lot of threats, especially since some of the best defensive pieces like Dragalge and Meganium require you to give up a mega slot.

Item clause is super lame btw. I wish we had a format with SV OU mons + megas, smogon could be less stubborn just for once. Like surely something as historically unproblematic as Mega Swampert would be fine if corv didn't have to handle half the tier by itself (exaggeration). Unironically Alomomola would do a lot of good for the tier.

Also samurott is for sure broken but I wouldn't kick him out because he's quite important for handling big threats like metagross, gambit, aegislash, delphox, and rain. Other stuff like ceruledge or even froslass too, that typing is crazy.

Broken checks broken whatever, this tier is kind of unserious to begin with (no hate tho) so we should try to keep as many new toys as possible.

Mega Starmie is not forgotten.

 

[Zyro Pegasi Thunder]

This metagame just doesn't have enough defensive guys and especially items to handle a lot of threats, especially since some of the best defensive pieces like Dragalge and Meganium require you to give up a mega slot.

Item clause is super lame btw. I wish we had a format with SV OU mons + champions megas, smogon could be less stubborn just for once. Like surely something as historically unproblematic as Mega Swampert would be fine if corv didn't have to handle half the tier by itself (exaggeration). Unironically Alomomola would do a lot of good for the tier.

Also samurott is for sure broken but I wouldn't kick him out because he's quite important for handling big threats like metagross, gambit, aegislash, delphox, and rain. Other stuff like ceruledge or even froslass too, that typing is crazy.

Broken checks broken whatever, this tier is kind of unserious to begin with (no hate tho) so we should try to keep as many new toys as possible.

Mega Starmie is not forgotten.

Click to collapse...

I wish we had a format of national dex with za content and champions buffs

 

[4G3NT CROISSANT]

I’m not gonna lie to you, this replay is a bad example. You kinda made some bad plays that led to that loss, switching a Mon weak to drain punch on ape that already has one bulk up is a free heal,

Still after sacking Sammy, you could have come back with meganium, I figure you were trying to predict but against a Mon that can 6-0 your team you gotta do damage first worry about predicting later. I assume you are max special attack max hp so dazzling gleam would have been the move.

32+ SpA Meganium-Mega Dazzling Gleam vs. 32 HP / 32 SpD Annihilape: 138-164 (63.5 - 75.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

Had you sacked slowking maybe get a future sight or went hard meganium without attacking the ape you could have survived two rage fists even after hitting ape once and killed it or forced it out.

Click to collapse...

That wasn't me. Huh? I was the ape user. Besides that, my only point is that it feels broken sometimes then feels near useless other times. It is VERY matchup oriented so all of the talk on banning it is my wonder.

 

[Geneade]

Champions OU: Tiering Constraints, Archetype Viability, and Over-Tuning :murkrow:​

From all the engagement I've seen regarding the tiering document, this is probably the most delicate survey we'll see in a long time. Balancing a metagame isn't merely about removing broken elements, but managing the ecosystem as a whole (which is why I'm personally for unvaulting certain mons as meta shift, but that's another story). The broader implications of chipping away at the tier's offensive power will inevitably highlight the core tension of competitive tiering, triggering a cascade that fundamentally alters the tier's archetypal balance entirely.

1. The Rain Dilemma: Archaludon vs. Mega Swampert :archaludon: :swampert-mega:​

Rain was not a prevalent archetype in Champions before the introduction of Mega Swampert, and in standard formats, Rain teams often struggle without a dedicated, overwhelmingly powerful Water-type abuser. (That is to say, riding on the coat-tails of said Pokémon is the archetype's whole premise).

If Mega Swampert is removed, Rain is likely to cease being a prevalent competitive archetype (in part due to the Mega Starmie & Palafin bans). Basculegion exists, but they lack the overall bulk & coverage of Pert. At this rate, Banning Mega Swampert effectively deletes Rain from the tier.

In practice, removing the defensive anchor of Archaludon is the "least destructive" option, given it's not commonly used outside of rain teams. I suspect the real stigma lies in the synergies that enable rain to function as a flexible weather-control team, rather than strictly Hyper Offense. Mega Swampert is a linear attacker whose damage output is static. It takes considerable recoil from Wave Crash, and its checks are well-defined. It forces adaptation, but it operates within predictable mathematical boundaries that can be prepared for.

Archaludon, however, functions as a dynamic snowball sweeper that leverages the format's specific constraints. The combination of Stamina (boosting Defense on every hit taken) and Electro Shot (instant charge in Rain, +1 Special Attack) creates mathematically unwinnable situations for standard defensive cores. This also considers the unpredictability it creates through movepool & item flexibility, which turns the match into a guessing game, making it a more degressive element on teambuilding and battle sequencing than Mega Swampert.

If the objective is to preserve archetype diversity while reducing the guessing-game aspect, banning Archaludon is the minimal intervention. If the objective is to eliminate the oppressive damage thresholds, banning Mega Swampert is necessary, but at the cost of an entire archetype. Edit: This isn't to say rain will die in its entirety; more so, the comparative/perceptive higher barrier of entry with Pert gone will drastically lower incentive.

2. The Ramifications of Removing Annihilape :annihilape:​

Annihilape is not that ubiquitous on ladder, but its presence dictates teambuilding constraints. It is the premier punisher of passive play. Without Annihilape, the tier's Balance and Stall archetypes lose their primary antagonist.

• Rise of Passive Structures: Balance teams would no longer need to fear a late-game Bulk Up + Rage Fist sweep. This would allow them to run increasingly passive defensive cores (e.g., Toxapex + Slowking-Galar + Corviknight) without consequence.
  
  
• Stall Becomes Dominant: Stall teams rely on attrition and Toxic-stalling. Annihilape is one of the only Pokémon that can reliably set up on these structures and break them. Removing it removes a vital pressure valve.

Rage Fist nerfs already reduced consistency, and its presence is necessary to keep passive playstyles honest. Banning it would push the meta toward a slower, more attrition-based state (which contradicts the objective of maintaining a dynamic and interactive metagame if that's the idea).

3. The Threat of Stall and the Accumulation of Bans :dragalge-mega: :slowbro:​

Stall relies on overwhelming defensive synergy and residual damage. If the tier systematically removes primary wallbreakers: Mega Swampert, Annihilape, Mega Raichu, OHKO, etc. Stall becomes the default best strategy.

• To fix Rain, offensive power must be removed.
  
  
• Removing offensive power empowers Stall.
  
  
• Stall is notoriously difficult to tier against without fundamentally changing game mechanics.

TLDR: There is rarely a "right" choice in tiering, only trade-offs. The question is, which trade-off is most acceptable.

• If Rain is deemed uncompetitive due to its guessing games and snowball potential, banning Archaludon is the most surgical solution, despite the loss of a defensive anchor.
  
  
• If Rain is deemed uncompetitive due to its raw damage output, banning Mega Swampert is necessary, despite the "death" of the Rain archetype.
  
  
• Annihilape must be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating.

Ideally, targeting specific interactions that break the metagame's Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic (Archaludon dual-setup + guessing game) rather than the raw power (Mega Swampert) preserves the most metagame diversity while addressing the most degenerate elements. Future tiering should remain vigilant against the risk of Stall if offensive options continue to be removed.

 

[fluff!!]

Even ChatGPT agrees that Archaludon should be banned. At this point, what are we waiting for???!!

By the way, saying that Rain would straight up die if we banned Mega Swampert is just not true. Rain would still have Archaludon and Basculegion, and Mega Meganium could easily become the archetype's main mega again, as it was in M-A. Mega Scizor is still a great pick for Rain as well.

 

[Melbelle]

Even ChatGPT agrees that Archaludon should be banned. At this point, what are we waiting for???!!

Click to collapse...

this is a revolutionary new way to balance smogon metagames

 

[Geneade]

Even ChatGPT agrees that Archaludon should be banned. At this point, what are we waiting for???!!

By the way, saying that Rain would straight up die if we banned Mega Swampert is just not true. Rain would still have Archaludon and Basculegion, and Mega Meganium could easily become the archetype's main mega again, as it was in M-A. Mega Scizor is still a great pick for Rain as well.

Click to collapse...

You could be right. I got swept by a Sun-Weather Ball Greninja not too long ago. Can never underestimate the niches at this point. I more so meant rain usage would straight up plummet given the overreliance on purely Bird + Swampert I've seen, but that could be mid-elo bias.

 

[Geneade]

this is a revolutionary new way to balance smogon metagames

Click to collapse...

*Insert emoji-heavy dissertation on why HP Ice Raikou & Make it Rain Hisui-Goodra should be banned from OU

 

[Zyro Pegasi Thunder]

:Dragonite-Mega: @ Dragoninite
Ability: Multiscale
Level: 50
EVs: 32 HP / 32 SpA / 2 SpD
Modest Nature
- Draco Meteor
- Hurricane
- Weather Ball
- Thunder
I think :Dragonite-Mega: may have potential to become a Rain Bulky Attacker if both :Swampert-Mega: and :Archaludon: get banned and I want them to get banned

 

[harriss2205]

Champions OU: Tiering Constraints, Archetype Viability, and Over-Tuning :murkrow:​

From all the engagement I've seen regarding the tiering document, this is probably the most delicate survey we'll see in a long time. Balancing a metagame isn't merely about removing broken elements, but managing the ecosystem as a whole (which is why I'm personally for unvaulting certain mons as meta shift, but that's another story). The broader implications of chipping away at the tier's offensive power will inevitably highlight the core tension of competitive tiering, triggering a cascade that fundamentally alters the tier's archetypal balance entirely.

1. The Rain Dilemma: Archaludon vs. Mega Swampert :archaludon: :swampert-mega:​

Rain was not a prevalent archetype in Champions before the introduction of Mega Swampert, and in standard formats, Rain teams often struggle without a dedicated, overwhelmingly powerful Water-type abuser. (That is to say, riding on the coat-tails of said Pokémon is the archetype's whole premise).

If Mega Swampert is removed, Rain is likely to cease being a prevalent competitive archetype (in part due to the Mega Starmie & Palafin bans). Basculegion exists, but they lack the overall bulk & coverage of Pert. At this rate, Banning Mega Swampert effectively deletes Rain from the tier.

In practice, removing the defensive anchor of Archaludon is the "least destructive" option, given it's not commonly used outside of rain teams. I suspect the real stigma lies in the synergies that enable rain to function as a flexible weather-control team, rather than strictly Hyper Offense. Mega Swampert is a linear attacker whose damage output is static. It takes considerable recoil from Wave Crash, and its checks are well-defined. It forces adaptation, but it operates within predictable mathematical boundaries that can be prepared for.

Archaludon, however, functions as a dynamic snowball sweeper that leverages the format's specific constraints. The combination of Stamina (boosting Defense on every hit taken) and Electro Shot (instant charge in Rain, +1 Special Attack) creates mathematically unwinnable situations for standard defensive cores. This also considers the unpredictability it creates through movepool & item flexibility, which turns the match into a guessing game, making it a more degressive element on teambuilding and battle sequencing than Mega Swampert.

If the objective is to preserve archetype diversity while reducing the guessing-game aspect, banning Archaludon is the minimal intervention. If the objective is to eliminate the oppressive damage thresholds, banning Mega Swampert is necessary, but at the cost of an entire archetype. Edit: This isn't to say rain will die in its entirety; more so, the comparative/perceptive higher barrier of entry with Pert gone will drastically lower incentive.

2. The Ramifications of Removing Annihilape :annihilape:​

Annihilape is not that ubiquitous on ladder, but its presence dictates teambuilding constraints. It is the premier punisher of passive play. Without Annihilape, the tier's Balance and Stall archetypes lose their primary antagonist.

• Rise of Passive Structures: Balance teams would no longer need to fear a late-game Bulk Up + Rage Fist sweep. This would allow them to run increasingly passive defensive cores (e.g., Toxapex + Slowking-Galar + Corviknight) without consequence.
  
  
• Stall Becomes Dominant: Stall teams rely on attrition and Toxic-stalling. Annihilape is one of the only Pokémon that can reliably set up on these structures and break them. Removing it removes a vital pressure valve.

Rage Fist nerfs already reduced consistency, and its presence is necessary to keep passive playstyles honest. Banning it would push the meta toward a slower, more attrition-based state (which contradicts the objective of maintaining a dynamic and interactive metagame if that's the idea).

3. The Threat of Stall and the Accumulation of Bans :dragalge-mega: :slowbro:​

Stall relies on overwhelming defensive synergy and residual damage. If the tier systematically removes primary wallbreakers: Mega Swampert, Annihilape, Mega Raichu, OHKO, etc. Stall becomes the default best strategy.

• To fix Rain, offensive power must be removed.
  
  
• Removing offensive power empowers Stall.
  
  
• Stall is notoriously difficult to tier against without fundamentally changing game mechanics.

TLDR: There is rarely a "right" choice in tiering, only trade-offs. The question is, which trade-off is most acceptable.

• If Rain is deemed uncompetitive due to its guessing games and snowball potential, banning Archaludon is the most surgical solution, despite the loss of a defensive anchor.
  
  
• If Rain is deemed uncompetitive due to its raw damage output, banning Mega Swampert is necessary, despite the "death" of the Rain archetype.
  
  
• Annihilape must be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating.

Ideally, targeting specific interactions that break the metagame's Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic (Archaludon dual-setup + guessing game) rather than the raw power (Mega Swampert) preserves the most metagame diversity while addressing the most degenerate elements. Future tiering should remain vigilant against the risk of Stall if offensive options continue to be removed.

Click to collapse...

I disagree that Annihilape must be preserved to prevent stall from becoming dominant. Your given reason is that Annihilape is 'one of the only pokemon who can reliably set up on these structures,' but I don't think that's true. The main forms of attrition damage are:
- Hazards, which Annihilape has no special privilege to defend itself against. Its vulnerable to every form of hazards.
- Toxic, which Annihilape is able to push through with one set, and is therefore worse at resisting than any natively toxic immune pokemon: (Aegislash, Kingambit, Archaludon, Mawile, Metagross, Scizor, Sneasler, CM Clefable)
- Sand, which Annihilape has no special privilege to defend itself against.

Stall is already pretty bad in Champions OU. The single item clause removes lefties from four team members (assuming you have a mega), there are few reliable ways to stop the prevelant ghost types from running away with the game after a boost - except for Kingambit, who isn't really a stall pokemon - and the metagame naturally demands so many defensive checks that teambuilding in stall much more challenging.

If you entertained this line of reasoning, would you still argue that Annihilape must be preserved?

 

[Geneade]

I disagree that Annihilape must be preserved to prevent stall from becoming dominant. Your given reason is that Annihilape is 'one of the only pokemon who can reliably set up on these structures,' but I don't think that's true. The main forms of attrition damage are:
- Hazards, which Annihilape has no special privilege to defend itself against. Its vulnerable to every form of hazards.
- Toxic, which Annihilape is able to push through with one set, and is therefore worse at resisting than any natively toxic immune pokemon: (Aegislash, Kingambit, Archaludon, Mawile, Metagross, Scizor, Sneasler, CM Clefable)
- Sand, which Annihilape has no special privilege to defend itself against.

Stall is already pretty bad in Champions OU. The single item clause removes lefties from four team members (assuming you have a mega), there are few reliable ways to stop the prevelant ghost types from running away with the game after a boost - except for Kingambit, who isn't really a stall pokemon - and the metagame naturally demands so many defensive checks that teambuilding in stall much more challenging.

If you entertained this line of reasoning, would you still argue that Annihilape must be preserved?

Click to collapse...

For one, attrition resist and passive play counters are 2 enitrely different arguments. On top of that, this entire stance is a glorified misclassification of how Annihilape functions within the game...And how are Steel types superior alternatives for stall breakers solely because of toxic immunity? (severe mismatch in role comprehension) The risk of Toxic is not much of a deterrent when you can Sub, Taunt, and/or Rest anyway. Not to mention, only 2 of the 8 you listed have reliable recovery options (stall's whole strategy is wearing you down by your lack of sustained recovery), and both are Skeledirge victims, at that.

Not entertaining a more degenerate metagame over nothing burgers like these. Unless I'm misinterpreting something?

 

[Zyro Pegasi Thunder]

Item Clause and the current Pokémon pool already make stall significantly harder to build. Limited recovery items, the lack of Heavy-Duty Boots, and the abundance of powerful setup sweepers and wallbreakers all place defensive teams under considerable pressure.

Because of that, I don't think preserving a Pokémon that is considered unhealthy simply because it makes stall even weaker is the right approach. If a Pokémon is broken, it should be evaluated on its own merits rather than on the fact that it suppresses one of the metagame's weaker archetypes.

 

[harriss2205]

For one, attrition resist and passive play counters are 2 enitrely different arguments. On top of that, this entire stance is a glorified misclassification of how Annihilape functions within the game...And how are Steel types superior alternatives for stall breakers solely because of toxic immunity? (severe mismatch in role comprehension) The risk of Toxic is not much of a deterrent when you can Sub, Taunt, and/or Rest anyway. Not to mention, only 2 of the 8 you listed have reliable recovery options (stall's whole strategy is wearing you down by your lack of sustained recovery), and both are Skeledirge victims, at that.

Not entertaining a more degenerate metagame over nothing burgers like these. Unless I'm misinterpreting something?

Click to collapse...

I hope I'm not coming across as rude, that's certainly not my intention. I think I've failed to communicate my thoughts to you. I'll give it another go, please be patient with me. You seem to take issue with the idea that there are pokemon who are better than annihilape at breaking stall. What I'm trying to say doesn't really depend on us agreeing over the tierlist of stall breakers, so I won't fight you on it.

Your initial point was that Annihilape was necessary for the metagame to avoid Stall becoming the dominant playstyle. I disagree with that notion. I think there are lots of pokemon who have good matchups into stall, and lots of pokemon who have effective forms of defence against the common means of attrition damage which I spoke about. I want to give some examples of common pokemon, who fit on multiple team archetypes, and who have a beneficial matchup into common stall pokemon:

- Sub CM Primarina
- Sub SD Aegislash
- SD Hisui-Samurott
- CM Mega-Clefable

I don't want to confuse a set up sweeper with a stallbreaker here, I think these pokemon are specifically good against common stall cores. Primarina has encore to lock pokemon into utility moves, psychic noise to prevent healing, and solid typing into common spikes setters (garchomp and chesnaught).
Aegislash is just the same. No encore, which is unfortunate, but its really *really* hard to wall. It outspeeds Skelidirge and gets a nice KO on any non-kasib varients.
Hisuian samurrot is on the chopping block, which I think is a good thing, but its undeniably an amazing stall breaker. It blows everything up, stacks hazard while it does so, and has both encore and taunt.
CM Mega Clefable has magic bounce and a really solid match up into a lot of the common stall cores, especially phazers.

Again, I'm not trying to say that annihilape isn't good against stall, or even that its not a top tier stall breaker. I'm just trying to make the argument that removing it wouldn't suddenly make stall the dominant archetype.

Really not trying to be rude, but I just plainly disagree.

 

[Da Pizza Man]

ChatGPT Ramblings about Stall

Click to collapse...

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

 

[Geneade]

I hope I'm not coming across as rude, that's certainly not my intention. I think I've failed to communicate my thoughts to you. I'll give it another go, please be patient with me. You seem to take issue with the idea that there are pokemon who are better than annihilape at breaking stall. What I'm trying to say doesn't really depend on us agreeing over the tierlist of stall breakers, so I won't fight you on it.

Your initial point was that Annihilape was necessary for the metagame to avoid Stall becoming the dominant playstyle. I disagree with that notion. I think there are lots of pokemon who have good matchups into stall, and lots of pokemon who have effective forms of defence against the common means of attrition damage which I spoke about. I want to give some examples of common pokemon, who fit on multiple team archetypes, and who have a beneficial matchup into common stall pokemon:

- Sub CM Primarina
- Sub SD Aegislash
- SD Hisui-Samurott
- CM Mega-Clefable

I don't want to confuse a set up sweeper with a stallbreaker here, I think these pokemon are specifically good against common stall cores. Primarina has encore to lock pokemon into utility moves, psychic noise to prevent healing, and solid typing into common spikes setters (garchomp and chesnaught).
Aegislash is just the same. No encore, which is unfortunate, but its really *really* hard to wall. It outspeeds Skelidirge and gets a nice KO on any non-kasib varients.
Hisuian samurrot is on the chopping block, which I think is a good thing, but its undeniably an amazing stall breaker. It blows everything up, stacks hazard while it does so, and has both encore and taunt.
CM Mega Clefable has magic bounce and a really solid match up into a lot of the common stall cores, especially phazers.

Again, I'm not trying to say that annihilape isn't good against stall, or even that its not a top tier stall breaker. I'm just trying to make the argument that removing it wouldn't suddenly make stall the dominant archetype.

Really not trying to be rude, but I just plainly disagree.

Click to collapse...

Took no offense whatsoever; the initial points you presented just came across slightly off-base from the point I was making. I was a bit confused, is all. I personally haven't experienced Ape being particularly strong outside of a balance/stall counterpick, so I'm on the side that it's good to have in the event too much power leaves the tier. Without a doubt, there are other capable breakers: H. Rott & Prim can both handle Unaware Skeledirge, for example. But if H. Rott is banned, stall becomes more unbearable with no dedicated hard counter. It's just me though; there are valid points on both ends, and you're probably right. We could go without it, maybe we couldn't. That was just my perception on it.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

Click to collapse...

Is there something about MLA formatting & typing more than 1 coherent paragraph that makes people shriek GPT, or are people just that sensitive over stall/Annihilape? ("easier to attack the messenger!" genepool) Not using software that would tell me Flame Orb Annihilape is a good strat because it thinks burn ticks can stack Rage Fist

 

[swordisbored]

Champions OU: Tiering Constraints, Archetype Viability, and Over-Tuning :murkrow:​

From all the engagement I've seen regarding the tiering document, this is probably the most delicate survey we'll see in a long time. Balancing a metagame isn't merely about removing broken elements, but managing the ecosystem as a whole (which is why I'm personally for unvaulting certain mons as meta shift, but that's another story). The broader implications of chipping away at the tier's offensive power will inevitably highlight the core tension of competitive tiering, triggering a cascade that fundamentally alters the tier's archetypal balance entirely.

1. The Rain Dilemma: Archaludon vs. Mega Swampert :archaludon: :swampert-mega:​

Rain was not a prevalent archetype in Champions before the introduction of Mega Swampert, and in standard formats, Rain teams often struggle without a dedicated, overwhelmingly powerful Water-type abuser. (That is to say, riding on the coat-tails of said Pokémon is the archetype's whole premise).

If Mega Swampert is removed, Rain is likely to cease being a prevalent competitive archetype (in part due to the Mega Starmie & Palafin bans). Basculegion exists, but they lack the overall bulk & coverage of Pert. At this rate, Banning Mega Swampert effectively deletes Rain from the tier.

In practice, removing the defensive anchor of Archaludon is the "least destructive" option, given it's not commonly used outside of rain teams. I suspect the real stigma lies in the synergies that enable rain to function as a flexible weather-control team, rather than strictly Hyper Offense. Mega Swampert is a linear attacker whose damage output is static. It takes considerable recoil from Wave Crash, and its checks are well-defined. It forces adaptation, but it operates within predictable mathematical boundaries that can be prepared for.

Archaludon, however, functions as a dynamic snowball sweeper that leverages the format's specific constraints. The combination of Stamina (boosting Defense on every hit taken) and Electro Shot (instant charge in Rain, +1 Special Attack) creates mathematically unwinnable situations for standard defensive cores. This also considers the unpredictability it creates through movepool & item flexibility, which turns the match into a guessing game, making it a more degressive element on teambuilding and battle sequencing than Mega Swampert.

If the objective is to preserve archetype diversity while reducing the guessing-game aspect, banning Archaludon is the minimal intervention. If the objective is to eliminate the oppressive damage thresholds, banning Mega Swampert is necessary, but at the cost of an entire archetype. Edit: This isn't to say rain will die in its entirety; more so, the comparative/perceptive higher barrier of entry with Pert gone will drastically lower incentive.

2. The Ramifications of Removing Annihilape :annihilape:​

Annihilape is not that ubiquitous on ladder, but its presence dictates teambuilding constraints. It is the premier punisher of passive play. Without Annihilape, the tier's Balance and Stall archetypes lose their primary antagonist.

• Rise of Passive Structures: Balance teams would no longer need to fear a late-game Bulk Up + Rage Fist sweep. This would allow them to run increasingly passive defensive cores (e.g., Toxapex + Slowking-Galar + Corviknight) without consequence.
  
  
• Stall Becomes Dominant: Stall teams rely on attrition and Toxic-stalling. Annihilape is one of the only Pokémon that can reliably set up on these structures and break them. Removing it removes a vital pressure valve.

Rage Fist nerfs already reduced consistency, and its presence is necessary to keep passive playstyles honest. Banning it would push the meta toward a slower, more attrition-based state (which contradicts the objective of maintaining a dynamic and interactive metagame if that's the idea).

3. The Threat of Stall and the Accumulation of Bans :dragalge-mega: :slowbro:​

Stall relies on overwhelming defensive synergy and residual damage. If the tier systematically removes primary wallbreakers: Mega Swampert, Annihilape, Mega Raichu, OHKO, etc. Stall becomes the default best strategy.

• To fix Rain, offensive power must be removed.
  
  
• Removing offensive power empowers Stall.
  
  
• Stall is notoriously difficult to tier against without fundamentally changing game mechanics.

TLDR: There is rarely a "right" choice in tiering, only trade-offs. The question is, which trade-off is most acceptable.

• If Rain is deemed uncompetitive due to its guessing games and snowball potential, banning Archaludon is the most surgical solution, despite the loss of a defensive anchor.
  
  
• If Rain is deemed uncompetitive due to its raw damage output, banning Mega Swampert is necessary, despite the "death" of the Rain archetype.
  
  
• Annihilape must be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating.

Ideally, targeting specific interactions that break the metagame's Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic (Archaludon dual-setup + guessing game) rather than the raw power (Mega Swampert) preserves the most metagame diversity while addressing the most degenerate elements. Future tiering should remain vigilant against the risk of Stall if offensive options continue to be removed.

Click to collapse...

Regarding rain I don't know why your post acts like there is only two decisions with those being the banning of Mega Swampert or Archaludon when the widely held belief currently is that banning Damp Rock is the action that should be taken. Regarding the power of stall I don't exactly agree there is any world where stall will become oppressive in this tier currently but I think taking the action of banning Damp Rock supports your argument. I agree that rain's matchup into stall isn't favourable in the slightest if Mega Swampert and especially Archaludon are banned but this offensive presence can be kept whilst nerfing the archetype through the banning of Damp Rock.

Banning Annihilape makes balance teams stronger, I agree but... When has this ever been a bad thing? Is this not a reason to ban Annihilape? To make the tier less offensive? What I don't agree on here is that Annihilape being banned makes stall better for the fact that I'd consider it as having one of the worst matchups into stall. On the surface, especially with the Rage Fist nerf, Annihilape can't do much into common stall Pokémon such as Clefable, Toxapex, Corviknight with the list of its bad matchups extending to Pokémon such as Gliscor and Skeledirge if you aren't running a Substitute or Rest set to be good into status conditions. In the stall matchup Close Combat makes you vulnerable and is easy to swap into, you aren't getting much mileage out of Drain Punch due to the many resists the archetype will have and you won't even get the chance to increase Rage Fist damage.

Overall, the take that defensive pieces being better is something to worry about is a strange interpretation of the metagame considering how dominant offensive teams are currently and the idea that stall will ever be an even above average archetype even if the bans you mentioned were to go through. You also neglected that the action that people want to take on rain is banning Damp Rock and that Annihilape is bad into stall and that banning it will only serve to help balance teams thrive which is what we want in this metagame.

 

[Geneade]

Regarding rain I don't know why your post acts like there is only two decisions with those being the banning of Mega Swampert or Archaludon when the widely held belief currently is that banning Damp Rock is the action that should be taken. Regarding the power of stall I don't exactly agree there is any world where stall will become oppressive in this tier currently but I think taking the action of banning Damp Rock supports your argument. I agree that rain's matchup into stall isn't favourable in the slightest if Mega Swampert and especially Archaludon are banned but this offensive presence can be kept whilst nerfing the archetype through the banning of Damp Rock.

Banning Annihilape makes balance teams stronger, I agree but... When has this ever been a bad thing? Is this not a reason to ban Annihilape? To make the tier less offensive? What I don't agree on here is that Annihilape being banned makes stall better for the fact that I'd consider it as having one of the worst matchups into stall. On the surface, especially with the Rage Fist nerf, Annihilape can't do much into common stall Pokémon such as Clefable, Toxapex, Corviknight with the list of its bad matchups extending to Pokémon such as Gliscor and Skeledirge if you aren't running a Substitute or Rest set to be good into status conditions. In the stall matchup Close Combat makes you vulnerable and is easy to swap into, you aren't getting much mileage out of Drain Punch due to the many resists the archetype will have and you won't even get the chance to increase Rage Fist damage.

Overall, the take that defensive pieces being better is something to worry about is a strange interpretation of the metagame considering how dominant offensive teams are currently and the idea that stall will ever be an even above average archetype even if the bans you mentioned were to go through. You also neglected that the action that people want to take on rain is banning Damp Rock and that Annihilape is bad into stall and that banning it will only serve to help balance teams thrive which is what we want in this metagame.

Click to collapse...

I'll quickly go over each point of contention:

I start out by calling attention to the 2 biggest points of friction the community showed based on "engagement I've seen regarding the tiering document." From visible posts after your announcement, 3 members were in favor of removing Damp Rock, and 6 were in favor of preserving it (this excludes your stance on its removal). My goal was to share my viewpoint on just Swampert vs Archaludon, as it looked like Damp Rock was already written out based on public posts.

Regarding Paragraph 2, it was perplexing to read how the goal is to "make the tier less offensive" only to see reasons why Annihilape isn't actually great offensively, but it mainly boils down to Annihilape being a late-game wincon and wreaking havoc after the opponents' checks have been chipped. Then, it takes advantage of gaps to bulk up/taunt/sub, etc. The idea isn't to 1v6 a stall team singlehandedly, but to bait the opponent to hit you (hard switch, taunting, etc.) and trap them in vulnerable positions to snowball. That is to say, it can potentially offer a straightforward solution to stall teams.

A sequence may look like: Corv clicks U-Turn, Annihilape hard switches to benefit from the blow, Unaware Clef is too vulnerable to eat hazards & a boosted rage fist, so Pex is opted for (HP + Defense Clef hits for 54% at most with Moonblast. Ape hits for 33.5 - 39.5% at 1 rage fist stack). You can attempt to poison w/Pex or hard switch back into Corv, anticipating the taunt. They decide to bulk up as you swap into Corv. Annihilape is naturally fast enough for another bulk-up before you can Brave Bird, so it takes at most 38.7 - 46.5%, while you suffer 11.5% - 13.8% recoil (considering 0 bulk investment on Ape). Annihilape deals 78.2 - 92.2% with Rage Fist. (Considering fully defense-invested Corv). Alternatively, you can Haze w/ Toxapex instead of swapping on the bulk-up turn, then the scenario repeats as the Annihilape used yet another bulk-up as you tried swapping into Corv, predicting the taunt. Maybe Annihilape used Substitute instead as you swap to Corv. OR, you swap into Skele instead as Ape bulks up, eat the hazards, get taunted, and realize you only hit for 43% at most on Hex. Meanwhile, the ape hits for 57.4 - 68.6%, considering 1 rage fist stack on full-defense invested dirge. These are some scenarios against ~1400+ & 1600+ elo.

Regarding your final paragraph, I mention at the end of my post that stall will be a concern if future offensive options continue to be removed. It's not me being confident enough to say the mons presented in this current doc are the sole thing keeping stall in check, but rather cautioning as a whole that banning too much power risks stall prevalence; thus, "Annihilape should be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating." I'm not arguing that Annihilape single-handedly clears stall teams; it can lose almost as easily as it can rise against it. In fact, I mentioned to a member earlier that "Ape is not particularly strong outside of a balance/stall counterpick." I believe Ape is tame enough not to interfere with the rest of the metagame, but capable enough to be an anti-metum to players who want an easier time against fat archetypes. In the future, we could be just fine without it. You're probably right, or maybe we remove it erroneously out of impulse. I believe both arguments have fun & noteworthy points to explore!

 

[swordisbored]

I'll quickly go over each point of contention:

I start out by calling attention to the 2 biggest points of friction the community showed based on "engagement I've seen regarding the tiering document." From visible posts after your announcement, 3 members were in favor of removing Damp Rock, and 6 were in favor of preserving it (this excludes your stance on its removal). My goal was to share my viewpoint on just Swampert vs Archaludon, as it looked like Damp Rock was already written out based on public posts.

Regarding Paragraph 2, it was perplexing to read how the goal is to "make the tier less offensive" only to see reasons why Annihilape isn't actually great offensively, but it mainly boils down to Annihilape being a late-game wincon and wreaking havoc after the opponents' checks have been chipped. Then, it takes advantage of gaps to bulk up/taunt/sub, etc. The idea isn't to 1v6 a stall team singlehandedly, but to bait the opponent to hit you (hard switch, taunting, etc.) and trap them in vulnerable positions to snowball. That is to say, it can potentially offer a straightforward solution to stall teams.

A sequence may look like: Corv clicks U-Turn, Annihilape hard switches to benefit from the blow, Unaware Clef is too vulnerable to eat hazards & a boosted rage fist, so Pex is opted for (HP + Defense Clef hits for 54% at most with Moonblast. Ape hits for 33.5 - 39.5% at 1 rage fist stack). You can attempt to poison w/Pex or hard switch back into Corv, anticipating the taunt. They decide to bulk up as you swap into Corv. Annihilape is naturally fast enough for another bulk-up before you can Brave Bird, so it takes at most 38.7 - 46.5%, while you suffer 11.5% - 13.8% recoil (considering 0 bulk investment on Ape). Annihilape deals 78.2 - 92.2% with Rage Fist. (Considering fully defense-invested Corv). Alternatively, you can Haze w/ Toxapex instead of swapping on the bulk-up turn, then the scenario repeats as the Annihilape used yet another bulk-up as you tried swapping into Corv, predicting the taunt. Maybe Annihilape used Substitute instead as you swap to Corv. OR, you swap into Skele instead as Ape bulks up, eat the hazards, get taunted, and realize you only hit for 43% at most on Hex. Meanwhile, the ape hits for 57.4 - 68.6%, considering 1 rage fist stack on full-defense invested dirge. These are some scenarios against ~1400+ & 1600+ elo.

Regarding your final paragraph, I mention at the end of my post that stall will be a concern if future offensive options continue to be removed. It's not me being confident enough to say the mons presented in this current doc are the sole thing keeping stall in check, but rather cautioning as a whole that banning too much power risks stall prevalence; thus, "Annihilape should be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating." I'm not arguing that Annihilape single-handedly clears stall teams; it can lose almost as easily as it can rise against it. In fact, I mentioned to a member earlier that "Ape is not particularly strong outside of a balance/stall counterpick." I believe Ape is tame enough not to interfere with the rest of the metagame, but capable enough to be an anti-metum to players who want an easier time against fat archetypes. In the future, we could be just fine without it. You're probably right, or maybe we remove it erroneously out of impulse. I believe both arguments have fun & noteworthy points to explore!

Click to collapse...

You're right but it is important to know that things change as more responses come in. With that statement I was really saying the perspective that I've seen from players who play the tier a bunch and speak about it in the Discord and on the forums.

Annihilape makes balance worse, it is good into balance and not common stall archetypes. It makes offense better by being so great into balance. Also your point about it against stall is true for any Pokémon but I'd still argue it is below average when handling stall.

I would also like to mention that I believe stall is a genuinely bad archetype right now. Semi stall is usable.

I find this second paragraph odd because this sequence of events can never be possible. Corviknight on every single successful stall team in this tier doesn't run U-Turn. Momentum from pivoting moves serves no purpose on stall teams and the Pokémon usually opts for Iron Defense and Body Press. Even in this fictional scenario Clefable wins here with a healing move, also your damage calculations are wrong and I have no clue where you got these from.

32+ Atk Annihilape Rage Fist (100) vs. 32 HP / 32+ Def Clefable: 76-90 (37.6 - 44.5%) -- guaranteed 3HKO
0 SpA Clefable Moonblast vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Annihilape: 114-134 (61.6 - 72.4%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

If Annihilape is specially defensive then you lose out on power and Clefable wins and if Annihilape is offensive then Clefable deals great damage.

For this last part I think because stall is so bad right now it will honestly never get as much out of control as your theorising, there are still so many absurd offensive Pokémon with few good defensive ones. I agree with Annihilape being a balance counterpick but ideas such as Defiant boost dissuading Defog isn't really true for stall teams with Pokémon that have Unaware and Haze amongst other physical walls that balance teams may not have. Whether we should take action on it is quite nuanced, my opinion is that it provides nothing good for the tier in contrary to yours but just because I think that isn't good enough reasoning. If Annihilape is to be banned I think it'll be for the reason that it accuentuates hazard stack against Defog users like Corviknight.

I can assure you that the council won't make any haphazard decisions and even if Annihilape is to be banned and honestly even without it being banned I encourage you to try other Pokémon who are great into more defensive teams that are on the radar of some people like Blaziken, Mega Charizard X and Mega Metagross.

Basically, with the Pokémon we have in M-B I don't think we could make any decision that would make stall go out of control without quite literally banning half the offensive Pokémon. In future regulations though, when we're bound to get more defensive Pokémon, we'll obviously keep how strong more defensive playstyles can become with certain bans in mind. I would also like to mention that in future regulations a lot of Pokémon and items will likely be unbanned. For example, I don't see Gholdengo or Light Clay being banned forever nor Annihilape banned for many regulations if it were to be.

 

[bsjb]

I reached third place in the ranked ladder with my rain M-swamp team the day before yesterday, but I dropped down yesterday.
team url: https://pokepast.es/4ef9e6e1a7e92360
With Wave Crash, Swampert can reliably 2HKO Corviknight and the Rotom of lack maximum def; neither Mega Dragalge nor Mega Metagross can withstand swamp's attacks. Poison Jab handles Meganium (Ice Punch is not recommended, as its damage output is comparable to Earthquake even against targets weak to Ice).
Swampert now boasts offensive power comparable to Life Orb Bascu and Ground-type coverage, while also being Unafraid of Sucker Punch. The offensive strategy in rain involves using Swampert and Bascu as a "suicide squad" to bombard the opponent; if you encounter an unmanageable defensive wall—such as Slowbro or Corviknight that keeps using Roost—you can simply use Flip Turn to pivot into Archaludon to handle it. The player using the rain team only needs to focus on attacking and making predictive plays, putting all the pressure on the opponent.
Additionally, I recommend running a Special Attack-boosting nature and Ice Beam on Pelipper, allowing it to deal with Garchomp, a common threat in the metagame.
From my personal experience, the Rain system doesn't have a high ceiling, but it requires no complex strategic maneuvering
and offers a high skill floor. Both the Swampert and Bascu sets are tied to rain; if the opponent changes the weather, the match becomes an uphill battle. Therefore, the Damp Rock isn't the main threaten. The truly matter is Swampert's Water/Ground offensive coverage. When countering rain teams, rather than searching for a defensive pivot capable of tanking a Wave Crash, it is far more effective to simply run a weather setter like Hippowdon; by using Stealth Rock to chip away at Pelipper's HP, you can easily
defeat the rain team.
View attachment 846074

Click to collapse...

As a rain team player, here is my take on the situation.
My suggested ban priority is: Swampert > Archaludon > Damp Rock.
First, Damp Rock is definitely not a threat. As I mentioned earlier, the easiest way to beat a rain team is to use a weather setter to change the weather; once the weather changes, it makes no difference whether the rain lasts for 8 turns or 5.
Regarding Swampert and Archaludon: I recommend banning Swampert because doing so weakens the rain archetype less than banning Archaludon would.
That’s right—you heard me correctly. Banning Swampert would certainly hurt the team's strength, but the impact would be less severe than banning Archaludon.
Swampert’s role is actually quite similar to Bascu’s. Their *Wave Crash* output is comparable, and both can gain the upper hand in matchups against common threats in the current meta, such as Dragalge; Swampert is simply the more versatile of the two.
Archaludon is a different story. Even if Swampert were banned, Basculegion could step in and handle its duties to some extent. However, Bascu-F cannot replicate what Archaludon does. Both Swampert and Basculegion struggle against Slowbro, Vaporeon, and *Water Absorb* Araquanid (with Basculegion finding them almost impossible to deal with). Currently, Archaludon is the only reliable answer to these "rain counters." It is also difficult for Swampert and Basculegion alone to handle threats like Corviknight (spamming *Roost*) or Rotom (spamming *Pain Split*). If Archaludon were banned, rain teams would find it extremely difficult to break through these counters, dealing a much heavier blow to the archetype.
Furthermore, while Archaludon’s "Electro Shot" strategy in the rain is devastatingly effective at sweeping teams, it is ultimately a slow attacker; unlike Swampert that can use "Flip Turn" to pivot out and avoid lurking Grass-type moves. This leaves it vulnerable to being instantly KO'd by a surprise "Focus Blast" at any moment. Raichu-Y, for instance, serves as a perfect hard counter to Archaludon in the current metagame. Ultimately, because Archaludon lacks speed, it cannot gain the upper hand in most direct exchanges the way Swampert can; instead, it generally functions as support for the "suicide squad" duo of Swampert and Basculegion, switching in to secure a favorable turn whenever they encounter specific rain-countering threats.
As I mentioned earlier, the Rain system doesn't have a high ceiling; once Archaludon is banned, rain-based builds can essentially be written off for high-rank match.

 

[Celeste]

Is there something about MLA formatting & typing more than 1 coherent paragraph that makes people shriek GPT, or are people just that sensitive over stall/Annihilape? ("easier to attack the messenger!" genepool) Not using software that would tell me Flame Orb Annihilape is a good strat because it thinks burn ticks can stack Rage Fist

Click to collapse...

Been mostly lurking in the thread but ngl i think its more the way you are discussing things and the random/somtimes outright incorrect things you have presented, to share an example that has kind of stuck in my mind since seeing it:

1. How much attack are you actually losing? We know from the damage formula that every SP ≈ 0.5-0.6% of damage. This means roughly a 6-7% damage reduction at -12 SP, which by itself may not flip anything at all. You're guaranteed to live the Flower Trick & win the interaction w/ Zap Cannon. This is good.

Click to collapse...

This is just factually incorrect unfortunately.
0 SpA Mewtwo Psystrike vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Chansey: 391-462 (120.3 - 142.1%) -- guaranteed OHKO

Based on this we should assume that with 12 SP in physical defense that we should see that 6-7% damage reduction, which would equal about 9% less damage in this case. However when we put the SPs properly in,
0 SpA Mewtwo Psystrike vs. 0 HP / 12 Def Chansey: 264-312 (81.2 - 96%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

For the record this is 28% damage reduction. SP investment is not a flat amount of damage reduction/magnification that is universally applicable, it is largely dependent on the base stats you are working with. I did a similar thing testing special attacks with milotic and actually matched up with the numbers you presented, however because milotic's special defense is so high already, the additive boost of SP becomes less effective compared to chansey, whos physical defense is so low that slight increases in its defense are proportionally much more, in this case each SP is roughly equivalent to 2% damage reduction from the initial damage roll.

The incorrect damage calcs you shared in your response to Sword also add to this, as well as the fact your other posts make it seem like you don't really understand how stall works. Eg; pokemon without recovery being bad into stall, where many good stallbreakers like Hisuian Samurott don't have access to recover. The argument you presented about how Annihilape needs to not be banned to prevent stall from being too good is also a slippery slope fallacy, which itself doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion. (Along with the strange assumption that... game mechanics need to be changed to appropriately tier stall?)

I don't think what you are interpreting as people being "sensitive to annihilape and stall" is that, it moreso seems like you are pulling out random statistics, unproven "facts", and it kind of can't be avoided that the way you speak falls into a lot of chatgpt-esque tropes, with quotes like "It's not just one priority user; it's the aggregate." You do have a lot of interesting things to say and comment on; I generally do enjoy reading this thread as I passively enjoy champions myself, but you gotta *at least* double check your facts man or else people are gonna accuse you of using chatgpt in this economy

 

[Geneade]

This is just factually incorrect unfortunately.
0 SpA Mewtwo Psystrike vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Chansey: 391-462 (120.3 - 142.1%) -- guaranteed OHKO

Based on this we should assume that with 12 SP in physical defense that we should see that 6-7% damage reduction, which would equal about 9% less damage in this case. However when we put the SPs properly in,
0 SpA Mewtwo Psystrike vs. 0 HP / 12 Def Chansey: 264-312 (81.2 - 96%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

Click to collapse...

The SP is 0.5% remark I made back then was me assuming it was universal after I ran a couple of calcs; I realized that much later after saying it & honestly don't know why I didn't check it for that Rai interaction before posting. That much is honestly deserved. Just blatant stupidity on my part.

The incorrect damage calcs you shared in your response to Sword also add to this, as well as the fact your other posts make it seem like you don't really understand how stall works. Eg; pokemon without recovery being bad into stall, where many good stallbreakers like Hisuian Samurott don't have access to recover. The argument you presented about how Annihilape needs to not be banned to prevent stall from being too good is also a slippery slope fallacy, which itself doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion. (Along with the strange assumption that... game mechanics need to be changed to appropriately tier stall?)

Click to collapse...

Ever since, though, I ran independent calcs to make sure I wasn't providing flat-out wrong numbers, which is what I did for every calc I gave Sword? Granted, I used lv. 100 tiers instead of the 50 v 50 for champ, so the numbers are slightly off; it's not a dramatic difference. The Annihilape I use alternates between Max Atk & Speed or Max Atk + Max Spdf

"HP + Defense Clef hits for 54% at most with Moonblast. Ape hits for 33.5 - 39.5% at 1 rage fist stack"

Calcs:

32 Atk Annihilape Rage Fist vs. 32 HP / 32+ Def Clefable: 69-82 (34.1 - 40.5%) -- 53.4% chance to 3HKO after Leftovers recovery

0 SpA Clefable Moonblast vs. 0 HP / 252 SpD Annihilape: 168-198 (46.5 - 54.8%) -- 8.6% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

I ran every calc I stated before posting; which did I get wrong?

Regarding "pokemon without recovery being bad into stall, where many good stallbreakers like Hisuian Samurott don't have access to recover," I was calling out the irony of the hazard attrition bias Harris brought up, considering the Pokemon he listed couldn't heal off the damage. If their point was that Annihilape is comparatively worse into stall, purely off an attrition war, it didn't make sense how Pokemon without any attrition were better into said attrition game, not that lack of recovery in general made them worse (I also conceded there are capable breakers outside of Ape like H. Rott in the follow-up post).

"Annihilape needs to not be banned to prevent stall from being too good is also a slippery slope fallacy, which itself doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion. (Along with the strange assumption that... game mechanics need to be changed to appropriately tier stall?)"

Refers to: "It's not me being confident enough to say the mons presented in this current doc are the sole thing keeping stall in check, but rather cautioning as a whole that banning too much power risks stall prevalence; thus, "Annihilape should be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating."...I believe Ape is tame enough not to interfere with the rest of the metagame, but capable enough to be an anti-metum to players who want an easier time against fat archetypes." But you're right that my thoughts on it could be ignorant; it's all just a perspective I had, at the end of the day.

"Stall is difficult to tier against without fundamentally changing game mechanics"

Mainly refers to things like the item clause & the PP revamps. It is more an acknowledgment of a theoretical boundary where standard tiering could be insufficient to fix it without causing collateral damage to the tier's infrastructure. I can see how this was said in poor taste though. As you said, "it doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion"

"and it kind of can't be avoided that the way you speak falls into a lot of chatgpt-esque tropes, with quotes like "It's not just one priority user; it's the aggregate."

I use the Grammarly extension religiously; it could mostly be that, if anything, lmao. All that being said, I truly appreciate everyone's feedback on the matter. And you all could be right; I might simply be too green to be writing these dissertations about competitive Pokémon. I don't typically climb any higher than early top 500 before jumping on a new account & the last thing I want to do is be a poor contributor to a community. I used to create similar content on other games as a guide maker & video essayist, and wanted to scratch that itch on a new game now that it's been some time, but it might be too early for that by the looks of it.

 

[Celeste]

Ever since, though, I ran independent calcs to make sure I wasn't providing flat-out wrong numbers, which is what I did for every calc I gave Sword? Granted, I used lv. 100 tiers instead of the 50 v 50 for champ, so the numbers are slightly off; it's not a dramatic difference. The Annihilape I use alternates between Max Atk & Speed or Max Atk + Max Spdf

Click to collapse...

Since there is a difference, it can still cause issues regarding people easily verifiying what you send. For this specific instance with Rage Fist it is a 1% difference, but there are cases where that difference can be 3, even 4% different. In the case of the Moonblast calc, this is likely just a case that the spread you use is 1. very uncommon and 2. you didnt share what it was for anyone to understand what you were calcing from. When sharing damage calcs its just good practice to include the defense and attack investments used, because if you had shared that the question wouldn't have been "why is moonblast doing that much to annihilape" and instead "why are you running 32 spdef and not hp", since in most cases when dealing with bulk unless there is a much more drastic difference between HP and the respetive defense stat, going 32 hp or a mix of HP and the defense you want to optimize in allows for much more generally effective spreads, in annihilape's case when people think of Annihilape running special defense they assume pretty much 32 hp 32 spdef with a boosting nature, or as Sword did no bulk because Annihilape does appreciate being able to run speed if its not going all in on bulk from my experience. This is in part probably a experience thing, but its why its incredibly important you share all the information and not just throw out numbers with nothing to back up where you are getting them from.

Regarding "pokemon without recovery being bad into stall, where many good stallbreakers like Hisuian Samurott don't have access to recover" I was calling out the irony of the hazard attrition bias Harris brought up, considering the Pokemon he listed couldn't heal off the damage. If their point was that Annihilape is comparatively worse into stall, purely off an attrition war, it didn't make sense how Pokemon without any attrition were better into said attrition game, not that lack of recovery in general made them worse (I also conceded there are capable breakers outside of Ape like H. Rott in the follow-up post).

Click to collapse...

I don't think that was the point at all, didn't want to make my post too long but in that case they were just listing steel types and you made the jump to them claiming every mon was explicitly a stallbreaker, and then made a general statement that at best shows a somewhat uninformed view of stall, and at worst is just wrong. Stall can be checked in many ways, outlasting as a whole can be difficult, and even in this case things like Kingambit have been historically good into stall via raw power alone. You will also see methods of disruption used to ease a stall MU, where taunt, trick and other options can mess up lines and ultimately gameplans for the stall team. Again, I think some of this is just the fact that you are presenting some rather unnuanced opinions as hard counters to someone else's take, the snark in this post didn't help: "On top of that, this entire stance is a glorified misclassification of how Annihilape functions within the game"??? In general this is the case, but in this post specifically you leave no room for discussion and instead just make bold (and wrong) claims without backing them up at all, which results in you having to walk back the severity of you statements later with added information.

Mainly refers to things like the item clause & the PP revamps. It is more an acknowledgment of a theoretical boundary where standard tiering could be insufficient to fix it without causing collateral damage to the tier's infrastructure. I can see how this was said in poor taste though. As you said, "it doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion"

Click to collapse...

Correct. I think you underestimate what tiering can actually do, and overestimate the power of stall. In the very rare cases where stall has become genuinely overbearing in smogon tiers, the solution then becomes to ban what is deemed to be the most problematic piece of stall in the tier. See the ban of Mega Sableye in ORAS OU.

I use the Grammarly extension religiously; it could mostly be that, if anything, lmao. All that being said, I truly appreciate everyone's feedback on the matter. And you all could be right; I might simply be too green to be writing these dissertations about competitive Pokémon. I don't typically climb any higher than early top 500 before jumping on a new account & the last thing I want to do is be a poor contributor to a community. I used to create similar content on other games as a guide maker & video essayist, and wanted to scratch that itch on a new game now that it's been some time, but it might be too early for that by the looks of it.

Click to collapse...

Its just a tone thing at the end of the day, when you present your ideas as fact > opinion, and double down on it at times when you probably shouldn't its going to cause a lot of friction in discussion. And while it is a nitpick, the italics lowkey kind of add to this problem because it does unintentionally add a slight layer of condescension when paired with the rather verbose language you use a lot. Your input is of course welcome, as you clearly care a lot and want to dive into so many things in a lot of detail! I'll prob go back to lurking this thread now but I hope this helped you out. You are not the first person to write long posts about things often (you are talking to one), and you won't be the last haha, glad to see you are enjoying the tier.

Edit: Grammarly does have so much AI stuff integreated in it that is likely the cause as you guessed. Especially in a pokemon context i find at times that writing assistants can sometimes help create sentances that sound about as out of place at chat gpt haha

 

[Blueming]

Enjoyment: 8/10
Competiveness: 6/10

Damp Rock: Suspect
Mega Swampert: No action
Preferred Action on Damp Rock
Archaludon: Quick Ban
Annihilape: Suspect
Mega Metagross: No Action
Mega Raichu Y: No Action
Hisuian Samurott: Quick Ban
Other: Possible Glimmora suspect

I'm a bit of a scrub but I wanted to yap. The tier I think is in an enjoyable state but not as skillful as current gen. I am biased towards megas as a mechanic as I believe it is the most balanced for singles over tera, so I enjoy the tier a bit more, but the lack of staple mons and items from current gen make the problematic mons of this tier and these super offensive strats stand out much more.

Rain is in an unhealthy state right now with **8** turns of weather. I disagree with the idea of a

ban despite the absurd damage he does to his theoretical checks like 2HKOing

and

; if he's gone and not

or

, what's to stop these same teams from popping up with

or

or

instead?

is rain's biggest bomb; it has no switch-ins, has insane bulk, easily trades using shuca, and because of

has so much leeway to setup without getting stalled out of weather.

isn't quick-ban status imo;

is the far bigger problem, but a

suspect in the future could be justified to further hold rain back.

and

seem fine, underwhelming even. No action needed imo.

... I'm on the fence about. I think it's a teambuilder check like

that restricts options without adding much good to the tier and the taunt+bulk up set in particular is awful to deal with and can win off team preview, and defiant only makes the issues of hazard control worse along with

. However, he can be prepped for and when he is he swings around to doing jack shit. I think Ape at least should be suspected though

Ah,

. Absolutely zero skill. seriously, where do you even begin with this mon. Amazing offensive typing, great ability, cheap ass STAB signature that sets hazard in a metagame with no HDB and a serious lack on hazard control unlike gen 9. In current gen,

isn't nearly as threatening as there are a variety of mons who defensively check him, out-damage and out-tempo him, and handle whatever he sets up off ceaseless. But in champions, the job off all that is compounded onto one mon:

What's this though?

gets taunt? Oh ok, there goes my defog. He also does like 40% off aqua cutter to

? Oh ok, let me just roost. Wait, he gets encore too? Ok fuck me ig. Oh and he also gets SD.

does just about everything you would want to be doing in the tier and bullies any switch-in that should in theory handle him and farming spikes. This mon and what is enables shapes the current tier and the strongest archetype alongside rain, and IMO shouldve been banned yesterday.

 

[harriss2205]

The SP is 0.5% remark I made back then was me assuming it was universal after I ran a couple of calcs; I realized that much later after saying it & honestly don't know why I didn't check it for that Rai interaction before posting. That much is honestly deserved. Just blatant stupidity on my part.



Ever since, though, I ran independent calcs to make sure I wasn't providing flat-out wrong numbers, which is what I did for every calc I gave Sword? Granted, I used lv. 100 tiers instead of the 50 v 50 for champ, so the numbers are slightly off; it's not a dramatic difference. The Annihilape I use alternates between Max Atk & Speed or Max Atk + Max Spdf

"HP + Defense Clef hits for 54% at most with Moonblast. Ape hits for 33.5 - 39.5% at 1 rage fist stack"

Calcs:

32 Atk Annihilape Rage Fist vs. 32 HP / 32+ Def Clefable: 69-82 (34.1 - 40.5%) -- 53.4% chance to 3HKO after Leftovers recovery

0 SpA Clefable Moonblast vs. 0 HP / 252 SpD Annihilape: 168-198 (46.5 - 54.8%) -- 8.6% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

I ran every calc I stated before posting; which did I get wrong?

Regarding "pokemon without recovery being bad into stall, where many good stallbreakers like Hisuian Samurott don't have access to recover," I was calling out the irony of the hazard attrition bias Harris brought up, considering the Pokemon he listed couldn't heal off the damage. If their point was that Annihilape is comparatively worse into stall, purely off an attrition war, it didn't make sense how Pokemon without any attrition were better into said attrition game, not that lack of recovery in general made them worse (I also conceded there are capable breakers outside of Ape like H. Rott in the follow-up post).

"Annihilape needs to not be banned to prevent stall from being too good is also a slippery slope fallacy, which itself doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion. (Along with the strange assumption that... game mechanics need to be changed to appropriately tier stall?)"

Refers to: "It's not me being confident enough to say the mons presented in this current doc are the sole thing keeping stall in check, but rather cautioning as a whole that banning too much power risks stall prevalence; thus, "Annihilape should be preserved to prevent Stall from dominating."...I believe Ape is tame enough not to interfere with the rest of the metagame, but capable enough to be an anti-metum to players who want an easier time against fat archetypes." But you're right that my thoughts on it could be ignorant; it's all just a perspective I had, at the end of the day.

"Stall is difficult to tier against without fundamentally changing game mechanics"

Mainly refers to things like the item clause & the PP revamps. It is more an acknowledgment of a theoretical boundary where standard tiering could be insufficient to fix it without causing collateral damage to the tier's infrastructure. I can see how this was said in poor taste though. As you said, "it doesn't really have much of a place in tiering discussion"

"and it kind of can't be avoided that the way you speak falls into a lot of chatgpt-esque tropes, with quotes like "It's not just one priority user; it's the aggregate."

I use the Grammarly extension religiously; it could mostly be that, if anything, lmao. All that being said, I truly appreciate everyone's feedback on the matter. And you all could be right; I might simply be too green to be writing these dissertations about competitive Pokémon. I don't typically climb any higher than early top 500 before jumping on a new account & the last thing I want to do is be a poor contributor to a community. I used to create similar content on other games as a guide maker & video essayist, and wanted to scratch that itch on a new game now that it's been some time, but it might be too early for that by the looks of it.

Click to collapse...

I don't know where you got the impression that I thought Annihilape was worse into stall than any of the pokemon I listed, since I specifically said I wasn't contending its role as a top tier stall breaker. I was making a pretty simple statement, which was that Annihilape was not the only pokemon keeping stall from becoming an oppressive archetype. I listed some pokemon who I think do a good job keeping stall from being oppressive, and stand by the ones I listed.