Why would we need another BL tier for pokemon that are too strong for OU but not strong enough for Ubers? Why not just ban them to Ubers and not waste time on wondering which pokemon could fit into that Borderline category?
Well, if there were enough of such pokemon, there could be ladders where:Why would we need another BL tier for pokemon that are too strong for OU but not strong enough for Ubers? Why not just ban them to Ubers and not waste time on wondering which pokemon could fit into that Borderline category?
Everyone keeps talking about using Mamoswine or Weavile to Ice Shard a Salamence to death, or countering with with Cresselia or Porygon-2.
Keep in mind that Mamoswine and Weavile were both, in April, used less than Electivire in OU Shoddy.
Except that neither Weavile nor Mamoswine can switch directly into Mence, they must come in as a revenge killer. And even then, Mence can switch out if the opponent feels that saving it for later is advantageous (especially when I've spun away the rocks, I often just save Mence for later knowing he can come in again after the Ice Sharder of choice goes down)
El Blecko said:One thing I’d like to ask the Uber supporters, though: why exactly would Salamence qualify under the Support Characteristic? To me, for something to fit this definition, the pokemon in question must directly facilitate the sweep of another specific pokemon. I’m not sure what exactly sweeps through teams with consistency after Salamence comes out and “mixes” things up. Enlighten me if I’m missing something, but this point seems to be more of a “Salamence can deal lots of damage with proper prediction but this doesn’t really fit under the Offensive Characteristic so we’re just going to bundle it in with Support” thing than anything else. I suppose you could make the case that Salamence weakens Steels for another lesser Dragon to exploit later on, but since Salamence doesn’t really control what it hits (unlike, say, Magnezone or ScarfTar, two other key supporters/sweep pavers), that doesn’t strike me as a very convincing argument.
If Mamoswine (which, as it has been pointed out CAN OHKO EVERY Salamence build) is seeing such "low usage" then obviously Salamence is not a big enough threat to devote an entire slot to to handle.
If Salamence were really that much of a threat to "every single team" with all of these supposed "guaranteed KOs" you would certainly not see a decrease in usage of Mamoswine or Weavile.
Naive Life Orb Salamence +1 Outrage
vs. Impish Leftovers Hippowdon : 63.1% - 74.5%
Rash Life Orb Salamence Draco Meteor
vs. Impish Leftovers Hippowdon : 80.7% - 95%
Why would we need another BL tier for pokemon that are too strong for OU but not strong enough for Ubers? Why not just ban them to Ubers and not waste time on wondering which pokemon could fit into that Borderline category?
I hope not.losing all the people who don't want to see Salamence banned would be much worse.
Is Salamence so bad it's really worth slicing up the community?
I think it's worth noting that the amount of discussion indicates Smogon is very divided. Actually banning Salamence guarentees the community will be ripped in two when the opposition against a Salamence ban is as strong as it is. This isn't a democracy, it's a battling community, and as bad as salamence might be for balance and diversity, losing all the people who don't want to see Salamence banned would be much worse. You absolutely need consensus on a ban.
Let me give you an example. You just switched your Gliscor in against my Lucario who used Close Combat for around 20%, I then switched in my Salamence on the Earthquake or Roost, then either Gliscor will switch out in fear of Draco Meteor, (or if your ballsy stay in expecting a DD) I use Draco Meteor as it is likely the safest move, what can you switch in except fodder (which isn't as likely as you think it is) that isn't koed, and is faster, and can ko back.But if it usually just knocks out one important Pokemon (one that wasn't already death fodder), and then goes down itself, or even lets you set up on it after a kill (Outrage), and you didn't use an overall crappy Pokemon or insane pivot switching/prediction to make it happen, that sounds completely fair.
You tell me what's really going on up there, and I'll know what side I'm on based on that.
I'm just tired of hearing "one kill per game" and "2HKOs everything with a stat boost" as arguments for brokenness, because to be honest they make Salamence sound like a pretty normal 4th gen offensive Pokemon. Remember, your opponent loses a key team member when Salamence dies, too.
That arguement can go both ways. If the pro-banning sidewants if banned while the no-banning side doesn't, either way someone isn't getting what they want. And if someone wants to leave because Salamence is (or isn't) banned, they probally weren't helping the metagame at all any way.
Plus, this has nothing at all to do with Salamence being broken or not.
Do you really think you have the right to influence such a huge decision if you if you're incapable or can't even bothered to address the other side's stance before you go out guns ablaze demanding conformity?Because people like me are convinced Salamence is OU, and refuse to recognize a standard metagame where Salamence is banned.
What claims? For the majority of the post I was just asking which description of Salamence's performance in your battles is more accurate. Strike the setup part from the record or replace it with "free turn" or "an opportunity to not die", but I didn't really try to say I was right or wrong about anything. Salamence is only absolutely guaranteed a kill or two if you have nothing on your team faster than it, though, since it can just quickly 2HKO your potential switch-ins. Otherwise you can play around it (not that it isn't risky, perhaps overly so)please back up your claims before saying your right.
Scarftran/rachi? I know there aren't many candidates though... Game Freak was pretty stupid not making a single Steel type over 100 speed. Is it overcentralizing to have these on your team or lose a Pokemon? Maybe... what do you think?what can you switch in except fodder (which isn't as likely as you think it is) that isn't koed, and is faster, and can ko back.
so, why dont we ban outrage?.
Megahorn 120 power, 85 acc, hits 11 types. exclusive move.
Flareblitz 120 power, 100 acc, hits 12 types recoil damage, uncommon move.
Bravebird 120 power, 100 acc, hits 14 types, recoil damage, uncommon move.
Close combat, 120 power, 100 acc, hits 10 types, lowers def and spdef, uncommon move.
(...)
Outrage, 120 power, 100 acc, hits 16 TYPES, "A rampage of 2 or 3 turns, and you switch the pokemon", Common, All dragons have access to it.
even the devastating draco meteor have 10% to fail, and leaves the dragons with half the options that they were in the beginning.
dragons wont be suffering to much, they have dragon claw instead of outrage,
its like lowering their attack. (yes, ban OUTRAGE FROM THE GAME)
im just trying to make a point, please correct me if im wrong.
I think it's worth noting that the amount of discussion indicates Smogon is very divided. Actually banning Salamence guarentees the community will be ripped in two when the opposition against a Salamence ban is as strong as it is. This isn't a democracy, it's a battling community, and as bad as salamence might be for balance and diversity, losing all the people who don't want to see Salamence banned would be much worse. You absolutely need consensus on a ban.
Is Salamence so bad it's really worth slicing up the community?