Yes you did, you COMPELETELY DISREGARDED EVERY DECISION FOR MENCE BECOMING UBER. You/some said that you can't make x pokemon uber just because x pokemon can do what others cannot, we have listed many reasons that Salamence should be uber, and now you are saying that you can't just ban him because he has no VIABLE COUNTERS, and can switch in rather easily with decent defesnses + resists + intimidate.
Holy fuck you are immeasurably stupid. I didn't say any of this. The other people who responded to my post understood it perfectly, why the fuck can't you? It seriously isn't hard: I specifically said that Salamence possessing a unique trait does not make him broken
unless the trait itself is broken. Saying that having "no viable counters" makes him broken is a fine argument; Saying he's broken just by virtue of being unique is not.
If you
still don't understand then don't even bother responding because I'm not going to continue arguing with someone who lacks even a basic understanding of simple logic.
Moving on...
Ok, but that's not what I said, I was responding to weak arguments like "sacrifice something weak to get your check in".
Okay, but aren't you the same person who has been advocating that "Salamence always gets a kill", that you have to "predict like a god [to not get beaten by him", etc? Even though there are plenty of common situations a Salamence will find itself in where it can't really do much at all?
SJCrew said:
Then again, it probably isn't because my lead beats yours. See how easy this is?
"It probably isn't" is a pretty stupid thing to say considering that there are only two fast Taunt leads that see common usage and they don't even necessarily beat the other common leads anyway. In fact, taking a turn to Taunt most likely means that you either don't get Rocks up yourself (against prioty or Scarf leads, Metagross comes to mind) or you do, but at the expense of your own lead and without even breaking my lead's Sash. Seriously, "rocks probably isn't up because my lead beats yours"? Did you even stop to think about that nonsense before you posted it?
(And what if my SR user isn't my lead...?)
SR is a common battle condition, like it or not. If you don't want to factor it in to your arguments, then you're only hurting your own chances of being taken seriously.
SJCrew said:
it's about the fact that Salamence makes this prediction game worse than any other OU because:
The question you're glossing over entirely is why the fuck should this matter? Proving that he makes prediction "worse" than other OUs
does not prove that "making prediction worse" is itself a broken quality. You're trying to tell me that Salamence should be Uber just because he does a particular thing better than his OU peers, and that's... dumb.
This question is even more pressing considering your use of the word "worse" is entirely subjective. While you might hate the prediction games that Salamence forces, others might enjoy it, and they certainly wouldn't describe it as "worse". You haven't given any supportive arguments for it actually being "worse" rather than perhaps "more challenging" (and pretend all you want, but you're not relying on pot luck/russian roulette against Salamence. I've already had this discussion a bunch of times and I'm not going to bother having it again with you, so look at my previous posts if you care what my arguments have been).
So to summarise: Showing that Salamence can do something other OUs can't - in your case, "make predictions worse" - isn't actually an argument for Salamence being Uber, its an argument for Salamence being different. You're free to start explaining why this difference is broken at any time... And just maybe you'll come up with something a little more convincing than the dull logic you offered me here.