The First Smogon Council - Salamence

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pokemon do become un-banned, sure. Latias was unbanned for a little while just recently (it didn't last, but still).

Of course what might happen in Gen 5 will not affect Salamence's tiering in Gen 4.
 
What I would like to know is why people think that Salamence is untouchable and shouldn't be tested. I think it is perfectly fair to test Salamence, and decide whether or not it is uber. If it deserves to be uber, it will go there. If not, then it will stay OU. The only people that are really 100% wrong are those that think the test shouldn't take place.

If we had enough time, we would test every pokemon in the game against the uber characteristics. For now, we have a short list of ones picked for various reasons that we are testing. If you think ANY pokemon is too "sacred" to be tested, you are not helping the process at all.
 

shrang

General Kenobi
is a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
What I would like to know is why people think that Salamence is untouchable and shouldn't be tested. I think it is perfectly fair to test Salamence, and decide whether or not it is uber. If it deserves to be uber, it will go there. If not, then it will stay OU. The only people that are really 100% wrong are those that think the test shouldn't take place.

If we had enough time, we would test every pokemon in the game against the uber characteristics. For now, we have a short list of ones picked for various reasons that we are testing. If you think ANY pokemon is too "sacred" to be tested, you are not helping the process at all.
That is what we are doing. What do you think this Council is for?? We are testing Salamence right now.
 
Why would we do that?
Once we are done testing Salamence, let's say he's OU. Does that mean we don't test anymore? We are done? The game is balanced perfectly?

If the goal is to hit some "magic" stopping point like that, then I fail to see the purpose of the whole thing, as that is basically giving up on making the system better.

I understand testing EVERY pokemon is too much to ever get done before another game comes out to screw everything up, that's fine. But, I don't want to stop testing just because achieving perfect balance is impossible.

EDIT: I don't imagine I have to tell you how many posts people have made that are "OMG, why are we testing Salamence??!?" or "Salamence sucks in UBARS, don't test it!!!oenone"
 
Are you advocating that, with unlimited time, it would be in our best interests to test everything in OU (at least)?

I'm under the impression that we only test things that have a debatably negative impact on the health of the metagame. Stuff like Garchomp, Latias and Skymin ultimately proved that they did have a negative impact, and the debate for Salamence is ongoing. But stuff like Electivire, Ninjask, and even more potent Pokemon like Infernape and Gengar... These don't have any apparent negative impact on the metagame. Why would you test those?

Why test everything, when we could just test as little as possible and most likely end up with exactly the same result?
 
Man I've visited this thread for days and all I have to say its that from what I've seen, this argument has been just an endless circle where neither side get's anywhere (at least from the last 20 pages or so).

Really its just basically one side (pro-Uber) reapeating over and over that Mence can beat its counters/checks/*insert name for something that could beat Mence and that he is extremely unpredictable and therafore its Uber while the other one (pro-OU) says over and over that he has checks, that SR, SS and LO recoil really screw him over and that unpredictability isn't Uber-worthy on this case. And don't even mention the facepalming "slippery slope" thing that some people say.

Why don't you guys try to post Suspect experiences rather than keeping this circle going? (It's the same as the old "Salamence for suspect" thread)
On this topic I've to say that even though stall is definatly more common, it's not as "infested" by it as some people mention, what I do see a lot are F/W/G cores with Swampert, Vaporeon and Gyara being the most common waters, Breloom/Celebi being the Grass ones and Heatran/Infernape (never seen both on a team IIRC) being the fires.
I don't know if my actual experience is a little off from the reality of the higher spots of the ladder though, if it is, blame my low CRE (1322, sucks, but I don't have a lot of time to ladder)
 
Are you advocating that, with unlimited time, it would be in our best interests to test everything in OU (at least)?
Yes. In this thread, there have been good arguments for the testing of Tyranitar, Breloom and Dragonite already, which I agree with.

Dragonite is Salamence-lite, as numerous posts show that he is very capable of reproducing every moveset that Salamence has minus the speed, replicating nearly all the same 2HKO's and OHKO's. Dragonite should be tested because of that. There are pages and pages here discussing Dragonite in this thread even.

Tyranitar was argued (in this thread even, if only jokingly) for testing due to its unique ability to choose which pokemon it removes from a team, much in the same way Wobbuffet does. That falls under the support characteristic for sure, as it opens the way for a sweep quite nicely.

Breloom nearly guarantees to remove one pokemon from the opposing player's team with Spore. If Spore is saved until Breloom is safely behind a Substitute, which has been attested in this thread to be the winner's strategy for Breloom, this can often determine the entire outcome of a game. That falls securely under the support category as well.

There are several other pokemon where equally good arguments can be made for testing, including other ubers that could be tested in OU with Latias gone. I don't think Giratina has been tested at all yet in any capacity, and neither has Dialga or Palkia. I'm not saying they wouldn't wreck the metagame (probably would), but there's lots of possibilities to try out.

One change could make all the difference.
 

supermarth64

Here I stand in the light of day
is a Contributor Alumnus
Baldafor, the fact that none of the other Pokemon have caused as much controversy as Salamence indicates how they aren't as dangerous to remove. Besides, after Mence, we're doing the clauses.

Also, Tyranitar cannot support as well as you think it is. Sure it might hit hard and have a wide movepool, but you only risk getting hit once by it. Salamence requires that you use at least a base 100 or a Scarfer to outspeed it.

Breloom cannot substantially help other Pokemon sweep. No one's going to bring in their only check to something just to have it be Spored. Rather, they're going to bring in their most expendable Pokemon at that time (once they've seen your team). That inconsistency along with the fact that they might have a Sleep Talker shows that Breloom isn't as great as it seems.
 
Once we are done testing Salamence, let's say he's OU. Does that mean we don't test anymore? We are done? The game is balanced perfectly?

If the goal is to hit some "magic" stopping point like that, then I fail to see the purpose of the whole thing, as that is basically giving up on making the system better.
We've got a good metagame and can stop testing stuff when people don't bitch so much. It's unfortunate that we're near the end of this generation and still arguing. Will things ever really stabilize and quiet down?

And yes, I've heard that UU is now at that magic stopping point, or at least very close to it. I hope we don't have to ban 8ish things to make that happen for OU, of course...



@ sm64:

Salamence cannot substantially help other Pokemon sweep. No one's going to bring in their only check to something just to have it be killed. Rather, they're going to bring in their most expendable Pokemon at that time (once they've seen your team). That inconsistency along with a weakness to Stealth Rock and the drawbacks of its STAB moves shows that Salamence isn't as great as it seems.

I'm joking of course, but you have to admit that Breloom argument sounds familiar. The big difference of course is that Breloom can be walled after sleeping something and is way slower/frailer. Salamence... yeah, no. Breloom can't force much into that tough situation except walls, being dead weight until something slower than it appears. Breloom can also only use Spore once, pretty much, while Salamence can use Kill a few times.

...Well, still. For some reason we say "oh you can sac this and deal with it, no biggie" for other Pokemon and not for Salamence. It's kind of annoying that we already accept it for some threats and not for others, even if there's a reason for it.
 

Chou Toshio

Over9000
is an Artist Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Let me say that I would be all in favor for banning pokemon for reasons other than "power," for instance I would favor banning pokemon that instigate too much hax and thus detract from the game *cough*Jirachi*cough*.

As it stands now, our major focus for banning/not-banning pokemon is power.

Keeping that in mind, it is unfair to say "The fact that Salamence has come into suspect proves that he is more powerful."

Not only is this an unfair argument within the suspect process itself (especially with all the pro-test people barking "suspect doesn't mean guilty!" "nothing wrong with testing!" pre-test), but it is a logical falacy.

"Power" in pokemon is not measurable, nor of a single measure. There are many types of power in pokemon, some of which fall under Salamence's forte and others that don't.

Salamence has its pros and flaws. It is easy to argue that simply the offensive nature of his strengths causes Salamence to draw more attention than a more defensively oriented pokemon. It might very well be that there are other pokemon equally as powerful and having as great an impact on the game as Mence, but simply do not come under scrutiny because the nature of their power is not as flashy and attention-drawing.
 
Finally someone with my kind of mind. Most people want to ban pokemon that have too much "power". But really what is power. Flareon has a base attack stat of 130! Is he banned to the uber section, no. Smeargle has a movepool that makes even miss mew alittle jealous. Is he banned, no!

The people who play the game hear only look towards brute power. IMO rotom can do just as much damage to a team as a Salamence. But the ghost does its damage in a different manner. There are a lot of game changing pokemon but do we ban them all, no!

What I'm saying is that we can't stand hear and became ban happy just because something makes itself look good. If we were to ban everything then eventually we will come to an enviroment where the star of the metagame is dratini and the premeir wall is magikarp!
 
Flareon's movepool is trash, smeargle's stats are trash.

Anyways, on the suspect ladder balanced teams are hard to play. Stall teams will outstall you because you don't have that trump card that can punch a hole in the team.
 
Can someone tell me why stall is so hard to beat? I've only played a few mtches so far, but a single pokemon with taunt can stop all the people I've been playing.

And for the record I used two poor excuses for a reason. They both have a diffent type of "power".
 
Just because Flareon's movepool is "trash" doesn't mean it can't kill a few Pokemon who aren't prepared for it. Just like Salamence. Flareon has power. Just a different kind.
 
I we wanted to just ban all metagame changers Scizor should have been kicked when platinum came out... and I hate Scizor.
No need to hate a Pokemon just because it is hard to counter! In my opinion 99% of the pokemon (including Salamence) are hard to counter if your team isn't prepared!

Is it just me or is Yanmega Lead getting popular on the suspect ladder?
I've seen it in many teams today! I'll try finding the average per 10 battle!
 
Salamence has its pros and flaws. It is easy to argue that simply the offensive nature of his strengths causes Salamence to draw more attention than a more defensively oriented pokemon. It might very well be that there are other pokemon equally as powerful and having as great an impact on the game as Mence, but simply do not come under scrutiny because the nature of their power is not as flashy and attention-drawing.
Very true. To reiterate, Jirachi could be argued to have as much power as Mence, but the metagame has simply adapted to it. Consider that without a steel resist, a simple scarf set could run through teams. Or that Sub-Twave turns every battle into a game of chance, as Jirachi has a possibility of beating its counters (such as Heatran).

You could argue that Stealth Rock resistance makes Jirachi uber, as any time it is faced with a counter, it can be switched out at little cost.

I ramble, but in short our guidelines are too vague for us to say anything is uber. The vote will come down to personal preferences more than anything.
 

Chou Toshio

Over9000
is an Artist Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
^Well, it will ALWAYS come down to personal preferences no matter how we do it. Be it a large vote, a paragraph'd vote, a council, it doesn't change the fact that ALL tiering decisions come down to personal preference.

What matters is the sway of opinions.
 

SJCrew

Believer, going on a journey...
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
So you concede that the players in favor of banning Salamence are merely hopping on the bandwagon? Interesting.
I'm conceding that I think Salamence is broken and have been arguing that since this thread started. I have my own ideas about why I think it's Uber and have outlined them with my posts. Is it really that hard to understand?

And about all this "pro-Ubers are hypocrites" and "ppl keep repeating themselves" bullshit: the reasoning behind Salamence being broken is not complicated. The simplest way to phrase this is that he 2HKOs the metagame and screws over all of his checks between the 50/50 chance you have of encountering either of his two already difficult to counter sets. He is different from the rest of OU because he's nigh impossible to counter, unlike everything else that has solid, universal checks/counters in the form of walls and bulky sweepers.

Pro-Ubers have been paraphrasing that this entire thread because there isn't anything new or groundbreaking to actually cover; anyone with a decent CRE and ladder experience has most likely faced a Salamence player worth half a crap and knows the above is generally true. The only variable in this case would be the player's perspective on whether or not they think this kind of influence has a healthy, stabilizing impact on the metagame. There can always be different perspectives on those without having to be inherently "wrong", so to speak, and quite frankly, I'd be much more satisfied to see those types of responses in this thread rather than the theorymon shitstorm we've been enduring so far.

One thing I will say: Salamence is a good counter-measure to six slot syndrome. No team can really hope to be 100% prepared for every possible threat/set in the metagame, a fact that is amplified on Suspect where if an opponent is carrying a particular defensive core, you either need exactly the right stuff to beat it - or failing that, consistently great prediction - or else they're just going to stall you out. Salamence's greatest advantage, I've found, is that when played well he can be used to prevent the opponent from getting into this advantageous situation; He can break apart their core, or at least injure them badly enough that you don't need exactly the right things to beat them any more. Sometimes, Pokemon matches between equally skilled players can be decided just on the back of which six Pokemon you each bring, but with Salamence, even a player who finds himself with an overall team disadvantage can overcome those odds if they play him well enough. He's the great equalizer, really, and I tend to prefer that to the way Suspect works.
What's ironic about this post is that you've outlined exactly why Salamence is broken.

Salamence's greatest advantage, I've found, is that when played well he can be used to prevent the opponent from getting into this advantageous situation
but with Salamence, even a player who finds himself with an overall team disadvantage can overcome those odds if they play him well enough.
That's not fair at all. If I build the better team, utilize better tactics, and make no major mistakes, I should win. Period. You're talking about the use of one Pokemon to completely circumvent the fact that I came better prepared to handle your team than you did mine, yet you have the gall to tell me that's fair game?

As far as I know, every other top OU has a healthy list of checks/counters besides Salamence (for those of you who are confused and like to bitch about terminology, when I say checks/counters, I'm referring to how Salamence is in and if I bring something else in response, I should expect it not to die before I kill Salamence a vast majority of the time). And every Pokemon representative of immense speed, power, bulk, and no healthy list of checks/counters, has proved to have exactly the same centralizing effect as Salamence and was subsequently banned to Ubers. Latias was banned on the basis that Blissey, Scizor and Tyranitar were required to beat it and even they didn't do enough to stop it. So Salamence gets to stay here despite the fact that it doesn't even have the virtue of three consistent checks to make for a decent argument that it could possibly be OU?
 
That's not fair at all. If I build the better team, utilize better tactics, and make no major mistakes, I should win. Period. You're talking about the use of one Pokemon to completely circumvent the fact that I came better prepared to handle your team than you did mine, yet you have the gall to tell me that's fair game?
Oh please. Your team isn't necessarily better than, or even utilized more efficiently, than mine. Again, these are your own insertions that dishonestly represent what I've said. Just because Team A beats Team B doesn't mean anything about Team A is "better" in the general sense of the word, it just means that Team B has trouble beating the particular combination of things that Team A packs.

What exactly is unfair about Salamence's ability to keep you from getting beaten before the match has even started? Like I said, he's an equalizer; but not so much of an equalizer that if your team is better than mine, is utilized more efficiently, and you don't make any mistakes, then you're still going to win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)

Top