np: OU Suspect Testing Round 2 - Who am I to break tradition?

[Arc Tech]

Heres a question.
Why the hell don't we just make a clause that prevents Drizzle and Swift swim from being on the same team, and use it as a Standard for every tier but Ubers?
Would not the MAJORITY be appeased? Would those wanting Rain stall not be appeased?
Where Swift Swim is used with RD + Damp rock, and Drizzle is used with everything else?

If we can have a Soul Dew clause, that's arguably the exact same in concept, why not just limit Drizzle and Swift swim from being used on the same team?

All you would need to do is implement the clause in a suspect test.
Then if anything if you implemented that clause you could definitely see whether or not Drizzle was actually broken.
Swift swimmers would not have permanent rain unless the opposing team brought Drizzle.
If Drizzle was broken without swift swim, excluding Manaphy due to the controversy, then there would unquestionably be reason for a ban.


Sue me for compromising when nobody gets banned, but rain offense is reduced to it's Gen 4 power, and the new existing rain strategies can then exist simultaneously.

Actually, I really think we should try this. They are broken as a team, not as one super sweeper or one pokemon who gives great support to pretty much every pokemon (like wobbuffet in previous, and maybe this, gen). And they are entangled enough to prevent a slippery slope leading to blissey + skarmory bans, etc.

And if we do ban drizzle, sandstream, and drought, then weather moves become actually viable. The main reason they don't work very well is auto-weather.

 

[TheValkyries]

I can't see why you can't ban both Drizzle and Manaphy at the same time without testing one without the other. Manaphy is an extremely controversial Pokemon when rain is not infinite

Assumption. We haven't played a metagame without inifinite rain, you can't possibly know whether it's broken or not. You can try and theorymon, but in the end you can't assume it something like this to be true.

while without Manaphy, infinite doesn't seem any less broken (you still have Swift Swimmers, Hydration abusers like Lapras and Whiscash and other stuff). Don't forget that Manaphy was deemed too powerful in 4th gen when infinite rain wasn't available and it's very possible that it still is.

You're making another assumption here. You'd have to play on PO's server to know what infinite rain is like without Manaphy. Even then, you're still making this assumption that somehow users of Swift Swim and Hydration are all broken in infinite rain. They're powerful yes, but to say broken is ridiculous. Let's face it, Luvdisc isn't threatening anything anytime soon with his outstanding speed in the rain.


Something is obviously broken within rain. But we can't know if Rain seems broken because of Manaphy or vice versa. Personally, my money is on Manaphy. But hey, maybe I'm jsut insane for thinking that a game mechanic that hasn't changed for 3 generations now, isn't broken.

 

[ensoriki]

And if we do ban drizzle, sandstream, and drought, then weather moves become actually viable. The main reason they don't work very well is auto-weather.

Weather moves would be completely viable under that clause since you would have no choice to use them if you wanted to use Swift swim.
If it can be proven that They are only broken together and both are completely fine without each other, it's the perfect solution.
I think if anything if we had this clause and we found they're not broken but Manaphy still is. We could temporarily suspect test without Drizzle period to see if Manaphy would still be a problem, and if it is we know Manaphy has to be banned either way, but the clause could remain in effect for everyone else.
Thanks for the acceptance.

 

[Nastyjungle]

I'll put my small two cents in and say that Drizzle and Manaphy should not be banned at the same time. One needs to go before the other, whichever one it may be (I personally believe Drizzle should go first).

And I also don't agree with this super-finite and specific banning (ie. Drizzle+SS can't be on the same team), it just doesn't seem right at all.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

What if Drizzle+Manaphy is broken, but neither is alone? We would ban Manaphy then, right...?

 

[Arc Tech]

Assumption. We haven't played a metagame without inifinite rain, you can't possibly know whether it's broken or not. You can try and theorymon, but in the end you can't assume it something like this to be true.



You're making another assumption here. You'd have to play on PO's server to know what infinite rain is like without Manaphy. Even then, you're still making this assumption that somehow users of Swift Swim and Hydration are all broken in infinite rain. They're powerful yes, but to say broken is ridiculous. Let's face it, Luvdisc isn't threatening anything anytime soon with his outstanding speed in the rain.


Something is obviously broken within rain. But we can't know if Rain seems broken because of Manaphy or vice versa. Personally, my money is on Manaphy. But hey, maybe I'm jsut insane for thinking that a game mechanic that hasn't changed for 3 generations now, isn't broken.

Actually I would call infinite turns, as opposed to 5 or 8, a pretty significant change. I'm not even 100% convinced manaphy is broken in rain, except for what he does to stall. Stall has to go through some unconvential methods to beat him, like rankurusu, but those methods are much more limited in manaphy's case. Actually maybe not...

Rank: cb Ttar, worry seed, encore, spiritomb/sableye
Manaphy: Latios, Birijion, Bolturusu, maybe terakion..., encore

 

[Arc Tech]

I'll put my small two cents in and say that Drizzle and Manaphy should not be banned at the same time. One needs to go before the other, whichever one it may be (I personally believe Drizzle should go first).

And I also don't agree with this super-finite and specific banning (ie. Drizzle+SS can't be on the same team), it just doesn't seem right at all.

The problem with nonsimple banning of pokemon is that, it is often a combination of many, not just one, which makes a pokemon broken: (such as wobb- ban shadow tag, encore, or countercoat?) This leads to an arbitrary choice between banning one of the offending elements of the pokemon so that the pokemon is no longer broken. And that is a major problem- the arbitrariness.

However, we are now looking at an arbitrary choice between Drizzle and Swift Swim. I think this is because Drizzle and Swift Swim are just the offending elements which make up a broken team, as opposed to a broken pokemon. As such, we should ban the team, not one of the two offending elements (Drizzle and Swift Swim) of the team.

[oops sorry for the double post. The topics going so fast I figured someone would post before I finished, and my edit would get lost like it usually does]

 

[shrang]

Assumption. We haven't played a metagame without inifinite rain, you can't possibly know whether it's broken or not. You can try and theorymon, but in the end you can't assume it something like this to be true.



You're making another assumption here. You'd have to play on PO's server to know what infinite rain is like without Manaphy. Even then, you're still making this assumption that somehow users of Swift Swim and Hydration are all broken in infinite rain. They're powerful yes, but to say broken is ridiculous. Let's face it, Luvdisc isn't threatening anything anytime soon with his outstanding speed in the rain.


Something is obviously broken within rain. But we can't know if Rain seems broken because of Manaphy or vice versa. Personally, my money is on Manaphy. But hey, maybe I'm jsut insane for thinking that a game mechanic that hasn't changed for 3 generations now, isn't broken.

Read my post again. I know it's an assumption and personally, I'd like to test Manaphy outside the rain. However, all I'm saying is that you shouldn't be surprised nor is it anything unusual or wrong if both get banned at the same time since both are controversial without the other anyway.

 

[Every1XplodeNOW]

Heres a question.
Why the hell don't we just make a clause that prevents Drizzle and Swift swim from being on the same team, and use it as a Standard for every tier but Ubers?
Would not the MAJORITY be appeased? Would those wanting Rain stall not be appeased?
Where Swift Swim is used with RD + Damp rock, and Drizzle is used with everything else?

If we can have a Soul Dew clause, that's arguably the exact same in concept, why not just limit Drizzle and Swift swim from being used on the same team?

All you would need to do is implement the clause in a suspect test.
Then if anything if you implemented that clause you could definitely see whether or not Drizzle was actually broken.
Swift swimmers would not have permanent rain unless the opposing team brought Drizzle.
If Drizzle was broken without swift swim, excluding Manaphy due to the controversy, then there would unquestionably be reason for a ban.
If the other weathers were later found broken you could put them under the same clause and limit their Speed ability users to setting up as well.
Drizzle without swift swim, and Swift swim without Drizzle? How does that not appease the most people and quite easily solve the issue of rain being broken.

Sue me for compromising when nobody gets banned, but rain offense is reduced to it's Gen 4 power, and the new existing rain strategies can then exist simultaneously.

Wow it was so simple. I'm all for this.

The only problem is that the soul dew clause is now viewed as being a stupid decision from what I've heard, so I really wouldn't compare it to that......

 

[Arc Tech]

Wow it was so simple. I'm all for this.

The only problem is that the soul dew clause is now viewed as being a stupid decision from what I've heard, so I really wouldn't compare it to that......

It doesn't really have anything to do with soul dew clause anyway. Soul dew was just banning an item on a pokemon (well two). This on the other hand, addresses a broken team.

 

[masterful]

What if Drizzle+Manaphy is broken, but neither is alone? We would ban Manaphy then, right...?

I definitely consider Drizzle broken more so because of the existence of the broken trio than of Hydration Manaphy. Drizzle must be banned in any case, and I hope Manaphy will be brought back down (if it is banned) for post-Drizzle testing

 

[Arc Tech]

Drizzle's also the more likely ban, since it gets voted upon first.

I wonder what would happen if we get both drizzle and swift swim as suspect abilities though. Especially since I don't think swift swim can even be truly broken.

 

[masterful]

Drizzle's also the more likely ban, since it gets voted upon first.

I wonder what would happen if we get both drizzle and swift swim as suspect abilities though. Especially since I don't think swift swim can even be truly broken.

There's no chance of Swift Swim being broken without Drizzle, as it is essentially just an agility that lasts 5/8 turns without Perma-rain

 

[Arc Tech]

There's no chance of Swift Swim being broken without Drizzle, as it is essentially just an agility that lasts 5/8 turns without Perma-rain

I don't believe it can be broken even with perma rain. An agility, in and of itself, does not break any pokemon. It also requires excellent offenses, which many pokes lack (such as luvdisk). As such, it cannot be broken- it can only be a contributing factor.

Only abilities that are broken (or produce far too much luck) in and of themselves, such as inconsistent, can and should be banned. I believe Drizzle has this quality, since it requires no traits in its user pokemon to be broken for support- it itself is broken.

(P.S. That is assuming we find rain to be broken, I am not yet 100% convinced it is broken. I'd probably vote to ban it on grounds of ridiculous overcentralization though, but I'm less than confident that sandstream and drought, which would be just as much broken and centralizing, will also get the same boot.)

 

[masterful]

I don't believe it can be broken even with perma rain. An agility, in and of itself, does not break any pokemon. It also requires excellent offenses, which many pokes lack (such as luvdisk). As such, it cannot be broken- it can only be a contributing factor.

Only abilities that are broken (or produce far too much luck) in and of themselves, such as inconsistent, can and should be banned. I believe Drizzle has this quality, since it requires no traits in its user pokemon to be broken for support- it itself is broken.

(P.S. That is assuming we find rain to be broken, I am not yet 100% convinced it is broken. I'd probably vote to ban it on grounds of ridiculous overcentralization though, but I'm less than confident that sandstream and drought, which would be just as much broken and centralizing, will also get the same boot.)

Abilities aren't simply banned by default brokenness. One of the main supporting factors of Swift Swim's "brokenness" (I theory I do not personally subscribe to) is its distribution. Something like Shadow Tag is a candidate for ban because of its distribution on things that can take advantage of it easily. This same trait is reflected in Swift Swim's distribution: namely, the broken trio (Ludicolo, Kingdra, and Kabutops). These three can rip through teams with pure power and crazy speed, wearing down and destroying their "counters" with Rain-boosted, STAB moves or obscenely powerful Specs DM's. These three with swift swim MAKE Drizzle broken (largely, at least).

 

[Every1XplodeNOW]

@Arc Tech: Well Drizzle+SS clause would be more of a soft ban, I guess.

Wait are you trying to say drizzle should be banned on the same grounds as inconsistent?

 

[capefeather]

Adding to masterful's statements, I've never liked the treatment of the Speed stat as an entity separate from the other stats. If a Pokémon outruns another, in many cases that's equivalent to doubling its power. This idea was used in the "Sweepiness" statistics used in CAP.

 

[Arc Tech]

Abilities aren't simply banned by default brokenness. One of the main supporting factors of Swift Swim's "brokenness" (I theory I do not personally subscribe to) is its distribution. Something like Shadow Tag is a candidate for ban because of its distribution on things that can take advantage of it easily. This same trait is reflected in Swift Swim's distribution: namely, the broken trio (Ludicolo, Kingdra, and Kabutops). These three can rip through teams with pure power and crazy speed, wearing down and destroying their "counters" with Rain-boosted, STAB moves or obscenely powerful Specs DM's. These three with swift swim MAKE Drizzle broken (largely, at least).

Banning an ability that isn't broken is the same as nerfing its userbase so that they aren't broken. It's would be like if we banned draco meteor rather than the latis last gen. Quite simply put, it is wrong and should not be done.

I also oppose a shadow tag ban for the same reason. Preventing the opponent from switching is not broken in and of itself- look a dugtrio. If shandera, wobbuffet, and gochizeru are broken, let them be banned, for they are the broken ones- not shadow tag.

EDIT:
No, I'm not saying that it should be banned on the same grounds as inconsistent. I'm saying that both fall into a class of abilities that can be broken in and of themselves, since they operate completely independently of their users in a broken way. Swift Swim does not fall into this category; doubling speed is not in itself broken, it also requires excellent offenses in its user. As such, Swift Swim cannot be broken (and should not be allowed for nomination).

 

[masterful]

Banning an ability that isn't broken is the same as nerfing its userbase so that they aren't broken. It's would be like if we banned draco meteor rather than the latis last gen. Quite simply put, it is wrong and should not be done.

I also oppose a shadow tag ban for the same reason. Preventing the opponent from switching is not broken in and of itself- look a dugtrio. If shandera, wobbuffet, and gochizeru are broken, let them be banned, for they are the broken ones- not shadow tag.

Like Isaid, I do not advocate Swift Swim being banned. Drizzle makes them too powerful, and banning less is usually preferrable to nerfing more. Yet, it needs to be said that Lati@s was not banned solely because of DM, but because their powerful stats allowed them to abuse them to great effect. With new steels and the like, DM will likely become less of a problem, yet SS sweepers in Perma-rain will not. Also, I advocate to some extent a Shadow Tag move because the pokes that use it (aside from Gochizeru, for the most part) use it to great and spectacularly irritatingly powerful effect. With the existence of Shandera, one must always fear the use of a choiced Bug/Fighting attack, and Wobb, well we all know about Wobb.

 

[ensoriki]

What abilities are not dependent on their user arch tech.
A pokemon with insomnia needs stats good enough to make an ability that is situationally useful worth bringing.

A pokemon with Rivalry should have good enough stats that if the opposing gender appears it is not rendered pointless to the team.

etc.

Pokemon and abilities have a symbiotic relationship to begin with. Except for inconsistent I can't think of an ability that is not "dependent on it's user" in some shape. Since basically every pokemon learns Protect or substitute it would be broken on almost if not everything.
What other abilities can you say that for? None?

---

And I also don't agree with this super-finite and specific banning (ie. Drizzle+SS can't be on the same team), it just doesn't seem right at all.

Right how, what ethics are involved?
If we're going to ban drizzle we have to know why we're banning drizzle.
If we say drizzle provides too much support, what kind of support, who's benefiting to make this broken combination?
Are the rain dishers broken? Is it the dry skin pokemon make it broken? We have quite a few hydration users, but only one stands out? Is vaporeon broken in rain? Wishcash( lol), Dewgong (come on now), Agiiruga? Manaphy? Is everyone having STAB water broken? How many pokemon efficiently benefit this? Is the speed + double stab too much?
Why are we banning Drizzle?
We say support, but support is general, who is benefiting to the point that the support is broken?
I hear Swift Swimmers, the trinity of Kabutops, Kingdra, Ludicolo for instance, among others.
I hear people want rain offense to be limited to Rain dance + damp rock.
In term's of forcing swift swimmers to use RD + damp rock, and put that form of rain offense into a more limited state, a Drizzle+Swift swim clause does exactly that.

What is "wrong" about it.
Are you worried about a slippery slope? Banning every combination we can think of that is broken?
I would say don't worry about that. For one we cannot continually do that in the first place, secondly the point of the clause is to replicate the desired effects of a hard ban while keeping all the other strategies behind permanent rain in tact, is something wrong with that?
Essentially if anything the clause would just be put under a suspect test to see if it works, and would isolate the issues with greater ease.

 

[Arc Tech]

Like Isaid, I do not advocate Swift Swim being banned. Drizzle makes them too powerful, and banning less is usually preferrable to nerfing more. Yet, it needs to be said that Lati@s was not banned solely because of DM, but because their powerful stats allowed them to abuse them to great effect. With new steels and the like, DM will likely become less of a problem, yet SS sweepers in Perma-rain will not. Also, I advocate to some extent a Shadow Tag move because the pokes that use it (aside from Gochizeru, for the most part) use it to great and spectacularly irritatingly powerful effect. With the existence of Shandera, one must always fear the use of a choiced Bug/Fighting attack, and Wobb, well we all know about Wobb.

Exactly, thats what I'm saying (in regards to swift swim). It's not swift swim alone that makes the sweepers broken; it's also their excellent offenses, just like the DM&latis case.

As for shadow tag... It's whether you believe not allowing the opponent to switch is in itself broken. Looking at dugtrio... But then again, it is stupidly powerful, and even borders upon mechanics-changing, even if it is not 100% broken.

What abilities are not dependent on their user arch tech.
A pokemon with insomnia needs stats good enough to make an ability that is situationally useful worth bringing.

A pokemon with Rivalry should have good enough stats that if the opposing gender appears it is not rendered pointless to the team.

etc.

Pokemon and abilities have a symbiotic relationship to begin with. Except for inconsistent I can't think of an ability that is not "dependent on it's user" in some shape. Since basically every pokemon learns Protect or substitute it would be broken on almost if not everything.
What other abilities can you say that for? None?

Inconsistent: introduces obscene amount of luck regardless of user, even bidoof, who has no decent traits to speak of, could sweep ou (and even Uber) teams.

Drizzle (etc): Requires no traits in the user to provide support to the pokes which it supposedly makes broken. A politoed at lv 1 would have the same effect on the pokes it would support. (admittedly, it would give you a decent opportunity to get something in and threaten, even more so than now).

Eccentric: Do I really need to explain this one?

"Shadow Tag": Like I said, depends on if you think not being able to switch is broken/mechanics changing/whatever.

Sand Veil/Snow Cloak: Introduces luck regardless of user. (Bannable under luck and evasion rather than sheer brokeness).

 

[SJCrew]

How about so we can test it next round in a metagame without Drizzle? Contrary to what most people seem to believe, Manaphy doesn't make Drizzle broken, it's the other way around. Drizzle is broken with or without Manaphy, hell Manaphy isn't even close to being the most dangerous abuser. Drizzle enables teams to utilize an army of powerful swift swimmers to rip through teams that aren't specifically built to counter it, while Manaphy, outside of Drizzle, is very borderline and deserves a separate test.

Here's my thesis: if enough players want to be so thorough as to test Manaphy under a condition they think makes him not broken, then by all means, do so.

But just like 4th gen when there was no Drizzle, he's going to be found broken anyway. Rain never completely went away even when it had no starter, it was just harder to use. If 3-4 is any indication, it'll come right out of the barracks if it has a good enough user. I set up Rain for Kingdra, I set up Rain for Manaphy in 3-4, and I'll do it again if the playerbase agrees with your way of thinking and moves the direction you predict.

With any hope, we'll have gotten rid of both before it even gets that point.

Also, I advocate to some extent a Shadow Tag move because the pokes that use it (aside from Gochizeru, for the most part) use it to great and spectacularly irritatingly powerful effect.

Gochiruzeru...is just as broken as Shandera. Not as powerful, but still has great coverage, less weaknesses, prone to Pursuit once its job is done. And its bulk goes a long ass way to doing some of the things Shandera wishes it could. Like switch into Hippowdon's Earthquake or the 500 other things it's weak to.

Looking at dugtrio...

There are too many Pokemon Dugtrio can't trap for that to be a valid argument.

 

[Arc Tech]

There are too many Pokemon Dugtrio can't trap for that to be a valid argument.

If Dugtrio had shadow tag rather than arena trap, do you really think it would be any better or used any more? Especially since it doesn't want to be in on pokes that are immune to its stab more often than not.

 

[Every1XplodeNOW]

Banning an ability that isn't broken is the same as nerfing its userbase so that they aren't broken. It's would be like if we banned draco meteor rather than the latis last gen. Quite simply put, it is wrong and should not be done.

I also oppose a shadow tag ban for the same reason. Preventing the opponent from switching is not broken in and of itself- look a dugtrio. If shandera, wobbuffet, and gochizeru are broken, let them be banned, for they are the broken ones- not shadow tag.

EDIT:
No, I'm not saying that it should be banned on the same grounds as inconsistent. I'm saying that both fall into a class of abilities that can be broken in and of themselves, since they operate completely independently of their users in a broken way. Swift Swim does not fall into this category; doubling speed is not in itself broken, it also requires excellent offenses in its user. As such, Swift Swim cannot be broken (and should not be allowed for nomination).

Sorry but I disagree with that. Inconsistent is broken because it doesn't need help from anything to make it broken, but drizzle does. If drizzle is broken without swift swim, then I would agree, but we won't know that until it's tested. That's why I first said swift swim is the real culprit, in my personal opinion.

This is really messed up. Swift Swim makes Drizzle broken, but Swift Swim isn't broken itself. But Drizzle might not be broken if Swift Swim was banned, but it's not broken unless drizzle is up.

I mean the easiest thing to do is to just ban drizzle, but it just won't sit well with me because we are banning it because of another ability.

 

[Arc Tech]

Sorry but I disagree with that. Inconsistent is broken because it doesn't need help from anything to make it broken, but drizzle does. If drizzle is broken without swift swim, then I would agree, but we won't know that until it's tested. That's why I first said swift swim is the real culprit, in my personal opinion.

This is really messed up. Swift Swim makes Drizzle broken, but Swift Swim isn't broken itself. But Drizzle might not be broken if Swift Swim was banned, but it's not broken unless drizzle is up.

I mean the easiest thing to do is to just ban drizzle, but it just won't sit well with me because we are banning it because of another ability.

Big problem with your thesis: Drizzle + Swift Swim =/= broken. Proof: Luvdisc.

Drizzle provides support to many pokemon, and supposedly provides enough support to the best swift swimmers, in both doubling their speed and giving them a 1.5 boost on their stab, to make them broken. Making it possibly bannable under the support clause. The fact that drizzle only supports so few pokemon though to such an extent to make them broken, and provides absolutely no support to many others, makes it somewhat arguable to ban the pokes rather than drizzle, or having both swift swim and drizzle on a team.