How is full stall even viable anymore?
So many things hit so hard,so fast,and have so many ways of laughing at status and phazing,that it isn't even funny.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Reuniclus
- Thread starter Pratty
- Start date
How is full stall even viable anymore?
So many things hit so hard,so fast,and have so many ways of laughing at status and phazing,that it isn't even funny.
Everyone said that at the start of Gen 4, too.
It was already starting to show a bit in gen 4 but it's just way worse now. There are way too pokemon that have really few counters. A team needs revenge killers or it will get swept by one of those pokemon. Stall needs to adapt. It really can't hope to tank everything and come out on top anymore.
They were right. At least until Garchomp, Salamence and every other offensive threat was banned...and before Rotom got its alternate formes for spinblocking. Platinum and HGSS changed quite a bit in the metagame.
Well regardless, if stall is just not an effective playstyle this gen, we need to accept that and try new things rather than try to force it to be effective though bans. Using a team full of special heavily offence sweepers is the same, we dont ban all the special walls to make it an effective strategy, we just dont use it and find something better.
Hrm I'm a fan of Semi-stall myself. I wouldn't say stall isnt viable. It's just weakened by all the powerful new players this gen.
Astrohawke wins this thread, I've agreed with him every step of the way. We've never banned a single pokemon to keep a playstyle of all things viable. If an entire playstyle is shut down by one mon for the most part, that's a fault with the playstyle itself. It's like saying we should ban Conkeldurr and Breloom because I can't use my mono-Normal playstyle! Garchomp threatened every playstyle last Gen, that's why it was banned. Reuniclus is no where close to being that effective. While it has good bulk and a great ability, it has poor defensive typing and is so slow it is very easy to revenge.
I can't beleive people are thinking of banning rankurusu. Personally, I'm glad there are some pokes strong enough to compete with those goddamn dragons. I remember last gen you pretty much had to have a super fast ice user/strong ice shard to take out mence/dnite, or you lost. This gen it almost seems like fighting and psychic, and of course weather, are dominating. I use rankurusu on a lot of my teams, and he doesn't siglehandedly win me games. Ever. He does well, for sure, but not any better than dragons or blissey or any other strong poke.
Stall teams do have ways of crippling rankurusu, definately. I know trick shuts down pretty much any rankurusu. You could always save a sleep for it, or spam uturns. Urgamoth, zoroark, sazandora are all huge threats that rankurusu has problems with. I know they're not stall, but yeah.
Stall teams do have ways of crippling rankurusu, definately. I know trick shuts down pretty much any rankurusu. You could always save a sleep for it, or spam uturns. Urgamoth, zoroark, sazandora are all huge threats that rankurusu has problems with. I know they're not stall, but yeah.
Your argument is absurd. Stall is a much more useful and ubiquitous playstyle than mono-normal, don't act like they're the same. If an entirely viable strat is rendered unusable by a single poke, that poke is broken. It's pretty simple. What your saying is a logical fallacy, a weak analogy, and acting as if it solidifies your argument entirely when it is far less relevant than you believe.
Actually Yanmega was banned from UU last gen because it made offense non-viable with Speed Boost and also the Specs Tinted Lens set. Yanmega required Chansey or Registeel to beat it and shifted the metagame towards stall and defensive play/pokemon just to deal with its hits.
Though honestly Rankurusu is JUST as devastating against offense with the TR set. Don't overlook this.
@Sir Azelf
That's not true. Yanmega has a much better ability to abuse it's power against offensive teams. Tinted Lens allows it to break through things that would otherwise be a good counter to it. Rankurusu doesn't have that luxury. It doesn't have enough power to break though what Tinted Lense Yanmega can quite easily.
That's not true. Yanmega has a much better ability to abuse it's power against offensive teams. Tinted Lens allows it to break through things that would otherwise be a good counter to it. Rankurusu doesn't have that luxury. It doesn't have enough power to break though what Tinted Lense Yanmega can quite easily.
But it DOES have the power to break through stall with Magic Guard LO. Yanmega and Rank each mess with different playstyles
Don't get too heated, I'm not a serious supporter of Rank being banned. He may have very few counters, but more importantly, I think he's an important proponent in balancing the metagame.
Also, some of that stuff you said is just plain wrong. Clefable being bulkier than Rank? Wtf? He has 2 points base Def over it and way more HP. Then there's Gengar 2HKOing with Shadow Ball when he gets OHKOed by Psychic, Mismagius not 2HKOing a +1 Rankurusu nor being viable in this meta, etc. If these are the best arguments you can make in favor of keeping Rank in OU, then the Ubers supporters can very well contently ban him.
Can't it just Trick Room as Gengar (or before) comes in and own it in 1 hit?
What if it wasn't just Reuniclus that made full stall much less viable, but multiple Pokemon? Should all of those Pokemon be banned just to make a certain playstyle work? Does playstyle completely dictate what should and should not be banned? I don't see why it should. I don't see why all playstyles have to be completely viable.
This goes out to not just you, but everyone debating here and anywhere else on this forum, please read the characteristics of a desirable metagame, it outlines what we as a community want the meta to be like and offers explanation for many proposed bans. Rank destroys stall, creating less variety in the meta, an undesirable situation
The characteristics of a desirable metagame cannot speak for everyone. They may be a good representation of the community, they may be good guidleines, but if a significant number of people disagree with them, then we don't have to follow them like the Bible (or Torah or Quran). So it's fine to use the characteristics as an argument, but don't say that someone is wrong because they disagree. By doing so, you would be wrong.
Who doesn't agree with those characteristics?
How about we try and figure out the specific set that gives people trouble? I've run into like 10 of these so far. 9 went down easily, while 1 KOed 4 of my pokemon and won the game. Obviously theres a certain set that makes it the most troublesome. I'm thinking its a trick room set. Using the TRed turns to set up and heal any damage taken is the tactic the troublesome Reuniclus used... but whats a common way to stop it before it gets going? Sure taunt I suppose would work, but your taunter dies what else?
I'm not sure.
I was just saying that they don't have to bind our hands. They don't have to act as a straight-jacket.
Are you joking? Don't argue just for the sake of arguing. In order to properly debate, we need a point of reference as to what a desired outcome would be. The characteristics serve as that. Without that point of reference, it is damn near impossible to fully debate the merits of a ban (or lack thereof).
What is it with the term "variety". There are always going to be, what, maybe 30-50 Pokemon out of 649 that are used on the majority of teams, regardless of who is banned? A lack of variety is inevitable because it's impossible to balance a game like this. There are always going to be better Pokemon, and those Pokemon are the ones that are going to get the most attention even if they push hundreds of others aside. We could spend months sitting here thinking of which Pokemon would get more use if we banned a certain OU Pokemon, and in the end we would still end up with 30-50 Pokemon.
Pokemon has undeniably been going through power creeps, so maybe offense is what the creators had in mind. Why fight this? Playstyles should revolve around the Pokemon in the metagame, not the other way around. Just because something worked in the past doesn't mean it has to work now.
Pokemon has undeniably been going through power creeps, so maybe offense is what the creators had in mind. Why fight this? Playstyles should revolve around the Pokemon in the metagame, not the other way around. Just because something worked in the past doesn't mean it has to work now.
That point is exactly what I'm arguing.
Yes, we should try to achieve the perfect metagame.
But you seem to have no idea how subjective that is.
I'm not arguing the validity of the characteristics.
I'm arguing that they apply to everyone, which you've pretty strongly implied.
What exactly is wrong with the characteristics?
