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

[ensoriki]

Evasion and OHKO moves are unhealthy for the metagame,even for Ubers,because they don't encourage skill or predition at all,you just use it.

Dark Void,Water Spout,*insert other Uber-strong moves here that most Ubers user here*,etc. make these mons broken,but their not unhealthy for the metagame in any way.
You still need your freaking brain to use the moves and not just luckily kill your counters by sheer luck.

Using double team & Minimize are practically the same as using Howl, leer, screech, flash, sand attack,Sword dance, Defense Curl, Iron defense, cosmic power, Growth, Tail Glow, Shell break, etc.

It's not a matter of them not encouraging skill or prediction at all, discussion about evasion moves (I wouldn't say items) should be about whether those moves are too powerful in comparison to the options to counter them.

I would say yes on that. Many of the counters even if we had a metagame that was evasion based aren't that potent. Now Double team isn't so bad even though most pokemon get that since +1 evasion is well Garchomp, people are used to that kind of evasion and it's nuisance. However if we account for perfect accuracy attack moves like vital throw, foresight like moves, mind reader & lock on, no guard and other things. I'd still say it's too powerful.

 

[Nanoswine]

Starman, the reason that OHKO clause and Evasion clause are implemented is because a large amount of Pokemon can use them, and using them does not promote strategy or competitiveness - in fact, it discourages it. Banning specific Pokemon + move combinations are far different, because they are direct nerfs. Under most circumstances, if something needs to be nerfed to be acceptable in OU it should be banned instead.

Icyman, I hope you read my last post because I addressed most of your arguments in it. Banning Drizzle + Swift Swim did nerf Swift Swimmers, but it was necessary to balance the metagame. Unless banning Drizzle + Manaphy would directly cause a significant improvement to the metagame, it is overly complex for it's purpose: nerfing Manaphy so it can stay OU. Before you say that's the exact same thing as Drizzle + Swift Swim, you need to realize that it is not at all the same. Drizzle + Swift Swim's purpose was not to keep the Swift Swimmers OU, it was to keep Drizzle OU. That is where the complexity exception applies. It can not be slapped on to any Weather Ability + Abusing Factor combination.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

Starman, the reason that OHKO clause and Evasion clause are implemented is because a large amount of Pokemon can use them, and using them does not promote strategy or competitiveness - in fact, it discourages it. Banning specific Pokemon + move combinations are far different, because they are direct nerfs. Under most circumstances, if something needs to be nerfed to be acceptable in OU it should be banned instead.

Icyman, I hope you read my last post because I addressed most of your arguments in it. Banning Drizzle + Swift Swim did nerf Swift Swimmers, but it was necessary to balance the metagame. Unless banning Drizzle + Manaphy would directly cause a significant improvement to the metagame, it is overly complex for it's purpose: nerfing Manaphy so it can stay OU. Before you say that's the exact same thing as Drizzle + Swift Swim, you need to realize that it is not at all the same. Drizzle + Swift Swim's purpose was not to keep the Swift Swimmers OU, it was to keep Drizzle OU. That is where the complexity exception applies. It can not be slapped on to any Weather Ability + Abusing Factor combination.

Adding on to that, Drizzle being kept in OU is not "playing favorites", but something necessary to keep the metagame balanced. Or at least that's what's believed.

 

[Thorhammer]

Aldaron's proposal was made to prevent the removing of playstyles from the Metagame. Banning drizzle itself would have led to rain stall being impossible. On the other hand Banning Swift Swim would have put some basically UU Pokemon into Uber's. And they fare no where near as well in Ubers as they did in OU. Then the proposal that Drizzle+SwSw be banned when used on the same team. This would allow SwSw strategies to stay in OU, and also keep Rain Stall from being rendered useless. It was as close to a Win/Win scenario as could be found in this case.

Aldaron's proposal was not about Swift Swim. It was about creating an exception regarding anything that involved permanent-weather abilities. I've quoted proof of this enough times.

Weather is different when it affects a large portion of the Metagame, as with the SwSw issue. When it is just one Pokemon though it can be considered null.

Aldaron's proposal makes no distinction regarding this.

Actually it is the combination of SwSw + Drizzle that was broken, thus the reason it got banned. SwSw is broken with Perma rain, providing a +1/+2 considering rain's boost to water attacks. Notice how none of the other weathers came up as broken with their respective sweepers, as it was only either double speed (Still scary, but managable when you consider that they don't automatically gain an extra STAB) or a boost to STAB only.

Swift Swim Luvdisc in Drizzle is not broken. Therefore, the combination of Swift Swim and Drizzle is not broken. It's only the capabilities of the individual Pokemon that make it broken.

Banning a Specific pokemon+weather condition is really a slippery path. If you start on it eventually it would lead to "Oh Arceus isn't broken without E-Speed so we can just take that away and move it to OU," or "Ho-oh isn't broken without Sun wo it can be moved to OU and banned from being used on Sunny Day teams." A ban to compensate for ONE Pokemon is overly complex and completely useless.

Aldaron's proposal made it clear that weather abilities and moves are completely different. Stop wasting my time by making me argue this point over and over again.

If Ho-oh is found to not be broken outside of permanent sun, it should be allowed. But I highly doubt that will turn out to be the case. Everything we know indicates that Ho-oh would still be broken even outside of sun.

When you start to say one Pokemon is completely effected by a weather you start down that slippery slope. Weather is complex due to it affecting mass amounts of users. That complexity in affecting a large amount of Pokemon is why SwSw+Drizzle was banned. Not because the Pokemon weren't broken without it, but because it affected such a large amount of Pokemon.

Nothing in Aldaron's proposal gives this specification.

However, we entirely ignore simplicity and slippery slope arguments IF we simply declare weather abilities as exceptions. No need to worry about "now we can propose Latios is only broken with Latias on the team" or something like that. Just say that abilities that affect some subjectively determined high number of variables in the metagame are exceptions to the rule. I think any of us can see how auto weather abilities affect a far larger number of variables than Intimidate or even entire individual Pokemon themselves.

So what are we going to do as a community. Are we really going to assume Drizzle is the same as other abilities / pokemon / moves and shoot down a proposal for a "complicated" ban without acknowledging that weather inducing abilities are exceptions to the rule?

Everything in Aldaron's proposal indicates a focus on weather-inducing abilities, and nothing else.

Read the paragraph above this.

Done.

Introducing ability bans is where banning team Styles comes in. And you kinda just stated that we ban pokemon, which is exactly what the Manaphy ban is.... And SwSw+Drizzle ban affects team styles, a lot....

We shouldn't be banning team styles. We should be banning Pokemon.

Banning a Pokemon entirely is one way of banning Pokemon. Banning a Pokemon only in permanent weather conditions is another way of doing this, and Aldaron's proposal has made it clear that that is an option.

So if I say "Because of weather X, the Pokemon Y is broken," that now constitutes as a weather "complexity"? So because of Rain, Kyorge is Broken, thus a complex ban to ban Kyorge+Drizzle should be put in place? That makes no sense. That is basically saying, here all of you broken mons, here is a free ticket to OU.

Kyogre's only ability is Drizzle. Such a ban would be impossible. Furthermore, it wouldn't be enough in the first place. Kyogre would be broken even if it somehow lost access to Drizzle.

What Aldaron's proposal means is that good bans involving permanent weather shouldn't be stopped by complexity, not that any illogical ban should be permitted just because it involves permanent weather. Allowing Manaphy outside of Drizzle would, if it is not broken in those conditions, benefit the metagame by adding variety, and therefore it should at least be considered.

-----------

I don't have time to explain Aldaron's proposal over and over again to every single person who thinks they understand it but doesn't. Does anyone have anything to say regarding this other than things I've already demonstrated to be incorrect?

I've shown six quotes from Aldaron's proposal that demonstrate it to be a general exception regarding weather abilities, not one constrained to Swift Swim + Drizzle. It is clear that he only addressed Swift Swim + Drizzle because it was what was currently causing the most issues for the metagame, not because it's supposed to be any more of an exception than any other case of weather abuse. Stop trying to argue with this.

Of course, the only way for us all to be absolutely sure it to ask Aldaron himself. For this reason, I've sent him a message requesting that he clarify.

 

[TheValkyries]

Aldaron's Proposal: The worst banning decision Smogon has ever made.

Why?

A) It sets poor precedent.

Blah, blah, blah, it only happens for weather, blah, blah, blah, meaningless excuses. There's a stark difference between the perception of something and its intentions. The perception of this proposal's acceptance can easily be construed as banning complexly to keep something weather related in OU. Extrapolating upon the idea that we can do that, it is really not a far leap at all to say we can ban the combination of x and y to keep x and y OU. Really, all we'd be removing are the words "weather related." How is this not a bad concept to lay down? You can say "it was meant to be this" all you want, but how people see it is how it's going to be seen, like it or not.

B) It was never well thought out.

The proposal was an appeal to the parts of the community that pressed the panic button and said "Ban Drizzle!", and to the part that also pressed Panic Mode saying "Drizzle's not broken, Swift Swim is!" (All of that stemmed from the poor choice of never establishing how or when ability bans should be called, but that's another time). The problem is, no one took a moment to think if it was really the ability's that were broken in the first place, and we were left with only the rhetoric from the logically impaired extremists. The proposal is literally like getting together with Rush Limbaugh and Osama Bin Laden, and having them both agree that they'd be fine letting Al Qeada bomb parts of Europe rather than America. Sure, it fixes the problem of the two's differences, but the idea of fixing the problem that way just makes no sense. No where did anyone attempt to decide if the abilities together were actually broken, they were just accepted as such as if it were common fact.

C) It bans far too much.

Because it was an ability combination ban, it affected a large amount of Pokemon. The desired effect was achieved, yes, but not many realize that it did far more than the desired effect. Yes it makes sure Kingdra and company doesn't ever reach a point where they're broken, but it also makes sure Qwilfish never even hits a point where it's viable. Because no one stopped to think that these abilities aren't actually broken, they never thought it could ever just be the Pokemon. In Aldaron's Proposal itself it talks about the fact that the community is too lazy to go and do things right, so they're going to do it simply. And that's the most pathetic thing about it. I honestly had no words for abhorred I was to the idea that he said we should ban them "because it affected such a large amount of Pokemon."

By the way, that "large amount" being talked about was 3 Pokemon, and most of it was poorly theorymonned. No one actually tested to see if it was just Kingdra or Kabutops that was broken, they just assumed that they both were. No one made sure to see that the meta-game could actually be stable with Swift Swimmers and Drizzle, they just assumed it so. People were too busy taking advantage of the poor premise of, "Oh, you can nominate abilities for banning" without any rationale or extra thought given to the ramifications of such a ban to care about making the correct bans. People were too busy clinging to old ideals of what a meta-game should look like, and not accepting the meta-game given to them to care about making the correct bans. People were too busy saying, "Fuck it, I don't want to deal with this shit storm of a meta-game, let's just ban it all quickly so we can move on," to care about making the correct bans. No one once thought that this ban could do something more than they wanted to, and for those who did, they didn't care.

That is the largest failing of the proposal. No one thought, or cared, about what we were doing, they only wanted to do something quickly to get it out of their sights. That's utterly wrong, and it has done a great disservice to this community.

 

[Byrn Dragonstone]

@Thorhammer
I would post and quote and argue your arguments, but they are the same arguments that I argued before. Nothing you said changed the facts of what I said. And some of them were more confusing then when you began. I am not trying to be rude, but there is honestly nothing in that post that has not been countered before, whether by me or by someone else over the last couple of pages.

(Also I completely agree on some of your points. Luvdisc will never be Uber material (Even consistent might not save it....))

I do have a question though. If we were to take your interpritation of the proposal, when would it end? from where I sit all that I see from your arguments is a long tedious banning process that would take years to complete, as we would have to dedicate entire months to the testing of one weather sweeper. That wasn't the point of Alderons proposal, nor the reason that SwSw+Drizzle are now banned. By what I have gathered from your remarks it seems that you want each and every individual pokemon that has to do with weather to be tested to see if they themselves are broken, or a combination of the abilities are broken.

Also the way that I see it Drizzle+SwSw was banned, not the excepting of a new rule for making bans...

 

[IcyMan28]

Starman, the reason that OHKO clause and Evasion clause are implemented is because a large amount of Pokemon can use them, and using them does not promote strategy or competitiveness - in fact, it discourages it. Banning specific Pokemon + move combinations are far different, because they are direct nerfs. Under most circumstances, if something needs to be nerfed to be acceptable in OU it should be banned instead.

Icyman, I hope you read my last post because I addressed most of your arguments in it. Banning Drizzle + Swift Swim did nerf Swift Swimmers, but it was necessary to balance the metagame. Unless banning Drizzle + Manaphy would directly cause a significant improvement to the metagame, it is overly complex for it's purpose: nerfing Manaphy so it can stay OU. Before you say that's the exact same thing as Drizzle + Swift Swim, you need to realize that it is not at all the same. Drizzle + Swift Swim's purpose was not to keep the Swift Swimmers OU, it was to keep Drizzle OU. That is where the complexity exception applies. It can not be slapped on to any Weather Ability + Abusing Factor combination.

And why did Drizzle HAVE to remain OU? We didn't even bother to actually test Sand and Sun without Drizzle, so we do not know whether or not keeping Drizzle was necessary.

At this point, our bans are really just the community picking and choosing what it wants. It isn't a bad thing, but let's acknowledge this rather than pretend Drizzle was kept to keep the other weathers (which are largely balanced on their own) in check.

 

[Thorhammer]

@Thorhammer
I would post and quote and argue your arguments, but they are the same arguments that I argued before. Nothing you said changed the facts of what I said. And some of them were more confusing then when you began. I am not trying to be rude, but there is honestly nothing in that post that has not been countered before, whether by me or by someone else over the last couple of pages.

(Also I completely agree on some of your points. Luvdisc will never be Uber material (Even consistent might not save it....))

I do have a question though. If we were to take your interpritation of the proposal, when would it end? from where I sit all that I see from your arguments is a long tedious banning process that would take years to complete, as we would have to dedicate entire months to the testing of one weather sweeper. That wasn't the point of Alderons proposal, nor the reason that SwSw+Drizzle are now banned. By what I have gathered from your remarks it seems that you want each and every individual pokemon that has to do with weather to be tested to see if they themselves are broken, or a combination of the abilities are broken.

Also the way that I see it Drizzle+SwSw was banned, not the excepting of a new rule for making bans...

Show me a single post that has ever shown any other possible explanation for the general statements I quoted from Aldaron's proposal.

These counters you're insisting on have never been made. Your previous argument added nothing to the arguments I had countered countless times before.

As or your second paragraph, there's no reason why it would take months to complete. To start, we would only have to decide on a few sweepers to ban from use in Drizzle - Manaphy, Kingdra, and probably Ludicolo and Kabutops as well. It seems as if that would be enough to solve the current rain problem, and if anything ese turns out to be broken, it wouldn't take long at all to ban under the current process. There are only a few abusers in question for sun and sand, and if they turn out to be a problem, they wouldn't take any longer to ban from use in their respective permanent weather conditions.

Also, regarding Luvdisc, yes, it would be broken even with Inconsistent. That's why Inconsistent was banned. It's broken on everything. That's why an Inconsistent ban was justified, and why a permanent Swift Swim ban would not be. The current Swift Swim + Drizzle ban to test if Drizzle would be broken even without rain's top sweepers able to be used in it is acceptable, but only if it remains temporary.

 

[Nanoswine]

Aldaron's proposal was not about Swift Swim. It was about creating an exception regarding anything that involved permanent-weather abilities. I've quoted proof of this enough times.

Where does it say this. Where have you quoted "proof" of this. All you have quoted is Aldaron saying that we should treat weather abilities as exceptions to the simplicity of bans. Yet the Drizzle isn't the focus of the bans you are proposing!

Aldaron's proposal makes no distinction regarding this.

It also never says anywhere to use it as a precedent to half-ass bans from now on (in fact it states the opposite). Yet that's what you're trying to do.

Swift Swim Luvdisc in Drizzle is not broken. Therefore, the combination of Swift Swim and Drizzle is not broken. It's only the capabilities of the individual Pokemon that make it broken.

Who would use Swift Swim Luvdisc anyways? And it is simpler to say "No Drizzle and Swift Swim on the same team" than it is to say "No Swift Swim Kingdra, Kabutops, Ludicolo, Gorybess, etc. on Drizzle teams." That's taking it too far, and intimidates new players from joining Smogon because it seems overly complex. Unless you want to screw up a large part of the playerbase?

Aldaron's proposal made it clear that weather abilities and moves are completely different. Stop wasting my time by making me argue this point over and over again.

It also made it clear that weather abilities and Pokemon are different. The focus of a Drizzle + Manaphy ban is not the weather ability, so no exception can be made.

If Ho-oh is found to not be broken outside of permanent sun, it should be allowed. But I highly doubt that will turn out to be the case. Everything we know indicates that Ho-oh would still be broken even outside of sun.

No. The exception set in stone by Aldaron's proposal was not a precedent for letting Pokemon be nerfed for the sake of having them in the metagame. It is a precedent for letting Pokemon be nerfed for the sake of having permanent weather in the metagame. Ho-oh does not break Drought, and at this point Drought isn't even broken!

Nothing in Aldaron's proposal gives this specification.

Bigfoot is real. Prove me wrong.

Everything in Aldaron's proposal indicates a focus on weather-inducing abilities, and nothing else.

So then why are you using it to justify bans with a focus not on weather-inducing abilities, but ones with a focus on Pokemon and abilities that are not weather-inducing!

We shouldn't be banning team styles. We should be banning Pokemon.

Banning a Pokemon entirely is one way of banning Pokemon. Banning a Pokemon only in permanent weather conditions is another way of doing this, and Aldaron's proposal has made it clear that that is an option.

Where does it make this clear. The only reason banning a Pokemon in permanent weather would be acceptable is if, like Aldaron's proposal, it is an effort to balance the weather so it does not have to be banned. It is not acceptable to make such a ban in an effort to balance the Pokemon so it does not have to be banned. I hope you understand the distinction here.

Kyogre's only ability is Drizzle. Such a ban would be impossible. Furthermore, it wouldn't be enough in the first place. Kyogre would be broken even if it somehow lost access to Drizzle.

What Aldaron's proposal means is that good bans involving permanent weather shouldn't be stopped by complexity, not that any illogical ban should be permitted just because it involves permanent weather. Allowing Manaphy outside of Drizzle would, if it is not broken in those conditions, benefit the metagame by adding variety, and therefore it should at least be considered.

When someone nitpicks at another's argument, it is often because they have lost the main argument. I believe what he was saying is that if we were to ban Manaphy + Drizzle, it would open the door to all kinds of arbitrary bans. which we want to avoid, not encourage.

What I bolded in there really confuses me. Aldaron's proposal was not a gateway for all kinds of weather + Pokemon bans, in fact he mentions in it several times that he discourages such a slippery slope from taking place! The second part really hits home though: no complex ban should be made just because it involves permanent weather. Why would you say this if you are attempting just that?

I don't have time to explain Aldaron's proposal over and over again to every single person who thinks they understand it but doesn't. Does anyone have anything to say regarding this other than things I've already demonstrated to be incorrect?

I've shown six quotes from Aldaron's proposal that demonstrate it to be a general exception regarding weather abilities, not one constrained to Swift Swim + Drizzle. It is clear that he only addressed Swift Swim + Drizzle because it was what was currently causing the most issues for the metagame, not because it's supposed to be any more of an exception than any other case of weather abuse. Stop trying to argue with this.

I have yet to see a quote that says it is a general exception regarding weather abilities. What I have seen from you are quotes that support my argument: the weather ability exception is in place to keep weather abilities available in standard play.

Of course, the only way for us all to be absolutely sure it to ask Aldaron himself. For this reason, I've sent him a message requesting that he clarify.

That would be helpful, but it doesn't really solve the issue at hand. What really matters is what all the suspect voters believed Aldaron intended.

tl;dr Aldaron's proposal was not intended to start a slippery slope of complex Weather + Pokemon bans. It was not in order to keep Swift Swim OU. Aldaron's proposal offered the weather-inducing exception as a way to balance Drizzle in order to keep it available in OU. Any Weather + Pokemon ban whose focus is on balancing a weather abuser can not have the complex ability exception apply, because it is not made in order to keep the weather-inducing ability avaliable in OU.

EDIT:

And why did Drizzle HAVE to remain OU? We didn't even bother to actually test Sand and Sun without Drizzle, so we do not know whether or not keeping Drizzle was necessary.

Can we please declare weather-inducing abilities as exceptions to the rule as well? People are seriously just spouting "simplicity of ruleset" and "slippery slope / bad precedent" for weather abilities, and it is confusing me because weather abilities are literally nothing like the majority of other abilities. Weather abilities affect a MUCH HIGHER number of variables than mostly individualistic based abilities.

It's already been voted on. Drizzle remained OU because banning it would cause severe imbalance in the metagame, which is why an exception was made for weather banning abilities.

 

[IcyMan28]

It's already been voted on. Drizzle remained OU because banning it would cause severe imbalance in the metagame, which is why an exception was made for weather banning abilities.

I'm aware that it has been voted on, it can be nominated and voted on again if Deoxys-N was any indication.

Notice the words I bolded for you. Why didn't you say that banning it caused severe imbalance with certainty? Because you don't know. You don't know, I don't know, the community at large simply DOES NOT KNOW whether or not this would be the case, which made this a preemptive ban of sorts.

_________________


Anyways, we've moved on from "what is broken and what isn't" to "what will create the healthiest, most balanced metagame possible?" If looked at from this perspective, here are some things to take note of.

How Manaphy Helps the Metagame

If we were to do something like this in the first place, we would need to justify it by showing that Manaphy does in fact help the metagame, and I believe that it does based on past rounds as well as theorymon.

As it stands, the water-type received a pretty big nerf in the form of Ferrothorn, which was a good thing because they have been virtually unchecked in the past by virtue of the grass-type's issues. In addition, the metagame in general is simply less kind to them than it has been in the past, there being several examples. Crocune isn't nearly as effective, LO Starmie isn't as effective (and is forced to run HP Fire if it hopes to be), Gyarados is now relegated to the role of bulky water and thus has to use ResTalk, Vaporeon remains about the same.

The grass-type in general has received various boosts, the first being Ferrothorn, who is capable of fitting on nearly any team and provides adequate team support while being able to actually do something in return. Another is Breloom, who gets a more powerful Bullet Seed and is poised to become pretty popular in general if the DW tier is any indication. Virizion's claim to fame is essentially taking down rain teams on its own with its high special defense and decent offenses.

The metagame is largely centered around types that hit water pokemon for neutral damage and have high base power moves, meaning that their raw bulk just isn't cutting it - I'm talking about Dragon and Fighting. Blaziken, Conkeldurr, Mienshao, Lucario - all are powerful fighting types that can simply muscle their way through bulky waters with ease, and the same goes for dragons in the form of SpecsLatios, Garchomp, Salamence, Hydreigon, and more. Water is still good, but the challenges it has always faced now surface more than ever.

Manaphy could help out with several of these issues, checking a decent bit of the metagame assuming Max/Max Bold + Surf / Calm Mind / Rest / Rain Dance.

-A solid check to Jolly Balloon Excadrill, taking (60.40% - 71.29%) from +2 Earthquake and retaliating with (80.11% - 95.03%) from Surf.
-A solid check to Adamant LO Rock Polish Landorus.
-A great check to Volcarona, as it can take it down with Surf if its weakened enough or throw up rain to nullify the threat level to another team member.
-Top Heatran check
-Good Conkeldurr check, as it can throw up rain and start firing boosted Surfs.
-Provides the option of immediate special sweeping boosting threat of the water-type. The closest we have to that now is...Simipour?
-A general check to all weather, as it carries a weather move of its own and uses Drizzle's weather to its advantage. This is what we were looking for in keeping Drizzle, right? If manaphy can do the same thing...then why is one Uber and one forced OU?

The list goes on. Remember that these are assuming Max/Max Bold, so Manaphy can EV itself as necessary depending on what you need it to check, and you could even run a TG / Rain Dance / Surf / Filler if you don't want Manaphy to be purely a pivot.

So the next question is, can the metagame handle Manaphy outside of eternal rain? Yes, here's how it can be done (some theorymon included):

-Latios and Latias: Top checks to Manaphy thanks to their bulk and access to power electric moves or Recover + CM. Lack of Ice Beam means Crophy is out of luck.
-Ferrothorn is a great defensive check to Manaphy, hitting it with Power Whip as Manaphy is forced to employ the RainRest cycle on its own due to lack of support.
-Virizion / CMCune / Vaporeon / Bloongell / Water Absorb will stop Crophy cold, while TG Manaphy lacking RD will be affected by status as a consequence. 2-move coverage Manaphy will be walled by common pokemon either way.
-Powerful neutral hits. Water has great special resistances, yes, but rarely has the bulk to take stronger neutral hits. LO Terakion CC, SpecsLatios Draco Meteor, etc, will all take their toll on both forms of Manaphy.

There are various options. In any case, I believe Manaphy benefits OU without breaking it so long as permanent rain is not involved, which is where the clause would come in.

And stop claiming that no Drizzle + Manaphy nerfs Manaphy. Nothing about Manaphy is changed, its the environment that it plays in, which is, again, the same thing we've done to the swift swimmers.

 

[Typhlosion]

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that keeping Manaphy is healthy for the metagame because it boosts the water type in general? Is that really necessary? Sure, water isn't as good as it was last gen, but its still one of the best types in the game.

 

[TheValkyries]

I'm enjoying how thoroughly wrong the phrase "we Kept [Drizzle/Swift Swim/x] in OU."

We didn't ban them, because they weren't fucking broken.

Together an argument COULD have been made (One I still would've disagreed with), but on no planet or universe was Drizzle broken by itself, nor was Swift Swim broken by itself.

Please, for the love of god, stop perpetuating this utterly stupid notion that we can complexly ban things to keep other things in OU.

 

[Lightning Tiger]

By the way, that "large amount" being talked about was 3 Pokemon

Just because there are 3 main guys taht were being talked about doesn't mean their the only things that are ridiculous under perma rain.

As i saw it the biggest complaint people had about say kingdra were the rain boosted specs hydro pumps (which are ridiculous), and he only has 95 special attack... hes not the only swift swimmer who can do taht, freaking Golduck, Huntail, and Gorebis can pull of the same nonsense as well. And then theres freaking Omastar, who can do that with much more special attack and access to shell break of death (screw choice specs, tahts even better).

Alot of people seem to think that if we just banned poklemon that wed only have to deal with 3 pokes, thats naive, the only reason other guys dont come up is because most just use those big 3, but those are can replaced with pokes just as problematic imo.

Instead of banning a load of swim swimmers after long testing times... id rather just have Swift Swim and Drizzle separated.

 

[JSND]

nope the problem with kingdra is actualy (special shout out time !!!) shrangs(lol) fault. Its his fault that he posted to use specs kingdra to everyone that specs kingdra become very popular and making kingdra harder to deal with even more than DD variants. Kingdra also has good speed AND DRACO FUCKING METEOR AND bulk. Kingdra can just use pump 3 time to kill and has no priority weakness. Yeah kingdra is definitely better than Omastar AND gorebyss. Hes much more immediately insane.

 

[Arc Tech]

Just because there are 3 main guys taht were being talked about doesn't mean their the only things that are ridiculous under perma rain.

As i saw it the biggest complaint people had about say kingdra were the rain boosted specs hydro pumps (which are ridiculous), and he only has 95 special attack... hes not the only swift swimmer who can do taht, freaking Golduck, Huntail, and Gorebis can pull of the same nonsense as well. And then theres freaking Omastar, who can do that with much more special attack and access to shell break of death (screw choice specs, tahts even better).

Alot of people seem to think that if we just banned poklemon that wed only have to deal with 3 pokes, thats naive, the only reason other guys dont come up is because most just use those big 3, but those are can replaced with pokes just as problematic imo.

Instead of banning a load of swim swimmers after long testing times... id rather just have Swift Swim and Drizzle separated.

While other kindgra does have lower sp atk than other Swift swimmers, it's draco meteor allowed to to beat right through bulky waters (especially water absorbers) no problem, something the others can't really do. The other two who might, Ludicolo and Kabutops, also happen to be the other two in discussion.

Omastar has no other real coverage moves, outside of ice beam. Gorebyss the same, but it has BP, which will probably be the reason it may end up being a problem- but I don't think that it's that much more effective in rain.

Pure offense might have a problem, but omastar, while having good defense, is weak to mach punch (especially if it shell breaks). And old HO is pretty much outclassed by centering on a weather with a few wildcards to help weaknesses. Or need to use abomasnow to disrupt weather teams. Ninetails and Politoed are very abusable due to their mediocore stats. Get in a powerful attacker on them, and either they or one of their sweepers will die.

 

[masterful]

I'm enjoying how thoroughly wrong the phrase "we Kept [Drizzle/Swift Swim/x] in OU."

We didn't ban them, because they weren't fucking broken.

Together an argument COULD have been made (One I still would've disagreed with), but on no planet or universe was Drizzle broken by itself, nor was Swift Swim broken by itself.

Please, for the love of god, stop perpetuating this utterly stupid notion that we can complexly ban things to keep other things in OU.

I must say, I am extremely confused. As you've said yourself, Drizzle and Swift Swim on the same team is usually broken, but an 8-turn rain offense, or perma-rain stall team isn't. By combo-banning the 2 things, we allowed both of those strategies to be usable in OU. Meanwhile, the only strategy we disallowed was perma-rain broken offense. How exactly is that not a success in your book?

 

[Mario With Lasers]

I'm enjoying how thoroughly wrong the phrase "we Kept [Drizzle/Swift Swim/x] in OU."

We didn't ban them, because they weren't fucking broken.

Together an argument COULD have been made (One I still would've disagreed with), but on no planet or universe was Drizzle broken by itself, nor was Swift Swim broken by itself.

Please, for the love of god, stop perpetuating this utterly stupid notion that we can complexly ban things to keep other things in OU.

I agree that "Drizzle" wasn't the problem, but that's what happened in the end; if it weren't the complex ban, we would have banned Drizzle instead. Of course I'd rather test the most prominent Swift Swimmers/abusers instead (I nominated Pocket's proposal, for instance), but the way the playerbase was so hysterical about Drizzle, we wouldn't even have a chance to look further into non-SwSw permanent Rain. Now with the complex ban, we have a chance of testing it and possibly lifting the complex ban in Round 4/5 and just test the "broken abusers" instead.

 

[Arc Tech]

Aldaron's proposal is really just the first step of pocket's proposal. That's the reason why I voted for it (when nothing was said about pocket's or banning Kingdra & co in the first vote). So we could push to get kingdra tested next round if rain-stall isn't broken (which I doubt it will be).

When's round 3 starting? Is Aldaron's proposal that difficult to code?

 

[BurningMan]

When's round 3 starting? Is Aldaron's proposal that difficult to code?

Its actually coded in the smogon server now, thus i am curious too why the next suspect round isn't started yet.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

Aldaron's proposal is really just the first step of pocket's proposal. That's the reason why I voted for it (when nothing was said about pocket's or banning Kingdra & co in the first vote). So we could push to get kingdra tested next round if rain-stall isn't broken (which I doubt it will be).

When's round 3 starting? Is Aldaron's proposal that difficult to code?

I've read somewhere Super's trying to get usage stats to work by this weekend, maybe that's why Round 3 hasn't started yet.

 

[Ninja_13]

I've read somewhere Super's trying to get usage stats to work by this weekend, maybe that's why Round 3 hasn't started yet.

There's also the fact that the way to obtain voting rights is being changed for this round; maybe it's also because they're trying to get that worked out?

 

[Lightning Tiger]

will people please stop reffering to aldarons thing as a "complex ban"?, there is nothing complex about this thing, dont use swift swim with Drizzle is not complicated or confusing, its pretty strait forward, just dont use swift swim with drizzle, just use rain dance instead.

give the players more credit, this is not rocket science here.

Aldaron's proposal is really just the first step of pocket's proposal. That's the reason why I voted for it (when nothing was said about pocket's or banning Kingdra & co in the first vote). So we could push to get kingdra tested next round if rain-stall isn't broken (which I doubt it will be)

no it isnt, it was actually the last part of his proposal,m aftter all the other stuff he suggested was done.

anyway, if i had to chose between banning drizzle or sending Kabutops, Ludu & Kingdra to ubbers then id honestly rather just ban drizzle. then those guys could still be used with just rain dance (just like it is now with aldarons except drizzle is not banned).

You guys are too ban happy, just ban everything why dont ya.

 

[Arc Tech]

Oh you're right I remembered it backwards. It's still the step that makes the most sense to go first to me, though.

Rain not being broken with Drizzle+Swift Swim ban would prove Drizzle is not broken alone, and thus should not be banned. We should then test with Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops, and if rain is not broken without them (but with Drizzle and swift swim on the same team) than ban them. If it's still broken, go back to aldaron's proposal.

If it was found to be broken with Aldaron's proposal, then ban drizzle.

And I'd rather ban the three abusers. Drizzle is not broken in and of itself (if it was a choice between the 3 and drizzle). Only those 3 can take advantage of it to the point of being broken, meaning they already had traits which made them broken in conjunction with drizzle. If drizzle was like support deoxys-s last gen, providing ridiculous amounts of support to everything to the point of some being broken, then maybe drizzle could be said to be at fault, but it supports far less than everything and actually nerfs some pokemon.

 

[Lightning Tiger]

^^or we can just keep things the way they are now, where people can still use those 3 with rain dance if they want (and which they wont be broken). Theres no need to just start banning shit when theres no longer a problem. You guys are too ban happy.

 

[TheValkyries]

^^or we can just keep things the way they are now, where people can still use those 3 with rain dance if they want (and which they wont be broken). Theres no need to just start banning shit when theres no longer a problem. You guys are too ban happy.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. We are the LEAST ban happy by wanting to ban the abusers, and that's what you completely fail to understand. You're literally saying you'd rather have an entire strategy banned rather than banning two to three Pokemon. The hell is wrong with you? You seem to think that because we banned one phrase that it means we did less than if we banned three Pokemon, wen in Reality we banned a strategy and banned the use of 15 Pokemon on the team where they are most effective, not even guaranteed to be broken.

And yes, I know you seem to think that there would be more broken Pokemon because of "Specs Boosted Hydro Pump," but what you fail to realize about why Kingdra was such a bitch to deal with is because he had a plethora of great resistances, was very bulky, is faster than everything that doesn't have Swift Swim when in the rain, and had only one weakness, to which he carried a super-effective STAB move. Omastar, Gorebyss, and all those others do not have that kind of godly coverage, they don't have the bulk, they don't have the speed, and they especially do not have the resistances. There was definitely more to Kingdra's broken status than just the Specs Hydro Pump.