Thundurus learns Grass Knot. LO+4 moves Thundurus was what I used to play with a couple months ago, I wonder if it's still good.
-
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.
np: OU Suspect Testing Round 3 - So Long and Thanks for all the Fish
- Thread starter reachzero
- Start date
- Status
Thundurus learns Grass Knot. LO+4 moves Thundurus was what I used to play with a couple months ago, I wonder if it's still good.
Thats a load of nonsense, against Sand Stream teams especially Kigdra using rain dance is very effective against them (Ludicolo as well).
Id rather not ban those 3, we have a situation now where they arent broken and theres no reason to just create one just to have swift swim + drizzle back.
Quoted for truth. I actually nominated him as a suspect a few days ago.
I'm not even sure this thing needs HP Ice on the Nasty Plot set. Gliscor takes about 70% from Focus Blast and in the rain Latias is 2HKO'd by Thunder (used the 252 HP/252 Speed spread) with that open slot its free to run Thunder Wave to make anything faster useless.
Edit: I just realized +2 LO Thunder does 75% min to Latios, that's basically a OHKO with two stealth rock switch ins
Most Sand teams have Nattorei, and Dory/Rand can both outspeed Kingdra and threaten it enough so that it cannot switch in. Ludicolo is worse off since it has average speed and mediocre attacking stats. I'm just speaking from MY experiences here. I'd rather ban one or two of those than have a metagame with "complex bans" that end up alienating smogon from competitive battling. It may have less bans (although when you see how many pokemon get nerfed it really seems like more bans to me) but it just isn't worth it.
Well in MY experience Nattorei can be taken out by pokes not named kingdra, and i dont try to switch it into Dory Or Land cause thats retarted, if im swtiching anything into those guys its Porygon 2 or some other wall i use, Kingdra comes in and changes weather after something dies.
Yeah, there are pokes that Kingdra cant just switch into, but you can say that about any poke.
nonsense, Smogon is its own competitive battling community, its always been and always will be.
And theres nothing complex about "dont use drizzle with rain dance", this isnt rocket science.
Personally I am okay with the situation as it is, as the meta is balanced and Rain is still viable. However if the consensus is that we should go further to specify what part of the large ban in Aldaron's proposal is actually broken (essentially what Pocket proposed), I believe that we should ban individual mons rather than Mons+ability or anything similar.
Essentially, the main issue with Aldaron's proposal was its complex nature - possibly opening the way for other bans in the future which would excessively complicate the banlist. If we can revert to a simple banlist we should - and moreover arbitrarily saying only mons with weather abilities can be restricted for example would never work in practice, it would result in a slippery slope. While the proposal may set the scene for such bans, I do not believe that it justifies going ahead with them.
In terms of if we ban say Kingdra and Ludicolo - why argue that we lose aspects of the meta in the mons themselves when by restricting all swift swimmers with drizzle makes a host of less powerful swift swimmers ultimately unviable - noone would use Qwilfish etc when Kingdra are still available, Drizzle or not. In any case, it is my view that pokemon should be considered in terms of all their qualities for a ban rather than some of those qualities selectively being banned.
TL:DR we don't need to edit Aldaron's proposal but if we do, ban individual mons.
Essentially, the main issue with Aldaron's proposal was its complex nature - possibly opening the way for other bans in the future which would excessively complicate the banlist. If we can revert to a simple banlist we should - and moreover arbitrarily saying only mons with weather abilities can be restricted for example would never work in practice, it would result in a slippery slope. While the proposal may set the scene for such bans, I do not believe that it justifies going ahead with them.
In terms of if we ban say Kingdra and Ludicolo - why argue that we lose aspects of the meta in the mons themselves when by restricting all swift swimmers with drizzle makes a host of less powerful swift swimmers ultimately unviable - noone would use Qwilfish etc when Kingdra are still available, Drizzle or not. In any case, it is my view that pokemon should be considered in terms of all their qualities for a ban rather than some of those qualities selectively being banned.
TL:DR we don't need to edit Aldaron's proposal but if we do, ban individual mons.
Here's my beef with aldaron's proposal: It seems like it's trying to keep these pokemon in OU, because we feel that they are not too good for OU. However, I beg to differ.
1. Kingdra, Kabutops, and Ludicolo all have decent stats, but it is notable that they have EXCELLENT stats for abusing swift swim.
2. Water typing is easily the best hybrid offensive/defensive type in the game.
3. All 3 of their secondary types are useful offensively.
4. They possess the best possible synergy with weather in the whole game.
5. They possess the best possible synergy with their teammates in a sweep (arguable)
6. They have more than adequate move-pools to be able to run multiple threatening sets, and not be totally predictable.
These pokemon are really awesome. They don't have base 670 stats, but we all saw it, they were nuts. But we didn't ban them; we changed the game to keep them here.
It's ironic that, as soon as Banning Kingdra was suggested, people commented how Kingdra wasn't broken.
We banned Swift Swim + Drizzle instead.
Because, without those three pokemon, Swift Swim + Drizzle has clearly been shown to be broken. *sarcasm*
1. Kingdra, Kabutops, and Ludicolo all have decent stats, but it is notable that they have EXCELLENT stats for abusing swift swim.
2. Water typing is easily the best hybrid offensive/defensive type in the game.
3. All 3 of their secondary types are useful offensively.
4. They possess the best possible synergy with weather in the whole game.
5. They possess the best possible synergy with their teammates in a sweep (arguable)
6. They have more than adequate move-pools to be able to run multiple threatening sets, and not be totally predictable.
These pokemon are really awesome. They don't have base 670 stats, but we all saw it, they were nuts. But we didn't ban them; we changed the game to keep them here.
It's ironic that, as soon as Banning Kingdra was suggested, people commented how Kingdra wasn't broken.
We banned Swift Swim + Drizzle instead.
Because, without those three pokemon, Swift Swim + Drizzle has clearly been shown to be broken. *sarcasm*
So you would rather have a "simpler" banning system that results in a worse metagame, than a "complex" one, that not only works currently but allows greater freedom for future bans? Alternatively: is the ban in and of itself more important than what the ban's purpose is?
I understand your argument behind selective qualities, but it's rather contradictory. Standard is 6v6 not 1v1. A ban that targets a strategy is a ban that targets a quantity in its largest possible form. Rain was broken, ban imposed, metagame is balanced. Is that truly different to: Mewtwo was broken, ban imposed, metagame is balanced. Yes, there is a distinction to be made between trying to "keep" something OU (such as removing moves from Mewtwo) and lessening the effectiveness of a strategy (such as banning SS + drizzle on rain teams). Personally I trust the community to make that distinction. Common sense is needed to acheive the best metagame possible, not defitions of what a ban is allowed to be.
I also understand this wasn't the best example to use, as you aren't completely set against complex bans. It's more of a reply in general to those ridiculous "creation of slippery slope" arguments. I'd like to see more than just paranoia at what could happen when people try to argue against "complex" bans.
10fore, you should try and consider rain as a strategy. Then consider whether it is completely the pokemon within the teams, or the strategy behind the teams, that was the problem. There is no right or wrong answer, but rain as a whole was what was being balanced before, not the pokemon that appear in rain teams.
Fine, whatever, then just forbid "those 3 pokemon + drizzle combo" on then they would only be able to be used with rain dance, those 3 pokemon dont need to be banned to ubers, or else id rather just get rid of drizzle.
and no, it is not "complex", its simple.
I notice you're excluding Manaphy. Is there a reason for this?
I think he was talking about Swift Swim specifically
Why are people complaining about Aldaron's proposal now? Before we passed it, everyone was saying it was the greatest thing ever, and now that it is in effect (and we have a pretty awesomely balanced metagame) everyone thinks it's "too broad," or that we "should just ban the individual Pokemon instead."
Neither of those opinions had enough support to even get put on the ballot, so now that Aldaron's proposal has accomplished what it set out to do, why is everyone hating on it all of a sudden?
Neither of those opinions had enough support to even get put on the ballot, so now that Aldaron's proposal has accomplished what it set out to do, why is everyone hating on it all of a sudden?
I was not aware that Manaphy was even a part of Aldarons proposal.
It wasn't, but the same concepts can and should apply to it.
If you're only talking about the Pokemon that were originally part of Aldaron's proposal, however, that's fair enough.
To be fair, we really haven't played a metagame with just sand and sun - Excadrill is far from broken so there would have been no need to ban sand and subsequently sun. People just automatically assumed this.
And if we are going to implement a Drizzle + pokemon ban, we sure as hell need to include Manaphy in that. Its these mini debates that make me think Drizzle should have been banned alone.
And if we are going to implement a Drizzle + pokemon ban, we sure as hell need to include Manaphy in that. Its these mini debates that make me think Drizzle should have been banned alone.
And which makes me think we should have just banned kingdra, ludicolo, and maybe kabutops outright.
The main reason I voted for Aldaron's was because neither Pocket's nor the big 3 were up for a ban. I hoped to get the big three tested next round once drizzle proved to be manageable this round (admittedly theorymoning there).
I kind of agree, in a way. Perhaps we should've been focusing on whether it was Manaphy, Kingdra, Politoed, Ludicolo, etc who should be banned, rather than trying to figure out a way to keep them all in.
Why not? This way, rain offense with drizzle is still viable, 8-turn rain offense is (less) viable, and we no longer have broken perma-rain teams that break through anything and everything. I'd consider that a win
People are always going to debate.
Like when people suggested Rayquaza, Lugia, and Ho-oh brought down.
People are complaining about the proposal because it's stupid, plain and simple. Allowing Rain Dance to be used with Swift Swim but not Drizzle is an oxymoron, no sane person would dare do that with instant weather inducers on nearly every single team (usually sand) which ruin the strategy instantly.
People were likely just mad that their Sand teams were actually getting ravaged by an enemy weather. A lot of Gen 4 Pokemon (outside of Ubers) resulted in you being forced to revenge kill it as it had no viable counter.
Banning Swift Swim is asinine in this sense: The Pokemon aren't broken without it? So in Gen 4, why couldn't I just use Garchomp without Earthquake and Outrage? Should be fine, right? I'm removing his best assets for a "complex" ban to let him be usable in OU.
People were likely just mad that their Sand teams were actually getting ravaged by an enemy weather. A lot of Gen 4 Pokemon (outside of Ubers) resulted in you being forced to revenge kill it as it had no viable counter.
Banning Swift Swim is asinine in this sense: The Pokemon aren't broken without it? So in Gen 4, why couldn't I just use Garchomp without Earthquake and Outrage? Should be fine, right? I'm removing his best assets for a "complex" ban to let him be usable in OU.
So are you saying Drizzle teams WEREN'T broken? That's an entirely different debate. Pokes like Kingdra who appear on rain dance teams can threaten a lot of the weather inducers in the game. 8-turn rain teams are far from terrible, and Drizzle Offense is still really good, just not to a point of being broken
8-turn Rain isn't terrible, but it's 100% outclassed by any other weather in the entirely game.
Perma-Rain is no more broken than Sand is. Kingdra isn't the "OMG I KILL YOU INSTANTLY" beast you think he is. He has several viable switch-ins.
Perma-Rain is no more broken than Sand is. Kingdra isn't the "OMG I KILL YOU INSTANTLY" beast you think he is. He has several viable switch-ins.
It;s not Kingdra that's broken, it's the broken trio. If you want to hear how rain's broken, read the round 2 suspect thread. I think I answered that question like 20 times in that thread
Kabutops has MORE viable switch-ins. Ferrothorn being the best one.
And Ludicolo? What joke of a world is it that he's broken with ANYTHING? 70 Attack, 90 Special Attack... how can this be broken?
And Ludicolo? What joke of a world is it that he's broken with ANYTHING? 70 Attack, 90 Special Attack... how can this be broken?
Possibly Ludicolo's best strategy was SubSeed, which did not use attacking stats much, but was hard to beat because it was so fast. And Nattorei is not the be-all and end-all counter to rain. Without recovery it can't take too many beatings before it eventually leaves your team open to these threats anyway.
- Status