Aldaron's proposal: Alternatives?

[Baldafor]

I would just like to say that in the event of a complex ban, it's not really the responsibility of the player to understand why or how the ban is in place, but the operator of the server to establish the ban.

In other words, the PO players don't have to know why, for example, Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops are banned from having Swift Swim when your team has Drizzle on it. It's a complex rule, but the server can just tell you if you have it on your team, correct?

I don't understand why people are so against this kind of thing. It won't let you, by accident or otherwise, use an illegal team, and it will give you a message saying oops! You done went and put Drizzle or Swift Swim where you shouldn't.

Can someone explain to me why the complexity of a ban itself makes it undesirable when it could very well be the only solution to the problem? Again, I will reiterate that the server will not allow you to make the mistake of not following the ban, just like you aren't allowed to use Arceus, or 5000 ev's on each pokemon, or Soul Dew Latios.

You don't have to remember which bans are in place, it tells you if its banned when you try to play with it!

 

[Sajak]

People do play the game on cartridges...

 

[TheMaskedNitpicker]

I would just like to say that in the event of a complex ban, it's not really the responsibility of the player to understand why or how the ban is in place, but the operator of the server to establish the ban.

I'm not going to give an opinion on this particular ban, but I think it's clear why this sort of complex ban could be considered objectionable.

If I spend an hour coming up with a team, only to find out when I try to use it that it's not legal due to some complex combination of moves and abilities, that's annoying. With one such ban, it's not so bad. If fifty such complex bans existed, team-building would very quickly become an exercise in frustration.

 

[charizard24]

I would just like to say that in the event of a complex ban, it's not really the responsibility of the player to understand why or how the ban is in place, but the operator of the server to establish the ban.

In other words, the PO players don't have to know why, for example, Kingdra/Ludicolo/Kabutops are banned from having Swift Swim when your team has Drizzle on it. It's a complex rule, but the server can just tell you if you have it on your team, correct?

I don't understand why people are so against this kind of thing. It won't let you, by accident or otherwise, use an illegal team, and it will give you a message saying oops! You done went and put Drizzle or Swift Swim where you shouldn't.

Can someone explain to me why the complexity of a ban itself makes it undesirable when it could very well be the only solution to the problem? Again, I will reiterate that the server will not allow you to make the mistake of not following the ban, just like you aren't allowed to use Arceus, or 5000 ev's on each pokemon, or Soul Dew Latios.

You don't have to remember which bans are in place, it tells you if its banned when you try to play with it!

It's not about remembereing what bans are or arent there. It's about the principle of the thing. If we start making complex bans such as these then when will we stop? It does make the rules more complicated when you begin to look at the banlist and question why? If you just accept whatever the server database tells you to do so then we could practically do anything we want and no one would care.

 

[Lightning Tiger]

I agree with Walshy that there should be a tier or game mode with no permanent weather, separate from regular OU.

 

[Ulevo]

Ok fine, i'll admit i was mistaken there. But even if we ban Swift Swim, it's not that different than the current proposal in place anyways... You'd still get people complaining about how it's not fair that the other Swift Swimmers are also nerfed and that they deserve to be played with or tested etc etc...

That's really the whole point.

From what I can tell, more than enough people are content with the current situation as far as its effects on the metagame are concerned, but they are unhappy with the complexity of the ban.

Banning Swift Swim gives you what we have now, with a simplistic ban. That's the entire reason I am promoting it.

Yes, people will want to test the individual Swift Swimmers, but I don't see them as being a majority, looking at the polls.

If anything, banning Swift Swim would prevent the people that use RD from even using Swift Swim at all which is more of a disadvantage than an advantage.

No one uses Rain Dance.

 

[charizard24]

That's really the whole point.

From what I can tell, more than enough people are content with the current situation as far as its effects on the metagame are concerned, but they are unhappy with the complexity of the ban.

Banning Swift Swim gives you what we have now, with a simplistic ban. That's the entire reason I am promoting it.

Yes, people will want to test the individual Swift Swimmers, but I don't see them as being a majority, looking at the polls.

Alright, i'll give you that. The simplicity of the ban is definitely better than the complex one we have in place. Though looking at the poll, others dont feel much the same way.

No one uses Rain Dance.

Not in OU maybe but how certain can you be that in the future UU and lower tiers that Rain Dance may not be a viable strategy in its own right.

 

[Ulevo]

Alright, i'll give you that. The simplicity of the ban is definitely better than the complex one we have in place. Though looking at the poll, others dont feel much the same way.

I feel more people would be willing to vote to ban Swift Swim if they were appropriately informed about the benefits and implications of banning Swift Swim, rather than skimming through the thread.

As I've witnessed, numerous people have the impression that by banning Swift Swim, we'll be arbitrarily banning numerous Pokemon for little to no reason, when in fact no Pokemon will be banned by banning Swift Swim.

Not in OU maybe but how certain can you be that in the future UU and lower tiers that Rain Dance may not be a viable strategy in its own right.

I've stated this before. We simply ban Swift Swim from OU, and not UU. Other tiers, such as LC, have implemented bans and clauses akin to this.

 

[Quixim]

I'm surprised at how many people want to ban Drizzle entirely - That would weaken rain to being the worst weather because every other type has a way to get it in permanently. To me, it just feels more like they're angry at Rain teams and not willing to put in any countermeasures to them on their own team.

No one uses rain dance? If I can keep swift swim without drizzle I'll definitely use a kingdra and ludicolo or kabutops on my team. If anybody else uses drizzle I can use my quite superior rain sweepers to pound through them, or they'll be forced to keep rain out of it for fear of a kingdra sweep and be at a disadvantage anyway.

I think that banning the swift swim on the broken pokemon is the best option mechanically (their other abilities are still somewhat viable), or banning them on a whole (Either way, they'd mostly be used on swift swim uber teams).

 

[10fore]

I was always under the impression that Drizzle + Swift Swim is broken. After all, isnt that what warranted such an unuasual ban in the first place. The fact that Swift Swimmers were sweeping teams aways with little to no effort under Drizzle was the breaking point for most people.

That doesn't make the combination of drizzle + swift swim broken. People forget that the pokemon bring the biggest element of success. That's why I always suggest banning pokemon.

It's the most elegant way to ban only what's broken. Sure, some pokemon fulfill multiple roles with different sets, but the species clause makes the most useful set generally the most common, and if the most common, useful set is broken, we ban the whole pokemon.

If kingdra is kicking too much ass everywhere, ban it. Duh.

This is how we've always done it, and we do it because it makes so much freaking sense. :naughty:

 

[RaRaRabbit]

For people saying that no one uses rain dance.... Personally I see the use of Rain Dance on a team not that hard to pull off... In fact I am almost considering running a rain dance + swift swim team.

Seeing as Thunderus and Tornadus have Prankster and have Rain Dance... and can hit TTar with Hammer Arm, and take care of Hippowdon and Ninetails and Politoed in their own ways as well.... I definitely see rain dance + swift swim being kind of fun. Not to mention, Murkrow, Sableye, Volbeat and Illumise (lol on the last 2) also learn rain dance and have prankster... I can see it being viable at least in SOME way in OU.

 

[Ulevo]

Hey, if you think I'm wrong, I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong. Go on the ladder, ladder it up with a Rain Dance + Swift Swim team, and tell me how high you ranked.

But personally, I don't see it being a noteworthy, successful strategy most people will pay attention to. Again, statistics would help confirm this.

 

[Lightning Tiger]

The argument that nobody is using rain dance is a fairy tale at best... wait till the stats come out to prove it.

Im still seeing Mantine and Kingdra being used with just rain dance.... Mantine of all pokemon.

 

[charizard24]

That doesn't make the combination of drizzle + swift swim broken. People forget that the pokemon bring the biggest element of success. That's why I always suggest banning pokemon.

It's the most elegant way to ban only what's broken. Sure, some pokemon fulfill multiple roles with different sets, but the species clause makes the most useful set generally the most common, and if the most common, useful set is broken, we ban the whole pokemon.

If kingdra is kicking too much ass everywhere, ban it. Duh.

This is how we've always done it, and we do it because it makes so much freaking sense. :naughty:

You also seem to be forgetting that one of the reasons we accepted this proposal was to keep as many pokemon from being banned as possible. If we allowed Drizzle + Swift Swim again, we'd have to ban Kingdra, Ludicolo and Kabutops immediately at least. (3) And then, what if i make a team of politoed + 5 other swift swimmers, would that not still be broken. Which means more pokemon bans or worst case a Drizzle ban.

We may have always banned pokemon in the past because that was the only option available for simplicity purposes. Now (unfortunately) we have a wider array of bans to implement.

For people saying that no one uses rain dance.... Personally I see the use of Rain Dance on a team not that hard to pull off... In fact I am almost considering running a rain dance + swift swim team.

Seeing as Thunderus and Tornadus have Prankster and have Rain Dance... and can hit TTar with Hammer Arm, and take care of Hippowdon and Ninetails and Politoed in their own ways as well.... I definitely see rain dance + swift swim being kind of fun. Not to mention, Murkrow, Sableye, Volbeat and Illumise (lol on the last 2) also learn rain dance and have prankster... I can see it being viable at least in SOME way in OU.

This ^

 

[KurashiDragon]

I voted 3 and 7

I would personally like to see drizzle completely banned. Everytime I see a drizzle team I know I lost. Drizzle basically traded the fast set up sweepers for powerful wall breakers. Tornadus, Dragonite, Latios, and Jirachi are just the major examples of powerful pokes in rain. I want away with Drizzle.

However, if everyone was as angry as me with something they want banned everything would be banned. While I personally want drizzle banned the smartest move would be to not kill a playstyle. Not only that but I feel people may have went to far with the Proposal. There are plenty of SwSws that likely aren't broken in Drizzle. For instance Floatzel is alot like Kabutops in the rain only with more speed, less power and a worse set up move. (Bulk Up vs Swords Dance Respectively)

 

[Thorhammer]

You also seem to be forgetting that one of the reasons we accepted this proposal was to keep as many pokemon from being banned as possible. If we allowed Drizzle + Swift Swim again, we'd have to ban Kingdra, Ludicolo and Kabutops immediately at least. (3) And then, what if i make a team of politoed + 5 other swift swimmers, would that not still be broken. Which means more pokemon bans or worst case a Drizzle ban.

We may have always banned pokemon in the past because that was the only option available for simplicity purposes. Now (unfortunately) we have a wider array of bans to implement.

Banning Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops is not something we should be afraid of doing.

If you made a team of Politoed + 5 Swift Swimmers not named Kingdra, Ludicolo, or Kabutops, you'd have a horribly imbalanced team destroyed easily by Electric and Grass attacks. I don't think such a team is going to be broken anytime soon.

 

[Lightning Tiger]

Banning Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops is not something we should be afraid of doing.

If you made a team of Politoed + 5 Swift Swimmers not named Kingdra, Ludicolo, or Kabutops, you'd have a horribly imbalanced team destroyed easily by Electric and Grass attacks. I don't think such a team is going to be broken anytime soon.

Oh really?, 2 of those swift swimmers could be the ones who arent weak against either electric or grass, and the other 3 could be the ones who are only affected by one of those types. Not to mention they outspeed everything to start with.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

I kind of feel offened that people would even consider just flat out banning broken swift swim pokemon, and thats the majority. There is no way Kingdra is borken normally? Why would you ban it?

I feel that we should agree on the broken swift swimmers: Kingdra, Kabutops and, Ludicolo. From there suspect test the final 4 swift swim pokemon, that might be broken with it:

-Gorebyss
-Omastar
-Carracosta
-Qwilfish

Thats only 4 pokemon, I am sure we can test them.

If you just ban drizzle, you will have to deal with the possibly broken sandstorm and sun. If you really want to be simplistic, go stay with the current option. As for the people that just want to stay the course, for simplicity reasons, thats the lazy mans way out. So you add a bit more complexity so what? Pokemon battling isn't simple.

 

[Thorhammer]

Oh really?, 2 of those swift swimmers could be the ones who arent weak against either electric or grass, and the other 3 could be the ones who are only affected by one of those types. Not to mention they outspeed everything to start with.

The only possible team for which that would work is Politoed / Qwilfish / Mantine / Carracosta / Armaldo / Beartic. Less than frightening, for reasons which hopefully don't need explanation.

 

[thunderstone]

I really want to see all permanent weather banned. As all supporters of weather enjoy saying: It's not uncounterable. However it overcentralises teams in order to counter it; and leaves us with a ridiculously unfun metagame. My Scarf Golduck is probably my most useful team member these days, and that says a lot.

Also there are a lot of things which are completely ridiculous under perma-weather; if overcentralisation isn't a good enough reason for you. Nattorei and Tornadus in Rain; Volcarona in Sun are the worst offenders.

I just don't think a metagame revolving entirely around weather - and you are kidding yourself if you think what we have now is anything but - should be Smogon's primary metagame.

 

[Gerard]

I think Weather is coming into a inmense force to take care of, still stuff like qwillfish and omanite could abuse drizzle without being broke, stuff like tyranitar and terakion could use sandstorm and so on they are not as broken as most of the ones that made people made their mind about banning Drizzle + SS, still Drizzle is the best weater, the double STAB to water moves, + the fact that water pokes are naturally ressistant to fire making them not as effective even in sun makes them a hard thing to take down, still, stuff like venusaur and excadrill can be more abusing if drizzle gets the boot so that's why i'm against it (even you ban all of the weather abuser bastards or you ban none of them)

Also, i've allways think it's a little unfair that weather gets a 0-turns-permanent-set-up while TR and things like it only last 4 effective turn (even weather can last 8 turns)

 

[Cshadow]

I just don't think a metagame revolving entirely around weather - and you are kidding yourself if you think what we have now is anything but - should be Smogon's primary metagame.

It's not our choice. We can't ban things because we don't want them there, they have to be broken. If a weather centric metagame has no broken Pokemon then there isn't anything you can do about it, that's just how OU will work.

(I'm not implying that there aren't any broken Pokemon in this weather centric metagame by any means).

 

[10fore]

You also seem to be forgetting that one of the reasons we accepted this proposal was to keep as many pokemon from being banned as possible. If we allowed Drizzle + Swift Swim again, we'd have to ban Kingdra, Ludicolo and Kabutops immediately at least. (3) And then, what if i make a team of politoed + 5 other swift swimmers, would that not still be broken. Which means more pokemon bans or worst case a Drizzle ban.

Essentially, I'd rather cripple a playstyle by banning its major abusers, whereas you'd rather cripple a playstyle by muzzling it with restrictions. I'd rather ban because everyone is overhyping the UU swift swimmers. It's like everyone forgets that they're actually not as good as Kingdra and Kabutops and Ludicolo. Really.

I won't say they're not broken, but we've got to play with them to know. Not banning something because we're all afraid that we're going to ban something else doesn't make sense.

In gen4 back on shoddy battle, with subject tests, we wouldn't have to do this. It'd all be on the subject server. However, there's not one of those right now, so the only way to test whether swift swim, or drizzle really, is broken is to make sure that it's not just Kingdra, Ludicolo, and Kabutops.

If I'm wrong, though, and Swift Swim does break anything with remotely good stats, we can back up, and implement a swift swim ban. Until then, though, I feel like everyone is just theorymonning about how good the rest of the Swift Swim sweepers are. Maybe they're right, but don't ban stuff because of theorymon.

 

[Lucindril]

Ban individual broken Pokemon?

That... doesn't sound right. What's a newcomer going to think when they want to use their favourite Pokemon, Ludicolo, to find it's banned to Ubers because of a playstyle that's no longer broken?

...In other words, it doesn't seem right to ban a Pokemon just because a particular playstyle or condition makes it broken. If the Pokemon is broken overall and doesn't need any outside factors or playstyles to make it so, then that's fine, but otherwise I don't think a Pokemon should be banned if they can be kept in the metagame by banning something else.

It's far easier to explain that Drizzle is banned because it has a lot of dangerous abusers that are very hard to beat under rain, than to explain certain Pokemon are banned because Drizzle makes them broken, and they are unable to be used outside of rain if one wishes. Banning individual suspects is just asking for more arguments over why they're still Uber when not used on a rain team, which then brings us back to the argument of complex bans.

Voting to ban Drizzle entirely. It's the only way we're going to get the situation under control and cease all arguments over it for good, IMO.

 

[Sajak]

Explain to a newcomer why Wobbuffet is banned, and explain to a newcomer why Ludicolo is banned. I'm sure anybody could understand the argument for why Ludicolo was banned over Wobbuffet.

And banning Drizzle clearly isn't going to cease the argument, as it's not even the most popular choice in the poll, nor is it what is actually broken.