The kind that prepares for it. Isn't that what I just said?
-
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 4 - Blaze of Glory
- Thread starter Philip7086
- Start date
- Status
The kind that prepares for it. Isn't that what I just said?
Any team that actually tries to beat a top threat, really.
If you don't want to prepare your team for a single threat, fine. Go lose every match when you see those threats, but you can't complain about how you just don't FEEL like preparing for the threat.
So you think it's okay that everyone has to run a Trick Room user + Wobbuffet just to beat one type of team, when the metagame is crawling with tons more threats and most teams can't find the space to fit those two kinds of Pokemon in (Hell, i've stopped using Wobbuffet because it was dragging me down)"?
Yes, that would be quite horrible indeed. It's quite nice that it's not actually happening, isn't it?
Also, guys, satire. Learn to recognize it, and you'll start seeing what people are actually saying. :P
Lucky vs. Skill? When your building a team, you have choosen to ignore those threats, that has nothing to do with luck, unless ypu count that you got unlucky from being paired with them. Sometimes is an acceptable risk, one your willing to take. For example, Liligant was a total counter for one weather team I had, could totally distroy it, but how often do you see Liligant around? Now if your really annoyed about losing to such pokemon, have you considered coutering them? Any pokemon single handily distroy a team if you don't counter it (well not ANY but you get the point), ignoring such threats for other ones you feel are more important, is completely your choice.
@PK, you're Spiral Warrior then? props if so for the gurren lagann awesomeness.
The problem I find with this stems from the fact that Gorebyss can come in and Shell Break with relative ease so long as it has screens up, which isn't hard with Deo-S and -D running around, as well as long-standing screeners in case someone doesn't want to use those (who doesn't @_@). Then it passes. You don't know what it's going to pass to, though.
Deo-D / Gory / Garchomp / Thundurus / filler / filler
The first thing I do in Team Preview is figure out which Pokemon on my team has the best match-up with the most likely-to-lead Pokemon. However, even then I might get it wrong, so Gory might get a free Shell Break or Deo-D might get a free turn of screen-setting.
Now if you just make the assumption (which isn't a wild one) that Gory gets a Shell Break (let's just assume one screen) it's now going to pass. But that team there has Garchomp and Thundurus. How do I know which one it's going to pass to? If I have the wrong Pokemon out they can come in easily. Now I'm dealing with a +2/+2/+2 Garchomp or Thundurus and I've got the wrong counter out. So I am probably going to have to sacrifice a Pokemon before I can get my counter / check in safely. Now I can take it out, but they will heavily damage my Pokemon; they may even choose to refrain from attacking, switch out and attempt again (which will be easier now, considering my original switch-in to Gorybess is probably fainted now).
The problem I have with it is not that it's a broken strategy; it can lose and does lose. The problem I have is that it is too easy to get a +2/+2/+2 to any sweeper and begin to wreck with it. When I have to try and decide which sweeper to prepare for on a whim, I just can't. It's like a coin toss. "Is he going to pass to Garchomp, Thundurus, or Doryuzuu?" When that kind of question comes up in my mind it screams uncompetitive. I'm not crying "cheap"; that would imply it was an easily counterable tactic that I'm choosing not to deal with. Instead I find it to be an easy to execute tactic that is a coin-toss when it comes to dealing with it in practice and nearly impossible to prepare for.
I am hoping that I'm just missing something and that someone can point out an easier way to deal with it than how I'm going about it (that is, hoping that I can correctly guess the sweeper they pass too!)
The problem I find with this stems from the fact that Gorebyss can come in and Shell Break with relative ease so long as it has screens up, which isn't hard with Deo-S and -D running around, as well as long-standing screeners in case someone doesn't want to use those (who doesn't @_@). Then it passes. You don't know what it's going to pass to, though.
Deo-D / Gory / Garchomp / Thundurus / filler / filler
The first thing I do in Team Preview is figure out which Pokemon on my team has the best match-up with the most likely-to-lead Pokemon. However, even then I might get it wrong, so Gory might get a free Shell Break or Deo-D might get a free turn of screen-setting.
Now if you just make the assumption (which isn't a wild one) that Gory gets a Shell Break (let's just assume one screen) it's now going to pass. But that team there has Garchomp and Thundurus. How do I know which one it's going to pass to? If I have the wrong Pokemon out they can come in easily. Now I'm dealing with a +2/+2/+2 Garchomp or Thundurus and I've got the wrong counter out. So I am probably going to have to sacrifice a Pokemon before I can get my counter / check in safely. Now I can take it out, but they will heavily damage my Pokemon; they may even choose to refrain from attacking, switch out and attempt again (which will be easier now, considering my original switch-in to Gorybess is probably fainted now).
The problem I have with it is not that it's a broken strategy; it can lose and does lose. The problem I have is that it is too easy to get a +2/+2/+2 to any sweeper and begin to wreck with it. When I have to try and decide which sweeper to prepare for on a whim, I just can't. It's like a coin toss. "Is he going to pass to Garchomp, Thundurus, or Doryuzuu?" When that kind of question comes up in my mind it screams uncompetitive. I'm not crying "cheap"; that would imply it was an easily counterable tactic that I'm choosing not to deal with. Instead I find it to be an easy to execute tactic that is a coin-toss when it comes to dealing with it in practice and nearly impossible to prepare for.
I am hoping that I'm just missing something and that someone can point out an easier way to deal with it than how I'm going about it (that is, hoping that I can correctly guess the sweeper they pass too!)
You both didn't get what I meant, unfortunately. I wasn't criticizing the democratic aspect of the suspect testing, but... its frequency. We have testing round after testing round, so we've never had a Standard ladder, but only a Suspect one. Have you guys been here during the Gen IV tests? One common "complaint" people made was that the Suspect ladder was always more centralized than the Standard one. Granted, it didn't have as many battles, but another reason was that, obviously, only people interested in voting played in that ladder. I feel something similar is happening now, with our month-long consecutive testing rounds always whose existence implies there's still "something" to ban, so there are those who play "Standard" and those who play "easy way to ban X".
If only we could have one month without suspect testing, but rather merely a month of people playing the game, maybe the metagame could have a better chance of stabilizing instead of people always trying to bandwagon for pokémon X which they have problems with.
I see what you going for, but due to the sheer amount of pokemon we are dealing with, its either all at once, and look like a bunch of ban happy nuts, and deal with turing the metagame on its head, or look at a few at a time and deal with, in comparison, small metagame changes. I do agree though, perhaps there needs to be a stablizing time period.
Nothing is truly broken in this metagame. The truth is, this generation the skill level needed to be consistently successful has risen dramatically. As for everyone who hates that auto-weather pretty much dilutes the game into "kill their setter first and you win", you must realize something: That is what Pokemon is about this generation. So what if variety has become nonexistent? Variety isn't what makes Pokemon competitive and it by no means warrants a ban in my opinion; honestly that argument holds no water whatsoever (wait, since when did Gen IV ever have variety in the first place?). Weather makes the game dramatically more about tactics than it has ever before been, so noobs can't just put together random teams without a real goal and win by mindlessly pummeling their opponent anymore.
Shell Break could be a bit of a problem, I admit. In fact, it is technically an entire BP chain on one Pokemon, if you think about it. But the thing is, it is perfectly counter-able. Just use a phazing move and its done; seriously. Team Preview exists! Use it! Make sure your phazer stays alive for as long as that Gorebyss does! There are plenty of viable phazers in this metagame that stop Gorebyss dead in its tracks. If you actually let Gorybyss pull off a successful Baton Pass, you're doing it wrong.
Shell Break could be a bit of a problem, I admit. In fact, it is technically an entire BP chain on one Pokemon, if you think about it. But the thing is, it is perfectly counter-able. Just use a phazing move and its done; seriously. Team Preview exists! Use it! Make sure your phazer stays alive for as long as that Gorebyss does! There are plenty of viable phazers in this metagame that stop Gorebyss dead in its tracks. If you actually let Gorybyss pull off a successful Baton Pass, you're doing it wrong.
Well, in a way we do have down-time periods between suspect tests. But I kind of agree. Maybe these shouldn't really be called "suspect tests" anymore...
I also noticed that nobody that plays to vote plays in between Suspect Tests. Seriously? Why are you voting if you aren't going to actually play the game? These frequent Suspect Tests are making the game more about analyzing what's powerful than being about ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME YOU ARE TRYING TO FIX, so people have the mindset of "play to ban" instead of "play to win".
This is a good point. Even if there are still some problems to work out, constant testing will only cause more problems. We've already gotten rid of everything that was unquestionably broken and then some. There's no reason to rush the process any longer.
Some people don't want to attempt to ladder to achieve a high rating only to have it reset during the suspect test and have to do it all over again. You do have a point, just wanted to mention that.
I'd nominate you for presidency if politics had any relevancy in the real world.
I can't wait to see what you guys do like, two or three generations from now when you have so many Pokemon coming out of your ears you'll need a textbook to keep all the rules and "broken" Pokemon in check.
In all seriousness, this is the main problem. People need to change their mind set if they want to play this game efficiently.
I didn't say it was the easiest in the world to stop; I said it was easy to stop.
Quit it with the hyperbole.
Anyone looking for single pokemon to stop the gorebyss strategy is doing it wrong. Not only does no such pokemon exist, but you should be trying to outplay your opponent from the get go the minute you see what their team is. That's what I have been doing and I only lost to it once because I messed up in assuming how my opponent would play.
Ninetales leads. Deo-S uses taunt. I switch to heatran as it sets up a screen/hazard. I flame charge up as it taunts me expecting stealth rock. Continue flame charging until Deo-S is dead. Gorebyss comes in. At this point, I'm faster than a +2 gorebyss either way. Kill it in two hits. The chain is ruined.
Sure, it isn't super easy to stop, but it can be played around if you stop and think to yourself, "hm. I know exactly what's going to happen. Now how can my team, as it is, do something to stop it?"
As already said, there is no way to cover all of your bases when building a team now. There never was. Your team is going to be weak to something no matter what you do.
Ninetales leads. Deo-S uses taunt. I switch to heatran as it sets up a screen/hazard. I flame charge up as it taunts me expecting stealth rock. Continue flame charging until Deo-S is dead. Gorebyss comes in. At this point, I'm faster than a +2 gorebyss either way. Kill it in two hits. The chain is ruined.
Sure, it isn't super easy to stop, but it can be played around if you stop and think to yourself, "hm. I know exactly what's going to happen. Now how can my team, as it is, do something to stop it?"
As already said, there is no way to cover all of your bases when building a team now. There never was. Your team is going to be weak to something no matter what you do.
This has been mentioned already, but Metaknight's really a bad example for any tiering discussion, but a pretty good metaphor for what's going on with the meta right now.
In the Brawl community, Metaknight is considered so powerful that he occupies the Metaknight Tier above God Tier in most people's rankings, with no negative matchups except for a 50/50 chance against himself. Banning something because it's a top-tier threat is one thing, but if a threat is so powerful that it could be a tier unto itself, there's a problem.
I don't think that's the case with the pokemon metagame right now, though, I'm just curious when UU and NU will be organized. It sort of goes without saying at this point that playing anything less than the absolute best pokemon in OU is playing to lose. :/
You have failed to understand since last generation that the "no counter" argument has nothing to do with actually wanting to counter it in real matches, but rather is used to gauge the strength of the Pokemon in comparison to the rest standard meta-game.
Protip: If something is so powerful it can't be significantly hindered by conventional means, that's a good indicator it's too strong for the meta-game.
The point still stands that people are nominating threats that are easily annoying but seldom broken. Hypothetically speaking, a Latios with Soul Dew and Psycho Boost would make a tier unto himself right? Proposing a ban on that particular pokemon would be universally accepted or at the least somewhat obviously well warranted. Nothing in the metagame is near that broken and Smogonites are getting into lengthy debates over what a few call broken based on annoyance rather than flat out brokeness. Barebones common sense says that the pokes can't be overwhelmingly powerful if you need serious effort to convince people.
I believe that a temporary suspension of suspect testing is a good idea. There has been a solid 3 rounds of testing/bans and the effects on the metagame should make themselves clear after a brief cool off time from bans. I don't see how people expect to see the metagame stabilize if it's not given time to do so.
Mmm, no. I don't think the metagame has achieved a level of balance as of yet so as to call it stable. Players like myself who are reluctant to ladder because of the state of things right now would rather see a change or two before competitive Pokemon starts being fun again. 4th gen was its own metagame, sure, but I think something's wrong when the level of discontent has increased to an all-time high, and most of our qualms are regarding the same things.
Hot topics at the moment are Deo-S, Garchomp, Drizzle, and Latios. I don't think any one of these four balance or contribute to the metagame in any significant way, so I'm perfectly all right leaving it up to the voters. I, however, do think that we'll have a better, even more competitive metagame if our attacks stopped randomly missing and we didn't see Politoed and the genies on every other team outmuscling our best efforts. Just my two cents.
Hot topics at the moment are Deo-S, Garchomp, Drizzle, and Latios. I don't think any one of these four balance or contribute to the metagame in any significant way, so I'm perfectly all right leaving it up to the voters. I, however, do think that we'll have a better, even more competitive metagame if our attacks stopped randomly missing and we didn't see Politoed and the genies on every other team outmuscling our best efforts. Just my two cents.
I don't remember saying the metagame was stable. I merely suggested that the metagame might stablize on its own if we took a break from banning and let the meta play out over some time. Fun is subjective, and your desire to ladder doesn't reflect the overall state of the meta. Let the bans in place do something before you decide if it's fun or not.
It's obvious that you want those topics banned and think they are unbalanced. What some of us see as the issue is the reluctance to work around those threats like you do all other threats and play the game w/o advocating a ban on something you don't like facing. Just my two cents.
- Status
Similar threads
