Bolded.
-
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
Bolded.
I'll tell you what the difference is.
It's that Game Freak says so. Because it's Game Freak who defines what a pokémon species is. They have always differed pokémon by species, and recognized certain ones have different formes. While we do not strictly follow Game Freak's tier lists (lol Phione, etc), we do use theirs as a basis for ours. Declaring Blaze and Speed Boost Blaziken are different entities will be the same as saying every pokémon can be split into two or more different pokémon. No, this is not a slippery slope or whatever, this is the truth. Event pokémon are banned in Nintendo tiers because of their availability philosophy; our philosophy is different in that sense (lol simulators), and that's why we allow Jirachi while you can't use Shaymin even in a VGC where Kyogre is allowed. There's nothing in either philosophies, however, that implies we can take a variation of a pokémon, not recognized as a different forme, and declare it a different pokémon (do note that both "metagames" still treat different formes as the same pokémon for Species Clause). Throwing that restriction away only because we want Blaze Blaziken allowed for whatever reason will give us a completely different game/philosphy than Game Freak's, because the moment we differentiate one pokémon, we can differentiate them all.
I was going to elaborate a bit more but I gave up halfway so have at you
Yes, we 'can'. That does not at all mean that we should.
And why should we differentiate (or be allowed to) Blaziken but not other pokémon?
@ Virizion
Thank you for that, I hope that makes things easier for all of us, not just me.
Well, I think the main reason that unbanning Blaziken would be a bad idea, is simply that we wouldn't know when to draw the line.
Why stop at a specific pokemon's ability? Why not moves? I mean if Darkrai didn't have Dark Void then he'd be OU. If Skymin didn't have Air Slash then there wouldn't be much hax from him to call him uber anymore. It's not like we' be nerfing either of those pokemon; they are both very viable even without the moves that broke them.
People are opposed to unbanning blaze blaziken (I have got to find an acronym for that, it's extremely weird typing it) simply because they fear that it won't stop there. If we can sacrifice a normally UU pokemon for the sake of keeping our banlist (and by extension our metagame) as stable as possible, then why not?
Most UU players would disagree, like you, because you are the one being treated unfairly. Unfortunately though, this is OU suspect testing, so the majority of people here will be playing OU. Thus, they don't really care. It's harsh, I know, but it's the truth.
Thank you for that, I hope that makes things easier for all of us, not just me.
Well, I think the main reason that unbanning Blaziken would be a bad idea, is simply that we wouldn't know when to draw the line.
Why stop at a specific pokemon's ability? Why not moves? I mean if Darkrai didn't have Dark Void then he'd be OU. If Skymin didn't have Air Slash then there wouldn't be much hax from him to call him uber anymore. It's not like we' be nerfing either of those pokemon; they are both very viable even without the moves that broke them.
People are opposed to unbanning blaze blaziken (I have got to find an acronym for that, it's extremely weird typing it) simply because they fear that it won't stop there. If we can sacrifice a normally UU pokemon for the sake of keeping our banlist (and by extension our metagame) as stable as possible, then why not?
Most UU players would disagree, like you, because you are the one being treated unfairly. Unfortunately though, this is OU suspect testing, so the majority of people here will be playing OU. Thus, they don't really care. It's harsh, I know, but it's the truth.
Because Blaziken is the only case in which one if its abilities have made an otherwise-UU Pokémon get sent to Ubers.
aregrgfdhdshg This topic is making me slowly die inside.
Can we please just go to vote? I'm not even gonna be voting, but I just want this to end now. The same arguments have been going back and forth for ages - 47 pages and we've had, what, 4 different discussions? - and all it essentially comes down to in each and every case is a difference of opinion.
Blaziken - Do we draw the line at Species or Ability<->Species?
Sand Veil/Snow Cloak - Is luck something that should be removed, or something that we should consider in team-building? (More importantly, do we ban based on being broken or just undesirable/"uncompetitive"?)
Bringing Ubers down - Are they worth testing (since we can move them back up anyways) or is it a waste of time?
Auto-weathers - Are they over-centralising (on the whole) or are the weather wars variation within themselves?
I'm sure pretty much everyone here can pick a side on each of those questions, and I don't think much else has come up lately, if at all. (Other than Reuniclus, but the usage stats shut that one down pretty quickly.)
Can we please just go to vote? I'm not even gonna be voting, but I just want this to end now. The same arguments have been going back and forth for ages - 47 pages and we've had, what, 4 different discussions? - and all it essentially comes down to in each and every case is a difference of opinion.
Blaziken - Do we draw the line at Species or Ability<->Species?
Sand Veil/Snow Cloak - Is luck something that should be removed, or something that we should consider in team-building? (More importantly, do we ban based on being broken or just undesirable/"uncompetitive"?)
Bringing Ubers down - Are they worth testing (since we can move them back up anyways) or is it a waste of time?
Auto-weathers - Are they over-centralising (on the whole) or are the weather wars variation within themselves?
I'm sure pretty much everyone here can pick a side on each of those questions, and I don't think much else has come up lately, if at all. (Other than Reuniclus, but the usage stats shut that one down pretty quickly.)
Here I'll poist my opinion clearly you guys care.
Banning Blaziken was justified, in the sense that we shouldn't have banned Blaziken + Speed Boost because that's dumb. Are we going to allow Starmie into UU if it uses Illuminate? What about Inner Focus Dragonite? What would that accomplish? Complex bans are, well, complex, and we should automatically assume everybody is going to use the best ability for their Pokemon, instead of just banning a bunch of combinations.
Oh dear god I couldn't be more against banning Sand veil / Snow Cloak and I will vote for them to remain OU 100% of the time until Mamoswine and Garchomp etc. have other abilities they can use. I mean it's really shortsighted to ban Mamoswine and even worse to break game mechanics and just give it no ability.
The only Uber I'd like a test for is Deoxys-N because we never once tested it, but we've already voted on this and rejected it.
I don't see the problem with auto-weather. Yes, weather wars are kind of a big deal now, especially against rain teams and the like, but I don't think any weather is greater than another and they sort of cancel each other out.
Banning Blaziken was justified, in the sense that we shouldn't have banned Blaziken + Speed Boost because that's dumb. Are we going to allow Starmie into UU if it uses Illuminate? What about Inner Focus Dragonite? What would that accomplish? Complex bans are, well, complex, and we should automatically assume everybody is going to use the best ability for their Pokemon, instead of just banning a bunch of combinations.
Oh dear god I couldn't be more against banning Sand veil / Snow Cloak and I will vote for them to remain OU 100% of the time until Mamoswine and Garchomp etc. have other abilities they can use. I mean it's really shortsighted to ban Mamoswine and even worse to break game mechanics and just give it no ability.
The only Uber I'd like a test for is Deoxys-N because we never once tested it, but we've already voted on this and rejected it.
I don't see the problem with auto-weather. Yes, weather wars are kind of a big deal now, especially against rain teams and the like, but I don't think any weather is greater than another and they sort of cancel each other out.
I understand completely.
And yet I am against the idea of a vote.
On the SVSC, Ubers, and Auto-weather issues, that is what the entire suspect testing process is for. If you want them changed, EARN a vote and then vote.
On Blaziken however, I don't think that should ever go to a vote. A Pokemon is a Pokemon, and, as Mario with Lasers pointed out, we should not be changing that. It is something defined by Game Freak and Nintendo, and not for us to decide.
That is a horrible argument against it, because Starmie and Dragonite aren't broken with their best ability. It's not the same case as with Blaze/SB Blaziken.
It is exactly the same thing. Being broken has nothing to do with it. The point is, if you treat one Pokemon as two different species, then you have to do the same for all Pokemon. You can't just say "I want Pokemon A in a lower tier so we should edit it, but I don't want Pokemon B in a lower tier, so it should stay as it is."
No, the whole point is that SB Blaziken is banned because it's broken. If Blaze Blaziken isn't broken, then why ban it? We already had a complex ban made to solve one broken suspect(s) (Drizzle + SwSw), why not another one for another broken suspect? It's just lazy to ban Blaziken as a whole, IMO.
I have avoided this thread like the devil. Like the plague. Even when I've really wanted to say why I think people are retarded, I have not (read: Giratina/Ferrothorn/Sand Veil).
But this Blaziken nonsense takes the cake, IMO. I'm going to tell now why Blaziken will not be split into Blaze Blaziken and Speed Boost Blaziken.
Philip7086 said that. In the Round 3 Nomination Thread. Let's look at number 2.
"Nominating" is how we get things to be voted on to go up to Ubers.
"Nominating" is also how we get things to be voted on to come down to OU.
Since nominating is the only way to get Blaziken down, and Philip said we may not nominate Blaziken + Blaze, then Blaziken + Blaze may not come down.
It's that simple.
But this Blaziken nonsense takes the cake, IMO. I'm going to tell now why Blaziken will not be split into Blaze Blaziken and Speed Boost Blaziken.
PHhilip7086 said:
Philip7086 said that. In the Round 3 Nomination Thread. Let's look at number 2.
Blaziken + Speed Boost is an ability + Pokemon combo. Therefore it may not be nominated.
"Nominating" is how we get things to be voted on to go up to Ubers.
"Nominating" is also how we get things to be voted on to come down to OU.
Since nominating is the only way to get Blaziken down, and Philip said we may not nominate Blaziken + Blaze, then Blaziken + Blaze may not come down.
It's that simple.
Dragonite is broken in uu and bl with Multi Scale but not with Inner Focus. Let's test Dragonite with Inner Focus. It wouldn't be broken in uu or bl with Inner focus so that's alot like Blaze/SB blaziken.
Doing stuff like that would just open a whole new kinda can of worms. The kinds nobody would like. Nearly every pokemon with 2 abilities would have to be clasified as different pokemon if we unban Blaziken without Speed Boost. I'd love Dragonite in uu. Hell I'd kill for it but there are consiquences to doing this. A line needs to be drawn and Complex pokemon/Ability bans (Not simple ability bans like Moody) is the place to draw it.
@SlimeMan
That pretty much stopped the whole debate. Can we move on now?
And that is simply a lazy way of getting rid of SB Blaziken. Thank you for proving one of my points.
My purpose has been served, then. I would leave now, except for...
I fail to see how it is lazy. Or if it is, then why laziness is a bad thing.
I'm not saying you don't have an argument, I'm just saying that you failed to communicate your argument to me. Please elaborate on what you mean by this post.
People are rather willing to ban Blaziken outright than to take a tiny bit more of their time to implement a complex ban that only disallows the use of the ability that made Blaziken broken. Why not only ban SB Blaziken if it's the only thing about it that is broken? It's surely not too difficult to tell people "You can use Blaziken, but only with the Blaze ability." and I'm 100% certain that it's not difficult for a player to remember that.
It's also not difficult to tell people "You can use Mewtwo, but you're not allowed to run special attacks on it".
Well, this isn't really a matter of us not wanting to take extra time. It's more like:
1) It honestly would contribute nothing to OU, so we'd only be doing it for UU or NU.
2) If we're doing it for UU or NU, then that begs the question of why we can't separate OU POkemon, and make things like Swarm Scizor available for UU/NU.
3) Saying "Blaziken minus Speed Boost isn't broken" is honestly the first step into the realm of "Darkrai without Nasty Plot isn't broken". No, I am not talking about a slippery slope. I am saying that a Pokemon is the sum of its parts, and one part is the same as any other part.
4) As I just established, Pokemon + ability bans are forbidden, and having only Speed Boost Blaziken banned is a Pokemon + ability ban.
''Even when I've really wanted to say why I think people are retarded, I have not (read: Giratina/Ferrothorn/Sand Veil).''
fortunately you kept your silence and you didn't said what you thought about some people...!!!
now on to the main part.first of all i want to say that i don't agree with a pokemon + ability ban.
i like that when you start discussing why we shoudn't nominate a pokemon + ability combo your only reasoning is that it is frobidden.so instead of thinking,you decide to just list us the opinion of someone else and call it a day...man this is a community that we discuss our opinions.everyone should be allowed to as long as it backs it up with reasonable arguements.but when people like you reject other people's opinions without presenting some solid reasons just because that's the way it is that's just horrible.
stop telling to people what they can't do and start thinking by yourself why we can't do 'this' or 'that'...
also do you remember how on round 2 an ability + ability combo ban was forbidden?and after this aldaron's proposal was passed!!!rules are there to be broken eventaully!!!
I think there is a difference between notions like "lets test Darkrai in ou without Dark Void" or Lets test "Garchomp in uu with Draco Meteor" or "lets test dragonite in uu with inner focus" are completely different than a 48 page thread on the world's most prominent pokemon competitive website. Then again what do I know I am just some guy...
Just come out and say it... "this is not a democracy"
A few people decide how things are for the masses, and if people dont want to deal with it they should play another game.
I wish someone would have some balls and say stuff like this and that way it would end a ton of these debates.
People dont care about people's arguements... no matter how valid they may be... Unless you are one of those deciding people, your opinion really doesnt matter.
Just come out and say it... "this is not a democracy"
A few people decide how things are for the masses, and if people dont want to deal with it they should play another game.
I wish someone would have some balls and say stuff like this and that way it would end a ton of these debates.
People dont care about people's arguements... no matter how valid they may be... Unless you are one of those deciding people, your opinion really doesnt matter.
First of all, I used the phrase, "I think", which clearly indicates that it is my opinion, not fact. Secondly, your hostility is completely unnecessitated.
Okay.
First of all, it's not my only reasoning. Read my other posts. It's merely my only non-repetitive argument.
Secondly, it's not "the opinion of someone else". It's the rules laid down by our former head-of-policy. Which our new head-of-policy have not changed.
Thirdly, that's exactly what you did with Sand Veil. You said "it's uncompetitive" and then you called it a day.
I shouldn't even respond to this, because it's basically you just whining about me.
But I actually didn't dismiss their arguments, because I continued to discuss their arguments in my next couple posts.
Fine. It's not a democracy. Because in a democracy we would let everyone vote. Here you actually have to prove you know what you are doing to get that vote. It is a democratic process, but it is not democracy. If you have a problem with that, go somewhere else.
that's a lie!i explained a lot of times the term uncompetitiveness!!!
You said uncompetitiveness is when something adds nothing but luck to the metagame. You said that uncompetitive does not equal broken. And both of those two things are true.
However, you also said that uncompetitiveness is why the Evasion Clause was made. That's a lie. The Evasion Clause was made to deal with some serious shit back in Generation 1, and we've just kept it because there's no point in getting rid of it.
- Status