• Follow our Instagram!
  • Curious about what we're currently doing about bots? Check out the latest updates from staff in this thread.

Entry Hazards - Are They Broken?

Are Entry Hazards Broken?

  • Total voters
    569
Status
Not open for further replies.
aAa123 said:
I would say the damage stealth rock does to 2x or 4x is too much. Chipping 50% hp off my Charizard is nonsense.

this exactly this. DO WE WANT A GAME with a stupid move(sorry for the s word) that chipps off 50% of a pokemon everytime he goes in?
 
A problem I see with the Stealth Rock dilemma is that it somewhat balances extremely threatening Pokemon such as Dragonite, Volcarona, Salamence, Thunderus-T, anything with an ice typing, etc.

However, Stealth Rocks makes Pokemon unviable and dictates how teams are built. Does any other move do this? Scald, Outrage and Close Combat are perhaps the others which affect teambuilding, but not as significantly as SR. Too much power in one move that fits in any playstyle.

Rapid Spin. Pokemon was not designed for a 6v6 single battle environment, hence why it takes Smogon years to put OU in a desirable place. No type is as balanced as another, and nor are any move distributions, base stats, etc. Rapid Spin's distribution compared to Stealth Rocks distribution on viable Pokemon is not even comparable. Bar Starmie, there are no real Pokemon who would be viable with Rapid Spin, if it weren't for Rapid Spin (if that makes sense). Spin blocking is another thing to go with this topic, but that is just another example of how much Power entry hazards bring to the table. Stealth Rock countered by Rapid Spin which is countered by a Spin Blocker. Look at the influence SR brings. It puts too much strain to teambuilding.

I for one would really like to see Stealth Rocks suspected. Players who disagree can see how much easier Teambuilding and the game would be. Plus, it would be much more enjoyable without the "I must get rocks up" or "I can only send this Pokemon in x amount of times before its dead."
 
Organization Member XIV said:
Do I really need to say more? If we've come to the point where SR is considered ESSENTIAL, then I do not honestly know what to say. I mean yes, I know what lokt was replying to, but assuming your opponent's Pokemon has 4 moves is just common sense.

EDIT: *Sigh* Really, Ditto OBVIOUSLY won't have 4 moves without Imposter activated and Last Resort mons are gimmicks anyways :/
My point is, that stealth rock is such an integral game mechanic. Entry hazards have been out since gen2, and stealth rock is just an addition to this concept. When one realizes that the concept of entry hazards has been around for so long it can be defined as an integral part of the metagame. It's part of what makes the pokemon metagame as a whole unique, and hazards have defined the metagame for so long. It's part of what makes pokemon different from other turn based games. Because of this, stealth rock and hazards can be looked upon as being an integral part of the metagame, similar to mechanics such as status and even as an added component of switching. It is obvious that we can't just ban status, because no matter how useful or centralizing it is, it defines our metagame. This is why we only restricted sleep with sleep clause instead of banning it completely. The same can be said about stealth rock. It is centralizing, but can be looked upon as an integral part of our metagame due to how long the concept of hazards has existed.This is what makes the argument of overcentralization so subjective(and therefore pointless), because many people look at stealth rock as a metagame definer since been in competitive pokemon since gen2, which justifies centralization around it.

When you say, we are considering it "essential" and saying(implying) it must be banned, this is subjective because as a metagame definer and mechanic, the metagame is supposed to be centralized around it. It's similar to switching, in that the game is centralized around it, but it defines the metagame, making that ok.
 
IMO SR should have a damage cap or does only 15-20% hp at max.

Or maybe more ways to clear them.

Edit : I am hoping to see these changes in X/Y.
 
I agree. A lack of type discrimination and more ways to clean up your field would be a great way to get rid of entry hazards, so that there is always at least some sort of a drawback in setting them to balance out the drawbacks in not clearing them from your side of the field.
 
The broken thing about SR is that it's really too easy to set up (since billions mons learn the move and it just require one turn), and that if they are spinned successfully, you can just put them again easily (unlike spikes).

Maybe SR should just have lower PP, like 1 or 2. It could be very interesting to make of them an important strategical choice.
 
Can we please drop the "if SR didn't exist Volcarona would be uber" argument once for all please?
If SR didn't exist Moltres would be viable in OU.
Volcarona would then be forced to choose between being walled by Heatran (if it doesn't run HP Ground) or Moltres (if it doesn't run HP Rock).
The very fact Volcarona has two perfect hard counters in a SR-free envirorment is a clear indication that it wouldn't be uber material.
And that's without counting things like Gyarados, Salamence and Dragonite, who would counter Volcarona even more easily without Stealth Rock.

Now one could say "but then Gyarados, Dragonite and Salamence would be broken!".
Not so. Gyarados is still slow and easily dispatched by most scarfers with an electric move, while Dragonite and Salamence would need to deal with Focus Sash (which suddenly becomes much more viable in a SR-free envirorment) pokemon with decent ice attacks.

If Salamence for some reason decides to run Focus Sash itself then it no longer has the power to defeat many bulky opponents, making it a lot less dangerous.
Of course let's not forget that Sandstorm and Hail still exist (and hail would be a LOT more viable without SR) so Focus Sash wouldn't be a fool-proof strategy.

Then there are multi-hit moves like Cloyster and Mamoswine's Icicle Spear who would be able to get past many Focus Sash users.

Stealth Rock not only keeps some pokemon in check, it also keeps their counters in check.
If Stealth Rock didn't exist the metagame would still be balanced, just different.

It would be interesting if we had a "Stealth Rock-free" tier on Pokemon Showdown - this theorymon discussion on how a SR-free tier would look like has been going on for years but we've never had the chance to actually experience it.
 
Well, I think Spikes/Toxic Spikes are fine do to not doing more damage to certain pokemon. I can handle immunities to SR, but WEAKNESSES? It single-handedly sent Charizard from OU to UU from ADV to DPP, then to NU in BW2. A single move can do that! Spikes can't do that much damage on a switch in with 3 layers of hazards. Toxic Spikes is worse. Even though it takes only 2 turns of setup, it needs time for the toxic damage to do good. Yeah, the weaknesses are only for certain typings, but it really does make a difference. As I always say, the 2 main controllers of OU are Hazards and the ever-so-annoying weather. I would be in favor of a SR ban, but that's never, EVER going to happen, so oh well.
 
Psylink said:
It single-handedly sent Charizard from OU to UU from ADV to DPP, then to NU in BW2.

Charizard was never OU. It was UU in RBY, BL in both GSC and ADV, and NU in both DPP and BW. Charizard doesn't exactly have a legacy of being a fantastic Pokemon that was suddenly crippled by the arrival of Stealth Rock.
 
to clarify, charizard was actually passable in gsc despite its uu tiering, but that's only because it has belly drum and 100 base speed - which, at the time, was faster than 80% of the ou metagame. with the opponent's faster pokemon paralyzed and a free setup opportunity on a sleeping snorlax or something that couldn't do 50% to it (which is surprisingly more pokemon than you would think).

you're right though, rocks didn't kill charizard's viability, definitely not "singlehandedly". definitely hurts the current viability of otherwise good stuff like volcarona and moltres though. and dragonite might be broken without rocks
 
What I've always liked about Stealth Rock was its almost guaranteed ability to get rid of Focus Sashes and provide residual damage. Too many things are immune to Spikes, and Spikes just takes too much time to get up. I really think Stealth Rock, though it may punish a few Pokemon rather severely, is beneficial to the metagame in the end, and the Pokemon it pushes from OU to UU were more niche than people may believe and wouldn't make all that much of an impact on the metagame, with the exception of Victini and Darmanitan. (I don't know why these two aren't in OU even with Stealth Rock but I think Rain may have a hand in that.) Charizard... just isn't that great, and the Pokemon with 4x Rock weaknesses wouldn't fare all that well without Stealth Rock anyway, with the exception of Volcarona of course. Lastly, I really don't think that Stealth Rock places that much of a strain on teambuilding, as you wouldn't be running a team full of Pokemon weak to Rock in the first place, unless you wanted to get wrecked by Terrakion, Tyranitar, or anyone with Rock-type coverage in general. You would at most limit yourself to maybe one or two Pokemon weak to Rock, and it just doesn't seem to make all that big of a difference to me.
 
Volc really isn't something that's being hurt in viability with Rocks. It's in the same boat as DNite. Ubers residency stuff that's being dragged down by SR.

You're right on Moltres though
 
lokt said:
My point is, that stealth rock is such an integral game mechanic. Entry hazards have been out since gen2, and stealth rock is just an addition to this concept. When one realizes that the concept of entry hazards has been around for so long it can be defined as an integral part of the metagame. It's part of what makes the pokemon metagame as a whole unique, and hazards have defined the metagame for so long. It's part of what makes pokemon different from other turn based games. Because of this, stealth rock and hazards can be looked upon as being an integral part of the metagame, similar to mechanics such as status and even as an added component of switching. It is obvious that we can't just ban status, because no matter how useful or centralizing it is, it defines our metagame. This is why we only restricted sleep with sleep clause instead of banning it completely. The same can be said about stealth rock. It is centralizing, but can be looked upon as an integral part of our metagame due to how long the concept of hazards has existed.This is what makes the argument of overcentralization so subjective(and therefore pointless), because many people look at stealth rock as a metagame definer since been in competitive pokemon since gen2, which justifies centralization around it.

When you say, we are considering it "essential" and saying(implying) it must be banned, this is subjective because as a metagame definer and mechanic, the metagame is supposed to be centralized around it. It's similar to switching, in that the game is centralized around it, but it defines the metagame, making that ok.

I'm sure this has been addressed multiple times already, but this argument is just ridiculous. Stealth Rock is a move, not an integral game mechanic. The only reason you view it as being an integral game mechanic is due to its presence on virtually every team, which is due to its incredible power. The metagame is not "supposed" to be centralized around it, any more than it is "supposed" to be centralized around Kyogre, and somehow I don't see anyone arguing that that should be OU. Again, all this argument comes down to is "this is the way we've done things in the past, so we should keep on doing that".
 
UltiMario said:
Volc really isn't something that's being hurt in viability with Rocks. It's in the same boat as DNite. Ubers residency stuff that's being dragged down by SR.

You're right on Moltres though

well it's still pretty high ou tier due to sheer devastating power once it gets a boost but it's a lot easier to get to +2 and clean sweep from 100% than it is from 50%. the presence of rocks hinders volcarona severely. i don't think viability was the word i should have used...maybe i ought to have said that rocks harm volc's efficiency? that sounds a bit better. hopefully everyone understands what i mean

moltres would be so good without rocks ugh
 
After listening to the smogcast i am more convinced than ever that SR shouldn't be banned. I consider SR to be the "castling" of pokemon. It makes the game a bit more skillful and it really doesn't create an imbalance outside of what Gamefreak wanted the original game to be. Yes, doing the math SR does what seems like a high percentage of damage per game... But I enjoy the strategy of managing my switches and doing the math myself. The host said something about defensive pokemon taking more from SR... I don't think that is true. While yes defensive pokemon have more HP ticks taken from them you can observe that defensive pokemon in practice are damaged less by SR than offensive pokemon. Take for instance the case of a cresselia and a standard specially offensive landorus-i with uturn. Both of these pokemon take the same amount from SR. Now lets say a 252HP cress comes in. That cress will lose about 55 HP. Now when lando switches in he will lose about 40 HP. This IS a big difference. The difference is cress will have leftovers to get half of that health back. Since lando isnt rocking leftovers lando is basically taking twice the damage that cress is from SR. SR is hurting lando more. So the idea that SR is making defensive pokemon unviable is a bit of a untruth. SR helps offense but it doesn't help them defensively either. I think with the huge power creep between adv and bw SR tones it down just a bit by giving these high powered threats a possible defensive dilemma of risking to set up now or switch out and wait to another time. SR should be cherished as a gift from GF to the competitive pokemon community. It makes more pokemon viable in OU than without it. SR ultimately creates the best game possible. Defensive mons love SR because it makes their weak moves a bit more powerful.
 
12 pages late, but Entry hazards are certainly not broken IMO, though the discussion about them reminds me of the drama about Drizzle. Drizzle requires only a switch-in while stealth rock requires a whole turn, but a wide variety of pokemon can use it. They are both too easy to set up and maintain.

The best way to balance them would likely be to nerf the damage taken from them (such as not factoring in a double weakness). Because if more pokemon could spin, then spikes would remain inferior (maybe they could deal 12.5% then 25%; 2 layers max).

I wouldn't mind a suspect test for stealth rock; I would be interested in seeing possibly new OU threats.
 
George Eliot said:
I'm sure this has been addressed multiple times already, but this argument is just ridiculous. Stealth Rock is a move, not an integral game mechanic. The only reason you view it as being an integral game mechanic is due to its presence on virtually every team, which is due to its incredible power. The metagame is not "supposed" to be centralized around it, any more than it is "supposed" to be centralized around Kyogre, and somehow I don't see anyone arguing that that should be OU. Again, all this argument comes down to is "this is the way we've done things in the past, so we should keep on doing that".

The first thing I’d like for you to understand is that this is not an argument that is meant to prove stealth rock banworthy or not. It is an explanation for why overcentralization alone is not a valid argument for a stealth rock ban. You state that stealth rock is a move and not a game mechanic. Yet the move is what activates the concept of entry hazards. I’m not saying that this is a mechanic or not, but it can be viewed as one. Let’s compare this to the move spore. While the move isn’t a mechanic, it activates the mechanic of sleep. And what did smogon do with spore? They implemented a clause to prevent it from becoming overpowering instead of straight up banning the move. Now I’ll talk about your comparison of Drizzle in the metagame. If you look at smogon’s record of bans in bw, you would realize that drizzle was never suspected, except near the very beginning of the metagame, when the metagame itself was created and being defined. Don’t you realize that there was a reason that smogon didn’t just ban drizzle and instead banned tornadus-t, manaphy, and swift-swimmers? The OU council has obviously decided that weather abilities could be seen as an “integral” part of the metagame and decided to nerf weather (similar to sleep clause nerfing sleep) instead of just outright banning it.

When I say this, I’m not necessarily saying that we should keep weather at all costs. On the contrary, I support a weather ban, not for the reason of over-centralization, but because other arguments such have team match-up have convinced me that weather is unhealthy for the metagame.
George Eliot said:
The only reason you view it as being an integral game mechanic is due to its presence on virtually every team
Think about this quote both ways, and you will realize that it's a paradox, which is what makes the argument of over-centralization subjective.
If we assume that stealth rock is an integral mechanic, then the importance of this mechanic to the metagame causes centralization.
If we assume that it's not a mechanic, then stealth rock is common because of centralization.

So you don’t believe that stealth rock is an integral game mechanic, and believe that it isn’t supposed to be part of the metagame. That’s fine. However, you have to realize that “integral game mechanic” and “supposed to be” are very subjective terms. Therefore, because other people believe that it is a game mechanic, it means that the argunment of over-centralization alone cannot be used to ban stealth rock due to how subjective the argument is.

Please realize that I’m only addressing that over-centralization is a weak argument due to subjectivity, and I’m not using it as an argument to ban stealth rock.
 
In my opinion, as well as the majority of Smogon, I do NOT think the move Stealth Rock is broken. Like many people have said, it helps counter sashes and multiscales. The rocks will also make players think carefully about switching. If you think you will be at a disadvantage because of the rocks, then build your team to deal with the rocks and/or make you opponent deal with the rocks also.

From the polls so far, we the people want Stealth Rock to remain in the game. Stealth Rock, whether you like it or not, seems like it will be in this game, along with other things that we may find annoying, such as weather teams.
 
While many think SR is broken in its current form, I don't think many think SR is broken by default.

I think the question is more: Should SR be nerfed?
I do not think that anybody - even those who voted that SR is broken - thinks that SR should be removed entirely. I voted as well that SR is broken, but also wrote that it is a necessary component because it breaks Sashes as well as that it helps to nerf Volcarona, which is very powerful despite its huge SR weakness

If SR did half the damage (with 4× resistors possibly being immune), I think there would be significantly less complaints. Dragonite's Multiscale would still be broken as Dragonite is SR weak and would still take 12,5% damage. Dunno about Volcarona, as there aren't any Specially Defensive Rock types in the game that aren't weak to Bug, which makes countering it quite hard in OU.
 
I believe the move itself is by no means, intrinsically broken, the issue is that the distribution and ease of use is simply too good! Of course, this suggests that it is GameFreaks problem to solve and otherwise we have to deal with what we have.

Right now, there are simply too many pokemon that can set up stealth rock, from offensive leads to offensive tanks to defensive tanks to classic walls, there are OU viable grass types, normal types, psychic types, fire types and fighting types that are not part ground or rock that can set up SR. What eventuates is a metagame where it is simply too hard to be able to stop your opponent from getting SR unless you follow a very offensive strategy with at least 1 reasonably fast taunt on your team (else sturdy pokemon get an early turn). Even this is not enough to reliably stop SR.


An example:

Hide
with a Taunt Keldeo + Taunt Whimsicott duo, I could only stop stealth rock in approximately 60-80% of my games, and keep in mind, this is (through testing) the best offensive SR prevention combo I could come up with.

Of course the discussion of rapid spinners being so far behind stealth rockers is another valid one, but it has been done to death so I won't pursue that just now.



If the move was restricted to primarily ground and rock types and the odd steel or miscellaneous type, it would be much easier to manage, and this is an inherent flaw in the way GameFreak decided to distribute Stealth Rock, but hey, even though its created a metagame around it, is it so bad? I'm sure we are all consistant with our opinion here that from a hazards perspective, the metagame isn't "so bad", there are pokemon that unfortunately miss out on OU because of - more or less - their vulnerability to stealth rocks. There are also pokemon that miss out on OU due to their vulnerability to other metagame defining moves...

Slowbro/Cresselia/Tangrowth and the other UU and lower tanks have issues getting past toxic, should we ban toxic too?

There are other UU and lower tier pokemon that have difficulty thriving in a metagame of high powered meteors, outrages and close combats, should we ban higher power moves?

You have to draw the line some where, sure Charizard and Moltres could be more useful in an SR free meta, but then I could argue other pokemon could be more useful in a meta free of other moves (as discussed above).
 
Moltres would be amazing without stealth rocks. It's things like these which make me sad:

deidarasenpai said:
What I've always liked about Stealth Rock was its almost guaranteed ability to get rid of Focus Sashes and provide residual damage. Too many things are immune to Spikes, and Spikes just takes too much time to get up. I really think Stealth Rock, though it may punish a few Pokemon rather severely, is beneficial to the metagame in the end, and the Pokemon it pushes from OU to UU were more niche than people may believe and wouldn't make all that much of an impact on the metagame

I would run Moltres on the majority of my teams if there were no stealth rocks. Giving it both fire blast and hurricane provides excellent use both in sun and in rain. It can also comfortably swap into the majority of pokemon found on sun teams (venusaur, ninetales, forretress, ...,). If Politoed wants to 'rain' on your parade you can still use Hurricane with 100% accuracy off an enormous sp.atk and STAB.
 
I'm fine either way. I'm interested to play in a meta without SR though, which is why they should make a server where it is banned. We can test it out and see if things are any better, and if it is you could put it up for testing whether to ban it. I would like to see Moltres and hail teams gain usage and add a bit more variety and fun.
 
HUARGH said:
Moltres would be amazing without stealth rocks. It's things like these which make me sad:



I would run Moltres on the majority of my teams if there were no stealth rocks. Giving it both fire blast and hurricane provides excellent use both in sun and in rain. It can also comfortably swap into the majority of pokemon found on sun teams (venusaur, ninetales, forretress, ...,). If Politoed wants to 'rain' on your parade you can still use Hurricane with 100% accuracy off an enormous sp.atk and STAB.

Let's not forget that Moltres can counter Sheer Force Landorus, the biggest threat in the current metagame, giving it use against all three types of weather (four, even, since it wrecks hail too)
 
I don't think they're broken, per se, but I do think the game would be more fun without Stealth Rock. I'd like to play a ladder without it.
 
HabibsHotDogs said:
You have to draw the line some where, sure Charizard and Moltres could be more useful in an SR free meta, but then I could argue other pokemon could be more useful in a meta free of other moves (as discussed above).
I'd like to say that Stealth Rock is more problematic because the Pokemon it weakens are all centralized around a group of types. The other moves you brought up tend to cover broad ranges; Stealth Rock specifically picks on certain types and excludes others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top