Entry Hazards - Are They Broken?

[vyomov]

The majority of opinions against SR are simply that "It's stupid to do this JUST to use Charizard and Moltres".
In reality, by banning SR, there are far more outcomes.
We make more playstyles viable(hail and sun) and inherently balance the metagame from rain and sand dominated to a level playing field.
At the same time, more mons have risks of becoming OP, like Dragonite(I don't think it will, but it certainly might)
I'm not saying we should straight away ban SR. But I'd prefer if people were to be :
a) Less negative about the possibility
b) More balanced in their posts, offering the negatives and the positives

I'm personally waiting for the day when the OU Council sits down and gives us their opinions on the matter. They're FAR more knowledgeable than me and a lot of other users, and I would be glad to hear their views and the rationale behind their views before the meta changes over.

 

[Lavos]

The majority of opinions against SR are simply that "It's stupid to do this JUST to use Charizard and Moltres".

that's incorrect. the majority opinion isn't narrow-minded and unintelligent so don't paraphrase them like they are. some people think unbanning rocks would make certain things broken, others believe it would throw the balance of power way off in what they consider to be a "good" metagame, and a lot of people are just afraid of change. regardless, i'm sure charizard is the least of everyone's worries.

i do agree with you, though, that it would be great if the council who is supposed to be overseeing this whole process would perhaps offer up an opinion on all the topics we've been dying to know about, including weather, entry hazards, and controversial pokemon like landorus-i. that way the rambling masses might have a more effective way to gauge whether or not all this discussion is actually going to yield some results.

 

[vyomov]

and a lot of people are just afraid of change.

On reflection, I completely agree with you on this one. People are instinctively opposed to change and ironically, after the change is made, a lot of times people cannot live without the change.

 

[x42bn6]

Personally, I don't think the aim of such a test should necessarily be to (definitely) ban Stealth Rock (and possibly associated others) - if the test shows there is a possibility that banning Stealth Rock is a good thing (i.e. a Stealth Rock-less metagame actually plays pretty nicely), then keep that thought in mind and revisit it when Generation VI comes out (i.e. suspect it early if Game Freak changes nothing and the suspect test showed some benefit in a ban).

I'd prefer to think of it as an experiment - you probably can't balance 6 years of metagame development in only a month or so. I don't think that should necessarily be an aim. I think it's more important to experiment and learn, and chuck it into the mixer (early on) for Generation VI if required.

 

[Curtains]

Virtually every SR weak pokemon currently in the metagame is considered to be broken or close to broken in a SR-less meta. You simply do not see these effects if it simply gives you an "edge". I'd challenge you to find anything in the game, even the weather war, which the meta revolves around more than Stealth Rock.

if your assumption is correct then why do you want to make the hassle of making even more stuff broken and make the tier even smaller? Isn't that what you are trying to avoid? The fact is the metagame goes around weather. Everyone knows that. This isnt a SR war metagame. There is really so lead metagame like it was in dppt. If you see that SR is balancing the game why take it away? FYI ice, bug and fire types are discriminated by the makers of the game. This is why hail teams stink and bug types are not even good in single player.

 

[Champion Steve]

I think that the people arguing against it are treating it like it was a Pokemon when they say it's overcentralizing and that confuses me. It's a move, of which we have 4 times as many of on a team than Pokemon and so obviously the chances of it being on a team are high. How many teams have a Pokemon with Hidden Power on them? I'm willing to bet that it's pretty high. Is Hidden Power centralizing?
I don't think it's fair to argue against Stealth Rock on a usage base. It's a valid tactic and one with very little opportunity cost (just one move needed and it comes on a wide variety of Pokemon? Sign me me up, please.) So any team aiming to win should try to fit in Stealth Rock (and probably Rapid Spin as well) unless they have a really pressing need for those moveslots.
And really, Stealth Rock is part of the game, isn't it? Those scrambles to lay down your own Rocks while denying your opponent their own, those involve what we call "strategy", don't they? When your Rocks are down and the opponents are not, letting you switch at will while they have to be careful not to overdo it, you could be said to have secured an "advantage", no? These don't seem like bad things.

 

[Shiruba]

It being "part of the game" isn't exactly the best argument, though. OHKO moves, Arceus, and others are part of the game, too, yet they're banned.

The difference is that HP doesn't make Pokemon instantly not viable by its mere existence, unlike many Pokemon previously discussed in the thread.

You saying that "any team aiming to win should try to use it"... That's sort of a tip-off for at least a suspect test, surely? After all, if you want to win, you should use it... That's quite similar to saying that in order to win, you should have x Pokemon on every team (a la Gen 2 Snorlax), and most would agree that Gen 2 Lax is Uber by today's standards.

 

[Chaoswalker]

I've only ever had one problem with hazards besides changing the viability of various pokemon: Hazards make team construction very annoying. It is much easier to put stealth rock on your team than rapid spin. Weak to grass types? Don't sweat it, there are plenty of flying, bug, fire, or dragon types. Patching up that type weakness gives you a lot of choices in picking something that fits your team. Hazards on the other hand demand one of two things: Magic Bounce or Rapid spin. It doesn't take much counting to see that there are twice as many hazard layers in OU than hazard stoppers. (never mind that there are more than 4 times as many in the grand scheme of Pokemon.) This means that your team will be built around one of a few very specific Rapid Spinning pokemon. (most of which are water types) Even patching Dragon weakness with steel types gives you more options.

 

[George Eliot]

if your assumption is correct then why do you want to make the hassle of making even more stuff broken and make the tier even smaller? Isn't that what you are trying to avoid? The fact is the metagame goes around weather. Everyone knows that. This isnt a SR war metagame. There is really so lead metagame like it was in dppt. If you see that SR is balancing the game why take it away? FYI ice, bug and fire types are discriminated by the makers of the game. This is why hail teams stink and bug types are not even good in single player.

We make a few more things potentially broken (Volc and Drag specifically), in return for making the metagame more balanced, and bringing a whole heap of other stuff into the meta. The amount of stuff kept from viability in OU by Stealth Rock outstrips the amount of stuff which is potentially kept within OU by it by so far it isn't funny. Viability is the key word here. Since we have a limit on the size of OU, removing SR won't necessarily push much stuff into the tier proper, but it will make a vast amount of threats viable options when teambuilding.

The rest of your argument is just characteristic of the lazy thinking that I'm sick of seeing in this thread. "The fact is the metagame goes around weather". True...but it also goes around SR, which was my point. SR has had at least as significant an effect on what is viable and popular in the tier as weather. It is absolutely a SR war game. And now you just go ahead and say that "Ice, Bug and Fire are made to be shit". So, we just go out of our way to further discriminate against the types which are already discriminated against? Ice and Fire are amazing offensive typings, Bug isn't so great but has STAB U-turn and some other uses. The fact is, SR is the only main thing hindering the best members of these types. Their type weaknesses to actual attacking moves can be easily played around; SR can't. I've been playing with a Hail team of Abomasnow / Nidoqueen / Starmie / Moltres / Kyurem / ScarfRachi, and if I can keep SR off it utterly destroys 90% of teams I face through quickstalling. But it's basically unviable as a ladder or tournament team because in the 20% of matches against good opponents where I can't get rid of SR quickly enough, I auto-lose. SR is literally the only thing stopping that kind of team archetype from being successful. Arguing that these typings are so bad that removing SR won't help them is just ignorant and lazy.

 

[Dracomaster]

If only Rapid Spin wasn't so crappy a move. There should at least be another variant of Rapid Spin, be it a status move or another (better) offensive move with more distribution. The amount of hazard moves, and the distribution they get far outweigh Rapid Spin by a mile.

There could even be an ability that acts like Rapid Spin as soon as the pokemon comes in, that would be cool.

 

[Lavos]

And now you just go ahead and say that "Ice, Bug and Fire are made to be shit". So, we just go out of our way to further discriminate against the types which are already discriminated against? Ice and Fire are amazing offensive typings, Bug isn't so great but has STAB U-turn and some other uses. The fact is, SR is the only main thing hindering the best members of these types. Their type weaknesses to actual attacking moves can be easily played around; SR can't.

i found this pretty interesting so i reckon i'll chime in here.

george makes an insightful distinction here between type weakness and rocks weakness that i'd like to expand upon. with certain pokemon sporting type weaknesses - let's use charizard as an example - the trainer can recognize these weaknesses and make a concerted effort to avoid being hit by, say, rock slide. prediction and timely switches are the main methods of avoiding your opponent taking advantage of your pokemon's inherent weakness. stealth rock is an entirely different story. instead of giving the trainer the ability to play around the weaknesses of his or her pokemon using prediction and switches, sr simply flips the bird to certain pokemon and takes out half their health upon entry. yes, rapid spin and magic bounce somewhat enhance the effect that skill can have upon setting and removing rocks, but the fact remains that moves are avoidable, whereas stealth rock is not. instead of rewarding the player for smart switches, it punishes a switch of any kind with chip damage in the case of some pokemon, and massive strikes in the case of others.

notice i didn't say anything about sr being good or bad, i'm simply making an observation.

 

[ChaosAkita]

I don't think Stealth Rock makes the metagame unplayable, but I wish it was rebalanced in such a way that didn't make certain pokemon completely unplayable.

 

[The 1 and Only Lady Gaga]

I don't think Stealth Rock makes the metagame unplayable, but I wish it was rebalanced in such a way that didn't make certain pokemon completely unplayable.

This... and to be rebalanced GameFreak should have other variants of Stealth Rock (And only one of them are allowed to be on the field at once, you can't have both Stealth Rock and its equivalent on the opponent's field simultaneously); the thing that irks me most about it is the type discrimination that makes what would be usable Pokemon much less viable, which are often those 2x or 4x weak to Rock. If there was something like Stealth Flame, Stealth Seed or whatever other type equivalent then this would be a non-issue as teams can choose whatever type their entry hazards should be to deal with threats, like a team weak to Scizor can utilize Stealth Flame (If it exists) to neuter it, making the metagame far more varied and less centralizing... too bad that such a thing only exists in my imagination.

 

[Champion Steve]

Umm, are we really saying Stealth Rock should be removed because it discriminates against types? Seriously? I want to know, do people here think Stealth Rock should be removed because it removes the effects of skill from play and hands wins to the weaker player? Or is it because they don't want to bother dealing with it in teambuilding or it hurts their favourite Pokemon?

I mean, I'd accept any arguments dealing with the first reason. The other two? Not really.

 

[baddjordan]

Or is it because they don't want to bother dealing with it in teambuilding or it hurts their favourite Pokemon?

Correct.

 

[George Eliot]

Champion Steve, jcp and co, why don't you actually just read the huge number of well-reasoned anti-SR arguments in this thread? Instead of just completely misrepresenting everything which has been said and then dismissing it on that basis. Ta.

The only way to resolve this is a suspect test. Either we see that actually, a SR-free metagame is much more balanced and fun, or that it somehow contains less strategy or whatever people are actually scared of.

 

[HabibsHotDogs]

My only gripe with the pro-banning SR school of thought (I think a suspect test on SR is a good idea though, if for no other reason than to see what the meta could evolve to) is that it doesn't necessarily favour ice/fire/bug types like everyone is saying, it does necessarily favour ALL flying/levitating pokemon though, just think of generation 3 and 2 where spikes were available but not stealth rock.

Hide

Honestly GF screwed up from the start by giving it such a massive distribution on so many already good/viable/diverse pokemon! It's not just "run a fast water/grass type lead (Keldeo is SE to steel/rock/ground with her stabs, the only types that naturally learn SR) and you'll be able to threaten any SR leads", it's become "run a spinner or a dual taunt core" or you're going to have to accept most of your games will involve you switching into rocks.

Btw for the record, I don't think SR is "broken" at all, banning it would simply reconstruct the metagame.

 

[Champion Steve]

Well okay then, explain how exactly no SR makes the meta more balanced. And I really don't care that SR makes Rock weak types get used less. The types are not equal and some are going to see less use than others. So for example, if SR is banned, being Rock weak won't be so bad, but being weak to all these ungodly powerful Flying types rampaging through the tier will be.

The best argument I've seen about it being unbalanced is that the wearing down they do leads to a more HO metagame. Though I'd still say that forcing switches to wear down your opponent seems tactical and, dare I say it, a good thing?

 

[SmashBrosBrawl]

Champion Steve, jcp and co, why don't you actually just read the huge number of well-reasoned anti-SR arguments in this thread? Instead of just completely misrepresenting everything which has been said and then dismissing it on that basis. Ta.

The only way to resolve this is a suspect test. Either we see that actually, a SR-free metagame is much more balanced and fun, or that it somehow contains less strategy or whatever people are actually scared of.

SR is in absolutely no way the only controversial aspect of the metagame. If we had to make suspect tests for everything that people disagreed with we would never have time to actually enjoy the game. Making a suspect test for SR is pointless at this time. If it end up being broken we wont have time to deal with the new metagame, and if end up being broken it wont change anything.

 

[George Eliot]

@Steve - The very definition of balance is that types aren't discriminated against as much. Thus, more of the currently SR-predated ones see use. That is "type balance". SR tends to favour offense > stall as well, and rain > any other weather thanks to Rain Tenta and the fact that Tales and Aboma are SR weak; so that's "playstyle" balance. Conversely, does SR actually contribute to balance in any way? Volcarona and Dragonite aren't broken due to its presence, which they probably would be otherwise. That's it. That's basically a non-factor.

@Smash - SR is currently one of the most controversial things. It's at least in the same category as auto-Rain/Sun and Lando. No one forces people to participate in suspect tests; they don't "stop people from enjoying the game". Contrary to what you seem to think, people do still play and care about metagames after the next one is released. There is no reason why we shouldn't seek to maximize the playability of this generation, not least because it sets a valuable precedent for the 6th gen metagame.

 

[Curtains]

The very definition of balance is that types aren't discriminated against as much.

Well we may of well just ban the entire game then. The discrimination starts at the type chart which will never under any circumstance be changed by smogon.

SR is currently one of the most controversial things. It's at least in the same category as auto-Rain/Sun and Lando.

I don't think so. There has been a very vocal minority that actually think SR should be suspected and subsequently banned. I would say weather and individual pokemon have always been at the top of the community docket. Only in the last month in a half or so is when a small minority of players have made a pitch for a test. Those players will be lucky to even have the council consider a suspect test for SR imo.

I think people need to stop looking at random pokemon that are weak to SR and automatically calling them not viable. Then you guys have to stop assuming they will be viable after SR is banned. The pro ban side is basically fighting discrimination with discrimination. You say that SR discriminates against moltres, abamasnow and charizard then make the proclamation that these pokemon will be OU in a SR less metagame. Why? Arent other pokemon going to be pushed down to the lower tiers? The fantasy metagame for the pro ban side is a OU tier with all SR weak pokemon..... Makes no sense and it is entirely the wrong way to think. There is no fact that states that SR weak pokemon are stronger than non SR weak pokemon.... Scizor is a good example of this. Scizor has constantly been a top 10 pokemon over the last few metagames. Scizor has nothing to do with SR at all...

 

[faint]

I didn't expect this thread so last so long...

Anyways, for those of you that wish to continue this debate please do so in Kidogo's thread. Just be sure to follow his rules and contribute to the discussion.

Sorry if you guys were in the middle of something. I'm locking this.