SwagPlay, evaluating potential bans (basic definition of "uncompetitive" in OP)

[Suisho]

The only people defending paraswag are the ones that use it.

Do I like Parafusion Prankster teams? No. They're annoying, gimmicky, and confoundedly effective. But do I think the entire archetype deserves to be banned? No. If you're going to ban anything, ban the concept of six-Prankster Pokémon teams. Introduce a clause (be it Prankster Clause, Parafusion Clause, whatever) that forbids people from building teams with more than two Pranksters. Two is fine, three or more is not. If you do this, you allow any one of the Pranksters to remain relevant in the meta without giving carte blanche to the annoying all-Prankster teams.

That stated, I'm not even sure if all-Prankster teams ought to be banned. I feel like too much energy is being spent trying to mold the Gen 6 landscape to match the familiar metagame of HGSS (which was what the Gen 5 landscape was likewise molded to match) rather than accepting the Gen 6 landscape for what it really is and could be. I know that I personally don't like the idea of a metagame dominated by Prankster teams. But I also know that I wasn't exactly thrilled with Stealth Rock + Rapid Spin in Gen 4. Gen 4 witnessed kings become paupers and paupers become kings. Maybe that's what Gen 6 would do too if we would only allow it to.

Myth: BUSTED.

I don't like falling victim to Paraswag. I don't use it myself either (outside of Random Battles where the Pokémon is assigned to me). But I don't think that banning an entire archetype just because people are upset about losing to it is the right way to go -- not when there are so, so many viable solutions either already on excellent teams or else easily added to them. I don't like having to put Stealth Rock on somebody when that slot could've gone to Stone Edge instead, but that's life. I don't like putting Rapid Spin on somebody when that slot could've gone to Psyshock instead, but that's life too. It's the same exact situation with moves like Safeguard: many players are too stubbornly set in their Gen 4 and 5 ways to change their teams' years-old movesets and incorporate a new move that threatens to bump out something else. That frustration should never be justification for banning an entire style of play. Especially not when it promotes an insular metagame that refuses to change with the times and allow yesterday's ugly ducklings to become today's beautiful swans.

 

[MEGUMI NAKAJIMA.]

What strategy is there that uses swagger w/o prankster or foul play? I've really only seen swagger used by Liepard and Klefki.

Swagsire for one. Use Swagger and enjoy your immunity to their attack boost with Unaware. I've also seen people use Swagger + Psych Up (admittedly kind of a silly one, but it's out there). Swagger is great to use on anything that's setting up, especially if they're trying to pass boosts. It's a nice way to give a great entrance to Ditto, too. I also don't see why Swagger + Foul Play is such a horrible uncompetitive thing on its own. I said earlier in the thread I use that combination on a physically defensive Umbreon. It can take boosted hits and ruin Pokemon with a decent Attack stat if they take the risk of staying in after Swagger. It's not really about luck since it doesn't need the confusion to work, just the Attack boost.

 

[blazeVA]

This is such a shitty argument that completely ignore precedent set by Evasion and OHKO clause, are you saying that evasion moves are okay cause, "MUH AERIAL ACE," or OHKO is okay cause "MUH STURDY?" This just completely ignores the big picture about the competitiveness of the meta game and frankly shows little knowledge of how bans like these have worked in the past.

Honestly there is a pretty big difference here and you know it. The Evasion Move clause exists because every single Pokemon that learns TMs can learn Double Team, and so can abuse evasion. Not to mention the several Pokemon who can run Minimize. The Evasion Ability clause, let's face it, really was just introduced so we could justify having Garchomp in OU. It wasn't broken in the lower tiers, Gliscor wasn't broken with it. OHKO moves are far different because they require far less work than SubSwagger and as such are less prone to not working.

I think people forget that neither Swagger nor Prankster is the issue here. You could have very well have ran SubSwaggerWave Pokemon in Gen II, there was more than enough with fast Speed stats and good stats otherwise that would have made the strategy viable. It's arguably the introduction of Foul Play that has made the strategy annoying and difficult to deal with, but broken? No, its SwagPlay teams that are the problem, not the strategy itself.

 

[v-mon]

I'm not ok with that. People have managed over the past metas to counter other haxers like Flinchirachi or ParaFlinch Togekiss. If you are beaten by ParaSwag and complain of the 'lack of skill of the opponent', well bad news, you have bad skill at building teams if you are completely stopped by that one strategy. So no ban at all for swagblabla or whatever you wanna call it.

 

[Petrico94]

I'm not ok with that. People have managed over the past metas to counter other haxers like Flinchirachi or ParaFlinch Togekiss. If you are beaten by ParaSwag and complain of the 'lack of skill of the opponent', well bad news, you have bad skill at building teams if you are completely stopped by that one strategy. So no ban at all for swagblabla or whatever you wanna call it.

Well sorry I didn't consider the potential of having a Numel on my OU team

 

[Suisho]

This is such a shitty argument that completely ignore precedent set by Evasion and OHKO clause, are you saying that evasion moves are okay cause, "MUH AERIAL ACE," or OHKO is okay cause "MUH STURDY?" This just completely ignores the big picture about the competitiveness of the meta game and frankly shows little knowledge of how bans like these have worked in the past.

Ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments. Lovely.

You don't have to like it. The facts are the facts. I recommend you check out for yourself the archived discussions about whether or not to ban Stealth Rock back in 2007. The staff's position -- the same staff that came up with the OHKO and Evasion Clauses long before Stealth Rock was even up for debate -- was that there is a difference between things which are uncompetitive (e.g. Mega Mewtwo Y in OU) and things which are competitive but require people to change their habits (e.g. Stealth Rock). We should ban things which are uncompetitive, but we must not ban things which are competitive yet force people outside their comfort zone.

You clearly believe that Parafusion Pranksters are uncompetitive. And I have to stress that I'm not exactly a fan of them myself. But I disagree with you that they are uncompetitive. At most, they are a gimmick team: and like all gimmick teams, they are highly effective against the ill-prepared but crumple before those that have taken the necessary precautions. This site's policy has never been "BAN ALL GIMMICKS!" What it has been is to ban any gimmick which was uncompetitive. So you see Moody banned but not the combination of Truant Entrainment Durant + Shadow Tag Chandelure (early Gen 5 DW OU). You see putting more than one Pokémon at a time to sleep banned but not F.E.A.R. Pokémon. If a "gimmick" ensures its user victory even against well-prepared teams or is too centralizing to prepare for (emphasis: too), then it's hardly a gimmick and is likely to get banned. If a gimmick is worthless before well-prepared teams and if becoming well-prepared necessitates you need only drop one of your six Pokémon or drop one of your twenty-four moves for something new, then it is what it is: a gimmick. And one that's not going to be banned if past precedent is any indication.

Anyway, banning Swagger + Prankster is far too crude and far too extreme a solution. It would be better to instate a Prankster clause that limits the number of Pranksters you can have on one team. People who aren't abusing Prankster's potential are already running one or no Pranksters. It's only the problem players who are running six Pranksters that we're worried about here. With a limitation of only one or two Pranksters per team, you can allow people who like Liepard or similar Pokémon to continue to enjoy their Prankster while at the same time giving the opponent a fair chance at overcoming the Prankster and winning.

 

[Mowtom]

Again...WHY ARE PEOPLE COMPARING THIS TO SLEEP POWDER?????????????????????

There was a ban that involved Sleep Powder, so please don't say, "Well Sleep Powder is allowed so SwagPlay should be also." It makes no sense.

 

[Tesung]

The reason to ban it swagplay isn't that it has no counters, it does to an extent at least. The reson is be uses it is sn unviable strateg. A good player would never use it because it can not win consistently. So since I like to prepare my team for good players, not ladder trash, I don't prepare for it. However, it makes laddering consistently unpleasant when u randomly lose to a coin flip. Ban swagger, it has no competitive use

 

[slayer3000]

Well, the only Pokemon I've ever heard of running this are Murkrow and Liepard, even though there are others. SwagPlay is good for trolling but is unreliable, and can be countered. Plus, most Pokemon who can run this set don't have any other uses except for Klefki. Murkrow would've been NFE/LC if it weren't for SwagPlay getting it into NU in Gen 5.

 

[SansNickel]

Swagplay isn't broken; it's annoying but it's counterable.
The trickier teams are the ones with 2-3 prankster swagplay users + team support (ditto, hazards, whatnot)

Sure, you can call it a legitimate strategy, but it's just not fun. I want to enjoy this game, not switch between chansey and rotom-w every turn for 200 turns to stall out swagger + twave + foul play.

Confusion moves in general are just annoying (again, not broken). Sure, you can switch out, but that means you lose a turn + hazard damage. If you don't switch out, you have a 50/50 chance of losing a turn + confusion damage.

The main point of concern I want to bring is that confusion doesn't do anything practical other than make your opponent not do anything. Which, some may argue, is very practical, but it really doesn't contribute to a win condition of sorts. So really, I believe it should be banned simply for being uncompetitive.

Ban non-damaging confusion-inducing moves.

 

[Wariomanp]

I'm in favor of not banning it. There are a few things that you can do to prevent it like taunt, safeguard, misty terrrain, magic bounce and using a lum berry on a pokemon to get the boost and power and knock it out in one hit could work. Sure the strategy is annoying and a pain to deal with but it isn't broken and impossible to overcome.

 

[Dovahhkiin64]

Why not just limit the pokemon with the ability prankster to 1 per team?

 

[Donkatron]

So how exactly does the prankster/swagger abuser work around magic bounce? They paralyze/confuse themselves, then the magic bouncer gets a free turn if they switch.

 

[Haru Piro]

You clearly believe that Parafusion Pranksters are uncompetitive. And I have to stress that I'm not exactly a fan of them myself. But I disagree with you that they are uncompetitive. At most, they are a gimmick team: and like all gimmick teams, they are highly effective against the ill-prepared but crumple before those that have taken the necessary precautions. This site's policy has never been "BAN ALL GIMMICKS!" What it has been is to ban any gimmick which was uncompetitive. So you see Moody banned but not the combination of Truant Entrainment Durant + Shadow Tag Chandelure (early Gen 5 DW OU). You see putting more than one Pokémon at a time to sleep banned but not F.E.A.R. Pokémon. If a "gimmick" ensures its user victory even against well-prepared teams or is too centralizing to prepare for (emphasis: too), then it's hardly a gimmick and is likely to get banned. If a gimmick is worthless before well-prepared teams and if becoming well-prepared necessitates you need only drop one of your six Pokémon or drop one of your twenty-four moves for something new, then it is what it is: a gimmick. And one that's not going to be banned if past precedent is any indication.

Because F.E.A.R. can be countered by any standard team with a bit of prediction, and Truant gives free turns for BOTH players (a simple switch is enough).

One Swagplay per team can be a good idea, but, why we need swagplay?

So how exactly does the prankster/swagger abuser work around magic bounce? They paralyze/confuse themselves, then the magic bouncer gets a free turn if they switch.

Substitute.
And Deoxys-S/D are weak to Foul Play.

 

[Donkatron]

Substitute. And Deoxys-S/D are weak to Foul Play.

I'm talking more about the Reuniclus calcs.

0- Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Reuniclus: 92-110 (21.6 - 25.9%) -- 3.1% chance to 4HKO

So on the switch, foul play will do very little, and barely enough to break a sub. It seems like it can be enough of a check with recover as well. What's the defense that Reuniclus isn't enough of a check?

 

[v-mon]

Well sorry I didn't consider the potential of having a Numel on my OU team

How about having a cleric on your team? Rotom-W, Excadrill, Gliscor...there's plenty of options to counter paraswag.

 

[KztxL7]

Prankster + Swagger needs to be banned. Not limit it to 1 per team or 1 each. Just ban the combination of moves on a moveset.

It is not because whether or not it is a viable strategy.
It is not because whether or not it has counters.

Its because it turns the healthy competitive field in which Smogon strives for into a mockery. It removes the players' ability to play essentially by forcibly inducing luck onto the opposing player in which the negative outcome is way to high of a chance.

This is not like Hydro Pump, Thunder, Fire Blast, Focus Blast, Sleep Powder, etc in which players choose the lower accuracy moves themselves, self-induced luck, for the greater reward.

This is not like moves such as Ice Beam, Fire Blast, Thunder Bolt, Poison Jab, etc in which there is a self-ingrained low percent chance of an additional effect.

If one had to compare it to anything it would be Paraflinching which is not nearly as bad as Prankster + Swagger? Why? There are really only 3 viable users of Paraflinching called Shaymin-S, Togekiss, and Jirachi. They're very scarce in comparison to Prankster + Swagger users. As it is now, for every tier you go down you lose 1 Paraflincher and not only that but each one as enough counters especially because the strategy lacks priority, which has become big this Generation (as well as speed issues).

Being able to force your opponent into a 50/50 situation each time before they can move is just ridiculous. No one wants to play against it. It is in the same vein as Double Team.

 

[Liarliarpantsonfire]

How about having a cleric on your team? Rotom-W, Excadrill, Gliscor...there's plenty of options to counter paraswag.

Those are not even remotely counters to Swagger :\ They're immune to paralysis and that's it. In the end you're still flipping coins because of Swagger.

 

[Wariomanp]

Why not just limit the pokemon with the ability prankster to 1 per team?

hmm....that isn't a bad idea.

 

[Leader Fox]

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-91380650

..... Do I need to say more well my Purrloin basically won me the game....

 

[rileydelete]

First off, I think a confusion clause is ridiculous. There are several moves that create debilitating/annoying side effects, which are similar to confusion. Attraction, for example, does not do damage, but it also activates 50% of the time and is luck based. The problem with facing/using these moves is how luck based they are. If you run confuse ray or swagger, you will lose 50% of the time. Such unreliability makes moves like Confuse Ray very gimmicky, at least in my opinion.

That being said, the odds can be stacked in a persons favor if you stack these pseudo-status moves or throw on paralysis and things like substitute and flinch causing moves. As it stands, Thunder Wave + Swagger + Substitute creates a very hard situation for non ground types/ Pokemon immune to confusion. Really, with each one of these moves deployed successfully, a player stacks the odds into their favor.

Now, this would be fine if not for the fact that the success of this strategy is always based on odds/ luck. In many ways, this combo of moves reminds me of the ability Moody. Moody makes games uncompetitive because it either backfires, or allows you to destroy teams, just like TWave, Swagger, and Substitute. The main abusers of this combo are Liepard and Klefki, and while Liepard is actually frail, Kelfki's typing not only gives it impressive bulk, but also lets it abuse STAB Iron head for even more odds stacking. Foul Play even adds reasonable attacking pressure when used with Swagger, making Klefki in particular, extremely hard to beat. Prankster in particular makes it almost impossible to outrun these Pokemon.

I raise my objection to this uncompetitive odds-stacking, and ask for Swagger to be banned in conjunction with Prankster. Thunder Wave is one thing, and Confusion is another. Stacking them with other moves which raise the chance of a Pokemon not moving a seriously hard to win against strategy. It doesn't matter how well your team is built and how well you play. Like Moody, all it takes is a few unlucky turns, and you've got a Pokemon who can be outright impossible to stop.

 

[Toljik]

Those are not even remotely counters to Swagger :\ They're immune to paralysis and that's it. In the end you're still flipping coins because of Swagger.

Rotom-W also takes little from confusion and Foul Play unless it's at +6 (or there's a crit), and Gliscor can handle it thanks to its high Defense and Poison Heal.

 

[Haru Piro]

How about having a cleric on your team? Rotom-W, Excadrill, Gliscor...there's plenty of options to counter paraswag.

Cleric= 8 PP VS 4 ParaFuse

+2 0 Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Excadrill: 439-517 (103.5 - 121.9%) -- guaranteed OHKO
Gliscor need luck one or two time, Luck is better than skill?
+2 0 Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 184+ Def Gliscor: 127-150 (35.8 - 42.3%) -- 93% chance to 3HKO after Stealth Rock and Poison Heal

Rotom-W=

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-91380650

..... Do I need to say more well my Purrloin basically won me the game....

The critical hit doesnt matter, 2HKO anyway.

 

[Nix_Hex]

So on the switch, foul play will do very little, and barely enough to break a sub. It seems like it can be enough of a check with recover as well. What's the defense that Reuniclus isn't enough of a check?

Taunt to not let it sub or recover in the first place. Swagger to make it waste time firing off weak attacks (or doing nothing) or whatever the hell a 252/252+ Reuniclus does these days. Switch to something that can take it out or pursuit it. Using Reuniclus to "counter" swagplay is just a waste of time. Kinda like swagplay itself!

How about having a cleric on your team? Rotom-W, Excadrill, Gliscor...there's plenty of options to counter paraswag.

A swaggered Excadrill is potentially a very unhappy one. Recoil and the chance not to hurt your opponent is really painful. OR if you get lucky, hit something or the confusion ends you've got a very powerful Excadrill on your side. The match is a coinflip and requires no skill on either of your parts. The swagplay user is banking on Excadrill hitting itself and you are banking on getting a break from confusion for a bit.

By the way, this thread is going around in circles faster than the Mega Kanga thread. You remember what happened to that, right? Supply some actual reasoning or risk your post getting deleted and having this restarted in PR where you can't post.

Ban this horrible strategy. I'm not going to propose a way to ban it (like one prankster per team or whatever) but I'll let the OU council convene on that.

 

[Toljik]

People in favor of banning: Which ban in the OP do you want to happen? The first one (Swagger), the second one (Swagger + Prankster), or the third one (banning Liepard and Klefki to Ubers)?

Keep in mind that other mods have already said banning confusion moves entirely won't happen.