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

[GuilherWolfang]

What strategies does that limit that aren't entirely hax based?

It seems the anti-ban crowd is more focused on freedom of choice than the actual metagame. We shouldn't limit player's options guys lets allow Evasion moves everyone will just have to run Shock Wave and Aerial Ace to compensate. We shouldn't limit player choice even if it's haxy for some reason.

The only compelling reason to keep Swagger has been for phasing.

Swagger is a confusion move...confusion os not worth a ban...it's there for 5 generations, and never done any harm. Like t-wave. The problem is everything together...

Ban the set together (prankster, foulplay, t-wave, substitute, swagger) and this strategy won't work anymore...the best chance of using this strategy will be replacing substitute for something else, and that means 50% chance of klefki probably dying.

 

[lucariomaster2]

I understand the argument that banning SwagPlay would further limit choices in terms of teambuilding, but that's not the reason I'm advocating a ban. The reason is that the strategy takes no skill at all to use, and turns the battle into a coin toss. If SwagPlay is used, neither player has control over who wins; it is completely left to the RNG. We banned evasion moves and OHKO moves for the same reason (rewarding luck instead of skill), but do you ever hear "noooo I can't run double team or sheer cold smogon has too many rules"? Hardly ever. And yet, people are saying that PranksterSwagPlay, which is in some ways more luck-based than Double Team, should stay, simply because people use it.

Wow, that turned into a bit of a rant. Basically, what I'm saying is that I understand why people want this to stay because of freedom of choice, but SwagPlay is a strategy that has got to go.

And besides, there are 718 Pokemon, (eventually) 5 tiers, and many different playstyles out there. The banning of SwagPlay really doesn't limit choices all that much.

 

[Poopfist]

Swagger is a confusion move...confusion os not worth a ban...it's there for 5 generations, and never done any harm. Like t-wave. The problem is everything together...

Ban the set together (prankster, foulplay, t-wave, substitute, swagger) and this strategy won't work anymore...the best chance of using this strategy will be replacing substitute for something else, and that means 50% chance of klefki probably dying.

Like I've said numerous times I'm in favor of a complex ban of Swagger in conjunction with Prankster, there's no point in making the ban even more complex by banning an entire 4 move set when Swagger is clearly the problem in the equation. Non Pranksters with Swagger is fine. At the same time though if Swagger is completely banned I won't bat an eye because imo it's not fun or competitve. But since I'm being realistic I'm in favor of the Prankster Swagger ban as it is the most realistic

 

[GuilherWolfang]

There's always going to be some sort of luck involved in Pokemon. Stacking the odds in your favor is okay as long as it's what you're doing to the other guy's pokemon, and not something to yours, like Double Team.

SwagPlay like parafusion is annoying at times, but definately not cheap. Some people are just pricks when it comes to the situation, because they do not know how to handle it, and this of course leads to very large problems to them.

One more time: BAN the whole set that makes one pokemon have all the support, offense, defense and speed that a full team is build to have.

 

[Wise Walrus]

There's always going to be some sort of luck involved in Pokemon. Stacking the odds in your favor is okay as long as it's what you're doing to the other guy's pokemon, and not something to yours, like Double Team.

SwagPlay like parafusion is annoying at times, but definately not cheap. Some people are just pricks when it comes to the situation, because they do not know how to handle it, and this of course leads to very large problems to them.

One more time: BAN the whole set that makes one pokemon have all the support, offense, defense and speed that a full team is build to have.

To be fair, swag play is basically a worse version of parafusion. I think you mean paraflinch, and paraflinch is a lot easier to counter than swagplay imo

 

[Poopfist]

There's always going to be some sort of luck involved in Pokemon. Stacking the odds in your favor is okay as long as it's what you're doing to the other guy's pokemon, and not something to yours, like Double Team.

SwagPlay like parafusion is annoying at times, but definately not cheap. Some people are just pricks when it comes to the situation, because they do not know how to handle it, and this of course leads to very large problems to them.

One more time: BAN the whole set that makes one pokemon have all the support, offense, defense and speed that a full team is build to have.

That justification really doesn't make a lot of sense. It's ok to hax towards your opponent but the opponent can't set up hax? At the end of the day Swagger and Evasion almost fill the same roll, leaving the game up to the RNG rather than making correct predictions.

 

[GuilherWolfang]

That justification really doesn't make a lot of sense. It's ok to hax towards your opponent but the opponent can't set up hax? At the end of the day Swagger and Evasion almost fill the same roll, leaving the game up to the RNG rather than making correct predictions.

fifth time i will explain this u.u

Using hax on yourself means that your opponent can't do nothing besides being FORCED to use something on his team when he builds it to stop you. something you can't react to is uncompetitive.
Using hax on opponent means he can partially control it and make use to his advantage(like predicting t-wave and switching on jolton for volt absorb or predicting confusion and changing to a defensive or special mon)

 

[Poopfist]

fifth time i will explain this u.u

Using hax on yourself means that your opponent can't do nothing besides being FORCED to use something on his team when he builds it to stop you. something you can't react to is uncompetitive.
Using hax on opponent means he can partially control it and make use to his advantage(like predicting t-wave and switching on jolton for volt absorb or predicting confusion and changing to a defensive or special mon)

You've said it multiple times but that doesn't mean the reasoning is valid, you can switch out to avoid confusion but if they're running a team of Swagplayers then they're just going to keep using Swagger so it really doesn't matter. It inherently puts the momentum on your opponents side so just like evasion moves you pretty much need to build something to not be Swagplayed to survive. Switching in a defensive mon doesn't really mean anything if after a couple of coin flips you've hit yourself multiple times. Further more if the swag player subs up on the switch (which they will) that defensive mon isn't doing shit besides wasting time. Once the 2 or 3 defensive mons are gone it's over. You can't expect a competitive player to run an all bulky team or a shitty Own Tempo mon on the off chance that their opponent likes Swagger with Prankster. There really is no justification for it in this current meta besides phasing, and even that's a weak justification to not ban Prankster and Swagger used together.

 

[pws72000]

sorry to interrupt this thrilling debate, but I have breaking news. I just had perhaps the best battle of my life, and I beat swagplay! I BEAT IT! I BEAT THAT FARKING TEAM! YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!!!! with no natural counters like noivern or cofagrigus or sylveon or imprison klefki! And it wasn't even a team of 6 swagplayers, it was the real deal with ditto, cleanup sweepers and everything!

http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-92068689
Cherish this moment smogonites, for the rng has given us glory.


p.s. but seriously, this strategy is broken beyond belief and requires not even half the prediction skill or practice of nearly any other teambuild. Smogon, plz nurf.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

GuilherWolfang
While setting up hax on your opponent is normally fine (such as sand attack not being banned), Prankster swagger kinda breaks the whole point of that because new opponents won't get a chance to attack you without risking hax. For that reason, citing the difference between double team and sand attack doesn't change the fact that your opponent has no control over being forced to deal with hax.

Oh, and Wise Walrus ,
With a 90% chance to be forced into a 50/50 situation, I'm of the opinion that Swagger + Prankster is ban worthy. Banning only the entire set is a little too complex anyway, and people would keep using Swagplay even without Twave

 

[Tomahawk]

Strange example for a counter-argument although that sounds ridiculous. My sentiments to both players, sounds like hell. If it was a tournament match then I can understand why it went that long but a ladder player who can swallow their pride will budget their time (hours) and a potential win vs. loss + tons of extra time to rack up wins. A one-off example like that wouldn't ever be brought up because anyone who petitions to ban stall would be laughed off the site. The potential to have several ladder matches where your opponent is brainlessly selecting swaggersubstitutethunderwavesubstitutesubstituteswaggerfoulplayfoulplay, even if you are NOT running a stall team or Mandibuzz or Clefable, is destroys a player's laddering experience.

I think you're missing my point: I don't think in any way that stall should be banned, I just noted that I wasn't sure what to think of your argument since to me it sounded like you suggested SwagPlay battles taking too much time was a reason to ban them. I suppose I misunderstood, but still I feel that this is not really a good argument as opposed to some other pro-ban arguments.

 

[Poopfist]

Just for fun a full SwagPlay team can use Swagger 144 times or 130 times depending on if the 6th member is ditto or not. So you would have to switch in and out 130-144 times to ensure you wouldn't be able to be Swaggered. What a balanced strategy.

 

[Ninja Charizard]

But I said i have the reason in 3 posts before lol
Want me to write it a forth time? Ok I'll write(you don't have to agree, just take it into consideration when awnsering). You can't react to evasion without luck OR without using something in your team just for this. And if you are forced to something it's not competitive. why? because the opponent used evasion on himself, YOU CAN'T CONTROL IT. In swagger case, when you send an obvious swagger pokemon the opponent can control who get confused and will use the best pokemon on his team to counter this...luck based with 50/50%? yes, but so is paralysis(also halts speed)... Swagger is not bad, and luck is an integral part of the game...a luck that you can't react(or is forced to use something on a team to counter it) like evasion is uncompetitive.

What swagger really do is shape the metagame to use more bulkier pokemons on a team, that won't be 1 or 2hko. I don't have a problem with it, the last gen OU was really offensive..this one can be more defensive with stall, confusion, paralysis, etc...it's ok.

LIKE I SAID THE PROBLEM IS THE WHOLE SET, THAT MAKES ONE POKEMON DO THE WORK THAT A FULL TEAM IS BUILD TO DO.

Paralysis is 25/75, not 50/50. That's a huge difference, people don't use paralysing moves for the chance of full paralysis, they do for the permanent speed reduction. The full paralysis is just a nice eventual bonus. Like freeze or critical hits.

The difference is that Swagger gives gives you an effect that happens very often, enough for you to be able to build a team around it. It can take over the match and turn it into a game of chance. And that's uncompetitive, because the entire metagames ceases to matter when the only thing important is whether the RNG gods will allow you to hit that Klefki who's spamming the same moves over and over. It takes control away from the players and gives it to chance, making the game less strategical.

Also banning the whole set will not do. It will make the sets less effective but won't solve the problem. Without these moves the Swagplay teams will win less often, but they will still be a problem to the metagame. Paralysis can be replaced by attract, or toxic to deal with walls, or recover to make the prankster last longer. Substitute is important but protect can also do the job and make the Prankster last longer. Foul Play is a very effective attack but it can be replaced by any other attack for a little less effectiveness. The problem is the confusion, and the Prankster ability that allows the confusion to become effective.

 

[Nix_Hex]

I think you're missing my point: I don't think in any way that stall should be banned, I just noted that I wasn't sure what to think of your argument since to me it sounded like you suggested SwagPlay battles taking too much time was a reason to ban them. I suppose I misunderstood, but still I feel that this is not really a good argument as opposed to some other pro-ban arguments.

Gotcha. However, I've made several arguments throughout this thread, so that argument was really only supplemental to the bigger argument at hand, which I address in my other posts in this thread.

edit: in fact, the point of that post was really about this:

• "can't make it to the top of the ladder" is not necessarily not op
• whether or not it's op is irrelevant because the strategy is uncompetitive.
• when your opponent loses to such a frustrating strategy, your shaky record doesn't matter.

 

[Toljik]

Paralysis is 25/75, not 50/50. That's a huge difference, people don't use paralysing moves for the chance of full paralysis, they do for the permanent speed reduction. The full paralysis is just a nice eventual bonus. Like freeze or critical hits.

That's not always true. I use Thunder Wave on my Porygon2 not just for the Speed reduction, but because full paralysis can give Porygon an extra chance to Recover and avoid a KO. Unless you interview a sample of Showdown players and ask them why they use Thunder Wave, you cannot say what people use it for.

 

[fenyxofshadows]

I would say, like any other broken set that is not widely distributed, ban the users if they are overpowered. In order of preference: Place Klefki and Thundurus-I for suspect tests, but leave it alone otherwise. Otherwise, leave it alone, or if you must complex ban the combo rather than the few abusers, ban Swagger + Foul Play. I'd rather not ban the annoyance moves themselves; Swagger is a decent phazing move, and there is precedence for many of the things that these abusers use on other users.

Remember, Blaze non-Mega Blaziken is not overpowered, and actually has several good UU sets. Yet it's still banned because SB Blaziken is a force that can HJK Arceus clear to next week. So, it's not a good argument that we want to keep a certain monster around because it has access to other sets.

 

[Toljik]

I would say, like any other broken set that is not widely distributed, ban the users if they are overpowered. In order of preference: Place Klefki and Thundurus-I for suspect tests, but leave it alone otherwise. Otherwise, leave it alone, or if you must complex ban the combo rather than the few abusers, ban Swagger + Foul Play. Swagger is a decent phazing move, and there is precedence for many of the things that these abusers use on other users.

Remember, Blaze non-Mega Blaziken is not overpowered, and actually has several good UU sets. Yet it's still banned because SB Blaziken is a force that can HJK Arceus clear to next week. So, it's not a good argument that we want to keep a certain monster around because it has access to other sets.

Thundurus-I is on thin ice as it is. It could make SwagPlay teams easier to deal with, but it could also make them harder because Thundurus-I is also the best counter to them.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

I would say, like any other broken set that is not widely distributed, ban the users if they are overpowered. In order of preference: Place Klefki and Thundurus-I for suspect tests, but leave it alone otherwise. Otherwise, leave it alone, or if you must complex ban the combo rather than the few abusers, ban Swagger + Foul Play. Swagger is a decent phazing move, and there is precedence for many of the things that these abusers use on other users.

Remember, Blaze non-Mega Blaziken is not overpowered, and actually has several good UU sets. Yet it's still banned because SB Blaziken is a force that can HJK Arceus clear to next week. So, it's not a good argument that we want to keep a certain monster around because it has access to other sets.

Normally your logic would make perfect sense, but this is a complex issue for many reasons, one of which is that multiple pokemon can run it and get pretty similar results. It's not the pokemon that are broken, it's the playing style. Sure you can cite SB Blaziken as evidence that we ban pokemon by their best set, but you can also point at drizzle + swift swim vs. Excadrill to show that we have to approach each subject individually. We could ban each individual abuser (while I'd miss Thundurus-I, you're right about how we ban pokemon, not what makes them ban worthy), but in this instance, I'd say the problem is with swagplay, not the abusers. We didn't ban speed boost partially because Ninjask wasn't broken, we didn't ban sand rush partially because stoutland wasn't broken, but swagplay as a whole is uncompetitive, so I'm for banning it specifically. I do see your reasoning though, so if we do decide to suspect the pokemon, I won't complain.

 

[atomicllamas]

I would say, like any other broken set that is not widely distributed, ban the users if they are overpowered. In order of preference: Place Klefki and Thundurus-I for suspect tests, but leave it alone otherwise. Otherwise, leave it alone, or if you must complex ban the combo rather than the few abusers, ban Swagger + Foul Play. I'd rather not ban the annoyance moves themselves; Swagger is a decent phazing move, and there is precedence for many of the things that these abusers use on other users.

Remember, Blaze non-Mega Blaziken is not overpowered, and actually has several good UU sets. Yet it's still banned because SB Blaziken is a force that can HJK Arceus clear to next week. So, it's not a good argument that we want to keep a certain monster around because it has access to other sets.

This is actually a slightly different case then Blaziken, due to the fact that we are considering banning something that is uncompetitive rather than (necessarily) broken. While it is policy to ban on the basis of a pokemon's best set, the argument isn't that this set is breaking these pokemon, the argument is actually that the moveset is making pokemon uncompetitive. A previous example of a ban that is similar to this is the Prankster + Assist Ban in BW NU, due to the fact that prankster + assist could be abused to get priority phazing moves and shuffle the opposing team through hazards until they were finished. The argument was, that it since both Liepard and Purrloin (yes Purrloin @_@) could pull this off, and the set was uncompetitive, rather than "broken", that the ban of Prankster Assist was justified over the ban of Liepard in this situation. I actually think this is clearly more uncompetitive than the prankster + assist ban (I actually voted ban Liepard, rather than prankster assist), due to the fact that unlike prankster assist, this actually takes no skill, and rather introduces luck into the game.

 

[fenyxofshadows]

Normally your logic would make perfect sense, but this is a complex issue for many reasons, one of which is that multiple pokemon can run it and get pretty similar results. It's not the pokemon that are broken, it's the playing style. Sure you can cite SB Blaziken as evidence that we ban pokemon by their best set, but you can also point at drizzle + swift swim vs. Excadrill with sand stream to show that we have to approach each subject individually. We could ban each individual abuser (while I'd miss Thundurus-I, you're right about how we ban pokemon, not what makes them ban worthy), but in this instance, I'd say the problem is with swagplay, not the abusers. We didn't ban speed boost partially because Ninjask wasn't broken, we didn't ban sand rush partially because stoutland wasn't broken, but swagplay as a whole is uncompetitive, so I'm for banning it specifically. I do see your reasoning though, so if we do decide to suspect the pokemon, I won't complain.

So, essentially the question now is whether or not it's the move set that is broken (judging by Liepard in Gen V, probably not on its own), or the new OU monsters in conjunction with the move set (Thundurus-I was Uber last gen, and Klefki has better defenses in exchange for natural attacking stats)

I will admit, the set is annoying, but it won't stop me from running a Klefki on my mono-Fairies.

 

[Liarliarpantsonfire]

Remember, Blaze non-Mega Blaziken is not overpowered, and actually has several good UU sets. Yet it's still banned because SB Blaziken is a force that can HJK Arceus clear to next week. So, it's not a good argument that we want to keep a certain monster around because it has access to other sets.

Blaziken was banned in itself because the only other alternative was a complex ban of Speed Boost Blaziken which is to be avoided at all costs if possible. Explain me why we should ban all Prankster users (because that's what you're trying to say) when we can ban a single uncompetitive move and allow all these pokemon to still be used in their respective tiers. If you really don't see what the better option is then you shouldn't be posting here.

 

[fenyxofshadows]

Blaziken was banned in itself because the only other alternative was a complex ban of Speed Boost Blaziken which is to be avoided at all costs if possible. Explain me why we should ban all Prankster users (because that's what you're trying to say) when we can ban a single uncompetitive move and allow all these pokemon to still be used in their respective tiers. If you really don't see what the better option is then you shouldn't be posting here.

I am not of the opinion that all Prankster users have to go. Is Wobbuffet broken because M-Gengar is? I am of the opinion that a couple of abusers (namely Klefki and Thundurus) are the broken components, and have the same broken support characteristics as M-Gengar; they set up free turns too easily and still manage to resist or overpower any actual checks

I doubt Swagcat will be doing anything without its partners in crime.

If you really don't see what the better option is then you shouldn't be posting here.

If you don't see room for discussion in opinions, you shouldn't be posting on a forum for discussion of opinions.

 

[Liarliarpantsonfire]

I am not of the opinion that all Prankster users have to go. Is Wobbuffet broken because M-Gengar is? I am of the opinion that a couple of abusers (namely Klefki and Thundurus) are the broken components, and have the same broken support characteristics as M-Gengar; they set up free turns too easily and still manage to resist or overpower any actual checks

I doubt Swagcat will be doing anything without its partners in crime.



If you don't see room for discussion in opinions, you shouldn't be posting on a forum for discussion of opinions.

Did you really just say Klefki is as broken as Mega Gengar?

.

 

[fenyxofshadows]

Did you really just say Klefki is as broken as Mega Gengar?

.

Yes. As a support monster, if it can run a set that allows it to eliminate any foe by fishing for free turns, outspeed any notable opponents, and overpower them through attrition, yes. If you're not going to respond to any other part of my posts, then you obviously agree with them.

Don't put words into my mouth by saying we should ban Murkrow when it's the fault of a couple of new abusers not the fault of the strategy that was around last generation.

 

[Kairyu_Gen1]

fenyxofshadows makes a good point, it was the introduction of Thundurus-I and Klefki that brought this annoying strategy to prominence, full OU teams whose whole strategy revolved around it only sprang up later. If we were to ban those 2, I'm more than willing to bet that swagplay teams would decrease and single abusers would almost cease to be a problem, but I don't think swagplay would go away entirely. We'd probably still have to deal with the occasional troll trying to ladder without bothering to come up with any actual strategies or teams besides "swagger, then Twave, then foul play until my opponent rage quits!"

I'm not quite sure I agree with Klefki being broken like MGengar was, but getting into an argument about that wouldn't be productive, so I'll leave well enough alone.