I think we should still allow 4-5 Baton Passers per team. If we are trying to nerf Baton Pass and not just outright kill its viability, then limiting to 4-5 users does the job.
-
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.
Baton Pass - its role in the metagame and possible solutions to nerf full Baton Pass chains
- Thread starter haunter
- Start date
- Status
The problem is that we haven't yet come to a consensus on whether we want bp teams to keep existing or not, and the type of ban depends on that consensus.
The goal of a potential suspect test would be to make the full Baton Pass chain archetype manageable, in a way where teams should not be forced to carry gimmick/obscure counters in order to not lose to it already in the team preview phase.
When, earlier today, I asked you to elaborate on the proposal of limiting a N number of Baton Pass Pokémon on the same team, I was looking for concrete examples of how a team of, let's say, 4 baton passers would work. In other words, what Pokémon are absolutely necessary for a full Baton Pass team to be effective?
When, earlier today, I asked you to elaborate on the proposal of limiting a N number of Baton Pass Pokémon on the same team, I was looking for concrete examples of how a team of, let's say, 4 baton passers would work. In other words, what Pokémon are absolutely necessary for a full Baton Pass team to be effective?
This is something that people have disagreed with for some past 20 pages or so. If you're going to assert that, refute what people have been saying. Same for Mega Banette and other counters, they haven't been ignored.
This may be true, but when you're talking about banning anything, people will be disenfranchised and leave either way:
"I don't want to play in a metagame where MegaGar is around"
"I don't want to play in a metagame where MegaGar is banned"
It can go either way. And honestly baton pass is common and viable enough at the top of the ladder that not nerfing baton pass will basically say to competitive players: Yea, Smogon as a community approves this strategy that we don't consider cheap and we approve its usage in tournaments de jure. Have fun with that metagame. SPL finals with same baton pass team vs other same baton pass team? "Oh wow, Player A won by critting Player B!" or "Wow, Player A won that 50/50 in the lead matchup!" I'd go back to watching/playing BW with constant rain. I don't know about others, but my intuition is that more people would leave if baton pass is considered legitimate than if long baton pass chains are banned.
Last edited:
Well...
That's the first post of this thread. We're discussing possible ways to nerf the effectiveness of Baton Pass if that's even necessary, definitely not outright remove it. We're 34 pages further now, I'd expect this would be clear to everyone by now ._.
Personally, I think an Ingrain+Baton Pass, Stored Power+ Baton Pass and a Magic Bounce + Baton Pass is the best ban. This prevents roar from bouncing/not working (outside of Mr. Mime, so there is still a stop beyond MB Roar), WW goes free so you'd need something for flying types/ww in the meta, taunt outside of MB would be blockable only by mime and does not bounce. Stored power, the unlimited boost move that can become more powerful than any other move in the meta, should not be allowed to be used on an active part of the chain... Passing into a SP user is still possible in this. In fact, passing into Espeon is not banned at all by this, but once into espeon, it is stuck from getting back out.
Can someone explain why banning protect plus speed boost is or isn't a good idea? I don't mean to sound pushy, I legitimately want to know. Speed boost is cheap, I'll concede that, and I didn't come here just to argue. I've mentioned it a couple times and It's gone completely untouched by everyone, and I really would like to know if this could possibly be the middle ground we're looking for. All it does is stop that automatic speed boost.
Because that will give Yanmega and Sharpedo a tougher time and those have nothing to do with baton pass.
Because there's nothing actually wrong with Protect + Speed Boost on its own. In fact, it's used for Pokemon such as cleaner LO Scolipede, Sharpedo, and Yanmega (in lower tiers) to nab the Speed Boost they need to start working. You kill the viability of these Pokemon by banning Protect + Speed Boost. It's really not a ban related to Baton Pass either; even if we did like Protect + Speed Boost + Baton Pass, we're just getting rid of a fully legitimate strategy in quick Speed passing, further harming the viability of Scolipede in particular.
I still don't think it's banworthy, but it's becoming increasingly clear that something's going to happen, so might as well start making arguments for the type of ban.
4 passers is the bare minimum for a chain to reasonably succeed. Scolipede, Vaporeon, Sylveon, and Espeon provide the four essentials: Speed, Defense, Special Defense, and Magic Bounce. The other possibilities are niche counters. Smeargle has Spore and Ingrain for extra security against phazers, Mr. Mime has Soundproof for the uncommon Perish Song, and Zapdos and Gliscor work as utility checks to flyspam teams. I can see chains of 4 being able to succeed albeit with somewhat reduced potency, with a MUCH heavier list of potential checks and counters, but with 3 that would not be nearly as much of the case. Teams of 4 baton passers would be very notably weaker to Flying spam, Roar users, and any strong persistent attacker, due to the lack of two additional teammates you can toss in front of the opponent in order to keep the members healthy. In addition, a limit of 3 Baton Pass users would also be pretty unrestrictive in terms of using Baton Pass on teams that aren't full chains. I don't really see it happening often, but you never know when some weirdo wants to get on the ladder with all of Smeargle, Huntail, and Gorebyss.
Restrict to 3 BP users if you want the strategy gone, 4 for more mild nerf that will significantly increase the pool of checks and counters.
4 passers is the bare minimum for a chain to reasonably succeed. Scolipede, Vaporeon, Sylveon, and Espeon provide the four essentials: Speed, Defense, Special Defense, and Magic Bounce. The other possibilities are niche counters. Smeargle has Spore and Ingrain for extra security against phazers, Mr. Mime has Soundproof for the uncommon Perish Song, and Zapdos and Gliscor work as utility checks to flyspam teams. I can see chains of 4 being able to succeed albeit with somewhat reduced potency, with a MUCH heavier list of potential checks and counters, but with 3 that would not be nearly as much of the case. Teams of 4 baton passers would be very notably weaker to Flying spam, Roar users, and any strong persistent attacker, due to the lack of two additional teammates you can toss in front of the opponent in order to keep the members healthy. In addition, a limit of 3 Baton Pass users would also be pretty unrestrictive in terms of using Baton Pass on teams that aren't full chains. I don't really see it happening often, but you never know when some weirdo wants to get on the ladder with all of Smeargle, Huntail, and Gorebyss.
Restrict to 3 BP users if you want the strategy gone, 4 for more mild nerf that will significantly increase the pool of checks and counters.
Last edited:
Thank you. It was buried a couple times, and I had thought of those pokes, just wanted to confirm.
And this slope seems to be getting increasingly slippery and subjective as the posts pile up. And those kinds are impossible to argue.
To whoever out was that took the time to reply earlier, thank you for a polite and well thought out post. I absolutely see where the pro ban argument comes from. But this strategy is almost balanced. Whether that balance will come from creative team building or a hasty nerf, I don't know.
It seems like golf. Anyone can take 100 strokes while playing a course and they are going to hit some good shots. But to hit good shots every time, it still takes skill and practice. The difference is the initial curve isn't as high as with other teams. Quite honestly, I think this is a great opportunity to really capitalize on the ladders creativity. See what comes of it. Again, this is easier said than done. I'd like to see some research done outside of this site as to: 1) Whether the majority of people that play think that it is as big a problem as the folks here do, and 2) what are some counters to this that we just haven't thought up yet? There are probably loads of things people are using to stop this and they probably for in well on a team.
And this slope seems to be getting increasingly slippery and subjective as the posts pile up. And those kinds are impossible to argue.
To whoever out was that took the time to reply earlier, thank you for a polite and well thought out post. I absolutely see where the pro ban argument comes from. But this strategy is almost balanced. Whether that balance will come from creative team building or a hasty nerf, I don't know.
It seems like golf. Anyone can take 100 strokes while playing a course and they are going to hit some good shots. But to hit good shots every time, it still takes skill and practice. The difference is the initial curve isn't as high as with other teams. Quite honestly, I think this is a great opportunity to really capitalize on the ladders creativity. See what comes of it. Again, this is easier said than done. I'd like to see some research done outside of this site as to: 1) Whether the majority of people that play think that it is as big a problem as the folks here do, and 2) what are some counters to this that we just haven't thought up yet? There are probably loads of things people are using to stop this and they probably for in well on a team.
As someone who is new to competitive play and has no experience in playing either with or against BP teams, let me ask one question that to me seems like the most fundamental one for the discussion at hand. Do we want BP in the metagame or not?
Of course one could simply play counters, but if only 5% of players use BP and you win those 5% of your matchups with your counter (assuming there is one hard counter, that is) you'll probably lose most of the other 95% since it's basically a 5v6 from the jump.
Now, what interests me in competitive Pokémon are things like: Mind games, matchups (that includes improving individual matchups by running unconventionals sets etc) and predictions, all of which are a constantly changing process in individual games as well as in the metagame itself. It's what makes the game interesting, at least to me. Like I said, I'm fairly new, so correct me if y'all feel different.
From what I gathered, BP tries to basically ignore ALL of that. It doesn't particularly care about team or individual matchups, the opposing player or the metagame environment. It tries to execute the exact same strategy the exact same way using the exact same team every game, deviating from it only if it is absolutely necessary. In my personal opinion, such a strategy is non-vital to the game and I'd have no problems with it being removed completely.
As I said, I'm neither a butthurt player who keeps losing against BP nor am I a player who uses it himself, I'm just trying to wrap my head around what it does or tries to do in a given game. From what I gathered, BP tries to do the exact opposite of what makes competitive Pokémon interesting (beating individual matchups, predicting the opponent, tweaking teams). If a more seasoned BP player disagrees, please correct me here since I'm completely going from what I read itt. I think it's a really interesting strategy and concept, but other than that, I don't see the point of it being used in competitive play.
Now, most of the arguments in this thread I read so far revolved around the question of what combination of moves or mons or how many of them should be banned, but I think the question that needs to be solved first is whether BP is "wanted" in the metagame.
If yes, a slight nerf should do the trick, if even that. If not, limiting BP users to 2 or 3 should suffice. It keeps QuickPassing alive, allows for BP to serve as a pseudo-VoltTurn while still destroying full BP teams.
I'd love for pro/con-BP players to make their points, since most of what I read in here are discussions about whether or not it is possible to counter BP, but that's beside the point to me.
TL;DR:
Baton Pass players, why should full BP teams be playable? Where's the fun in using them?
Non-BP players/advocates of a BP ban/nerf: Why should BP not be playable? Where's the fun in playing against them/is there fun in outplaying/countering them?
Of course one could simply play counters, but if only 5% of players use BP and you win those 5% of your matchups with your counter (assuming there is one hard counter, that is) you'll probably lose most of the other 95% since it's basically a 5v6 from the jump.
Now, what interests me in competitive Pokémon are things like: Mind games, matchups (that includes improving individual matchups by running unconventionals sets etc) and predictions, all of which are a constantly changing process in individual games as well as in the metagame itself. It's what makes the game interesting, at least to me. Like I said, I'm fairly new, so correct me if y'all feel different.
From what I gathered, BP tries to basically ignore ALL of that. It doesn't particularly care about team or individual matchups, the opposing player or the metagame environment. It tries to execute the exact same strategy the exact same way using the exact same team every game, deviating from it only if it is absolutely necessary. In my personal opinion, such a strategy is non-vital to the game and I'd have no problems with it being removed completely.
As I said, I'm neither a butthurt player who keeps losing against BP nor am I a player who uses it himself, I'm just trying to wrap my head around what it does or tries to do in a given game. From what I gathered, BP tries to do the exact opposite of what makes competitive Pokémon interesting (beating individual matchups, predicting the opponent, tweaking teams). If a more seasoned BP player disagrees, please correct me here since I'm completely going from what I read itt. I think it's a really interesting strategy and concept, but other than that, I don't see the point of it being used in competitive play.
Now, most of the arguments in this thread I read so far revolved around the question of what combination of moves or mons or how many of them should be banned, but I think the question that needs to be solved first is whether BP is "wanted" in the metagame.
If yes, a slight nerf should do the trick, if even that. If not, limiting BP users to 2 or 3 should suffice. It keeps QuickPassing alive, allows for BP to serve as a pseudo-VoltTurn while still destroying full BP teams.
I'd love for pro/con-BP players to make their points, since most of what I read in here are discussions about whether or not it is possible to counter BP, but that's beside the point to me.
TL;DR:
Baton Pass players, why should full BP teams be playable? Where's the fun in using them?
Non-BP players/advocates of a BP ban/nerf: Why should BP not be playable? Where's the fun in playing against them/is there fun in outplaying/countering them?
The post right above yours shows it's not. Quite a lot of people are approaching this problem with the understanding that baton pass teams must cease to exist, and are discussing ways to make it happen. Other people want them to keep exxisting, but think they're overpwered and need to be nerfed. And others like me, think bp is fine and nothing should change.
That is a lack of consensus that is preventing us from deciding what type of nerf is better, since different nerfS would be ideal for different goals.
So I decided to go try out a 4-mon Baton Pass team on a trashed alt and played some battles. A few replays:
Replay 1 (win vs Fly spam HO)
Replay 2 (win vs Fly spam offense)
Replay 3 (win vs Deo-D offense with Mega Manectric and Keldeo)
I found when battling with 4-mon BP, I pretty much had everything I needed from before. It definitely didn't feel like a disadvantage to play with the 4-mon core + 2 random crap basically for fodder if I needed to. I threw on a Mega Aerodactyl because it basically solos all the stupid Fly spam teams that threaten especially limited BP, and a random ass Kyurem-B. Team still functioned in a ridiculous manner. I haven't tested this out yet, but I actually think this could work sans Vaporeon (I wasn't using it very much). 2-mon cap IMO, 3 is the bare minimum. 4 is still broken.
Replay 1 (win vs Fly spam HO)
Replay 2 (win vs Fly spam offense)
Replay 3 (win vs Deo-D offense with Mega Manectric and Keldeo)
I found when battling with 4-mon BP, I pretty much had everything I needed from before. It definitely didn't feel like a disadvantage to play with the 4-mon core + 2 random crap basically for fodder if I needed to. I threw on a Mega Aerodactyl because it basically solos all the stupid Fly spam teams that threaten especially limited BP, and a random ass Kyurem-B. Team still functioned in a ridiculous manner. I haven't tested this out yet, but I actually think this could work sans Vaporeon (I wasn't using it very much). 2-mon cap IMO, 3 is the bare minimum. 4 is still broken.
For me, the fun is that it's an uphill battle right from turn one. My team is actually unlike most of the ones being argued here. I don't have Scolipede, I don't have Mime, I don's have Zapdos, I don't even have Smeargle. I have to use Jolteon to manually boost speed and then hope she lives long enough to get to Vaporeon. Early game priority kinda jacks me up. My planned end game sweeper isn't even said to be remotely viable in OU. Basically all the odds are stacked against me from turn one, and it's up to me to know what my biggest weaknesses are and how to beat them. If Jolteon dies without passing an agility, I have a bunch of slow mons that are mostly outsped by everything. Vaporeon goes and the team is pretty freakin frail and easily dispatched by spamming Bullet Punch, Mach Punch, and Aqua Jet. Espeon goes and suddenly hazards and phazing roam free. After those three, are you people really gonna tell me you're afraid of Sylveon? Umbreon? Flareon? Yeah I didn't think so. I think most of you can say that a team like this isn't even on your radars, yet it's getting killed in the crossfire cause of things I don't even run.
You did a Drizzle/Swift Swim ban before, yes? Why not Speed Boost/Magic Bounce/Absolite then? It's clear enough the biggest problem is that Scolipede racks up speed and defense at the same time and then passes to espeon/mega absol to block hazards and status (which btw requires prediction and those things come from literally everywhere) Without those two abilities together, the teams have to manually boost speed, or forego it altogether, or they have to give up their precious magic bounce and be vulnerable to taunting, phazing, hazards, and STICKY WEB (which destroys BP chains). Or they have to spend time defogging, and since the defoggers they have are very predictable, you can send in your beloved Bisharp and go to work on that (incidentally, my peeps hate the DeoSharp core infinitely more than they hate my BP team). I think forcing them to manually do everything should be manageable enough, and if you lose to them then, you just messed up.
BTW, these are still last resort for me. Why not just let them be and allow some new amazing thing to surface and take the stage like you've been doing?
I agree with the second and the third. I have a feeling that BP teams are like fairy to existing teams being dragon/dark. However, they may be slightly overpowered, so they may have to be nerfed.
Have we decided if BP is actually broken or not? Because the way I see it, there are three ways it can be considered: 1) BP chains, in their current, strongest iteration (which is like Scolipede / Vaporeon / Sylveon / 2 of Mime / Smeargle / Zapdos / Something else) aren't broken or uncompetitive and should be allowed; 2) One or two specific pokemon (with traits, i.e speed boost / magic bounce included) make BP chains broken, and without those the strategy should be allowed; 3) BP chains are broken and uncompetitive and should be basically ruined as a playstyle. I'm leaning to either 2) or 3) right now, because of the transitive nature of countering BP chains. It's fully possible to counter BP chains, pretty much completely, with something like Haze Quagsire. However, If you aren't packing something like that, you're pretty much going to get boned by a BP chain team. And if you do bring your BP counter and your opponent isn't running BP, the nicheness of most counters means you're often playing 5 or 5.5 on 6, which is the kiss of death against a good player with a solid team. I'm not saying there's no way to win against a regular team if you pack a BP counter; that's retarded. However, you're often using an inferior pokemon / set to counter BP, which puts you at a disadvantage. I don't like the idea of taking away Scolipede or Espeon entirely, because they have uses outside of BP chain teams. In addition, a Speed Boost + Magic Bounce + BP ban might ruin a possible viable, competive strategy (speedpass to Espeon) that is fully counterable. So I think the best solution is to cap BP users at 2 per team. That allows for Smashpass / Pursuit escaping / Speedpassing, but prevents the whole uncompetive Rock Papper Scissors shit that happens with full BP chains. 2 instead of 3 because I cant think of a non-ridiculous team with 3 non-chained BP users.
I think what you meant to say it that with four members the strategy is still barely playable in a completely non-versatile form. After watching a number of replays and having read the pages of this thread, I have to say that I am wondering if a nerf to the strategy is even necessary. Furthermore as I explained before I can't quite understand why we'd render a strategy completely unplayable when an approach to reasonably weaken it has not even be attempted?
All in all a question that I hope to see answered is: why is a limiting the number of Pokémon on a team that can know the move Baton Pass a better choice than a ban on either Espeon or Scolipede, a complex ban that disallows Espeon and Scolipede/Speed Boost and Magic Bounce being used on the same team, or any other of the alternative options brought forward, that does not have the goal to whipe out an entire playstyle? Why is it that full defensive Baton Pass as a playstyle is not entitled to retaining playability by remaining in a more manageable form in the same way tactics like heavy offense, stall, or weather may lose members, but not their entire strategy?
I think what he actually meant was "4 member chains still fuck up any team that isn't packing a specific counter". He supported that by showing replays of a 4 member chain fucking up regular teams. I'm confident if someone battled his team with a Haze Quagsire or shit like that, his 4-member team would lose. so would a "stronger" six-member chain. His point is, limiting BP users to 4 isn't a nerf.
Why didn't we ban Thundurus, Klefki, Liepard, and Sableye instead of banning Swagger alone? Because those Pokemon aren't broken on themselves, and the only broken aspect of them was the priority SwagPlay that 100% depended on luck.
The same can be applied here, Scolipede and Espeon aren't broken on their own, and therefore shouldn't be banned. Even without Speed Boost and Magic Bounce, BP can work, really. Ingrain can prevent pHazing and speed can be boosted manually by a lot of viable Pokemon like Mew, who can also boost it's def and SpD with Barrier and Amnesia, respectively.
If complex bans can be avoided, they should. Limiting BP to 2-3 Pokemon in a team seems like the best solution, and it bans no individual Pokemon, and removes the broken aspect of BP.
I have to disagree with that comparison. We banned swagger because of its inherent uncompetitiveness. Banning klefki and others was considered, but was considered not the correct route because they weren't the root problem.
Baton Pass on the other hand, is not inherently anything but a gimmick. We don't ban gimmicks. Baton Pass requires a nerf because it has 2 things, a team member to render every would be counter (that is reasonable) mute, and scolipede to make the baton pass always outspeed the move. BP of itself isn't a problem
First of all it is pretty evident that full BP teams can totally roll over unprepared teams. After countless hours of discussion in the OU room at showdown it was pretty much a unanimous agreement that full BP teams are broken.While many decided to spam the room with comments how BP is broken and other laddering with BP to prove their point, many wanted to ban magic bounce+ BP mainly on Espeon as this would solve the whole issue by roaring and whirlwinding and even taunting the respective pokemon in the baton pass chain. Shoutout to Albacore for helping me test against full BP. After testing a bit i found out in certain situations if played well A taunting Thundurus and Unaware Calm Mind clefable can stop full baton pass to some extent but not fully.
An experienced BP player still smashed this core pretty well. While testing with reduced amount of baton pass pokemon, specifically 3 we found out it was the sweet spot it was not Broken at all. With Gen 6 introduced the new Fairy type which made the Baton Pass strategy a bit more viable.
I agree completely with not banning Scoliopede and Espeon as they are not broken themselves but the strategy they are a part of is.
Also here we come with the classic argument of a well experienced player vs. a relatively new one using the strategy. And even in the hand of a Novice player it can be devastating to face. Concluding according to me the step in the right direction would be REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF BATON PASS POKEMON TO 3 PER TEAM.
This according to me will dilute the situation to a more balanced and manageable playstyle.
An experienced BP player still smashed this core pretty well. While testing with reduced amount of baton pass pokemon, specifically 3 we found out it was the sweet spot it was not Broken at all. With Gen 6 introduced the new Fairy type which made the Baton Pass strategy a bit more viable.
I agree completely with not banning Scoliopede and Espeon as they are not broken themselves but the strategy they are a part of is.
Also here we come with the classic argument of a well experienced player vs. a relatively new one using the strategy. And even in the hand of a Novice player it can be devastating to face. Concluding according to me the step in the right direction would be REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF BATON PASS POKEMON TO 3 PER TEAM.
This according to me will dilute the situation to a more balanced and manageable playstyle.
So explain to me what's required to be broken. I've been arguing that scolipede and espeon ARE broken for the support they give.
Blaziken, Mega Gengar, and Genesect were all banned, at least partially, for elements not purely offensive (and certainly not defensive).
Blaziken obviously could, but the other two couldn't sweep teams or break unbeatable walls. They were banned for making situations that were uncompetitive (the momentum genesect gives, and clearing the way for a win the condition).
So, is it the lack of offensive element? Is it the fact that only this one specific team is made OP by it? Or do we just not understand support yet (because the second two bans took a lot of convincing to get the majority behind)?
Took me a while, but I finally got a stable internet connection, so I went to ladder a bit.
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-110411308
Here is a replay of Mega Gardevoir doing her magic: she trolls Scolipede with trace and proceeds to wreck everything on sight. My opponent had two possible answers to her. The first one is spore, which is easily predicted by switching into conkeldurr (and if my opponent didnt spore, I'd just keep attacking with conk to keep momentum or force them to use spore). The other one is Mr. Mime, which is countered by the fact that mr. mime is a terrible pokemon and pretty much everything can wear it down fast (also I got lucky with red card, but more on that later). After these two things are out of the equation, the bp team simply lacks enough bulk to stop my attackers.
Could I have lost? Sure, I could have failed on predicting that Sylveon switch (though it was a pretty obvious switch). I could had also gotten unlucky with red card and switched to a wrong mon, but that goes for my opponent too. My team is not failproff against baton pass. But as of this battle, it has a 8-0 win-loss rate against bp, so yeah, it probably works. And there isn't anything obscure here, the least mainstream mon is gardy herself, which has gotten OU usage in March and is ranked B+ in the viability thread.
Also note that trace ended up making little difference to the outcome of the match. That goes for most matches I have against bp. In the end, what matters is how hard you attack from turn 1. Don't let the bp team breathe, and they will eventually crumble under their limited bulk. There is a high number of pokemon in the tier who can do that, from ZardY to Volcarona. My choice was the Gardevoir/Thundurus/Aegislash core, and they work amazingly together. Not that I actually tried to teambuild against bp, I just made a bulky offense team like I always do and ended up with something that naturally shits on bp.
I'd like people to post more videos of offensive pokemon beating bp teams to help me prove my point. Let's bring some data to this thread instead of theorymoning, please.
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-110411308
Here is a replay of Mega Gardevoir doing her magic: she trolls Scolipede with trace and proceeds to wreck everything on sight. My opponent had two possible answers to her. The first one is spore, which is easily predicted by switching into conkeldurr (and if my opponent didnt spore, I'd just keep attacking with conk to keep momentum or force them to use spore). The other one is Mr. Mime, which is countered by the fact that mr. mime is a terrible pokemon and pretty much everything can wear it down fast (also I got lucky with red card, but more on that later). After these two things are out of the equation, the bp team simply lacks enough bulk to stop my attackers.
Could I have lost? Sure, I could have failed on predicting that Sylveon switch (though it was a pretty obvious switch). I could had also gotten unlucky with red card and switched to a wrong mon, but that goes for my opponent too. My team is not failproff against baton pass. But as of this battle, it has a 8-0 win-loss rate against bp, so yeah, it probably works. And there isn't anything obscure here, the least mainstream mon is gardy herself, which has gotten OU usage in March and is ranked B+ in the viability thread.
Also note that trace ended up making little difference to the outcome of the match. That goes for most matches I have against bp. In the end, what matters is how hard you attack from turn 1. Don't let the bp team breathe, and they will eventually crumble under their limited bulk. There is a high number of pokemon in the tier who can do that, from ZardY to Volcarona. My choice was the Gardevoir/Thundurus/Aegislash core, and they work amazingly together. Not that I actually tried to teambuild against bp, I just made a bulky offense team like I always do and ended up with something that naturally shits on bp.
I'd like people to post more videos of offensive pokemon beating bp teams to help me prove my point. Let's bring some data to this thread instead of theorymoning, please.
Last edited:
What I see is someone carefully playing around the Baton Pass core's counters with two team members that make it hard for them to switch in, in preperation of the Baton Pass core setting up: Black Kyurem and Mega-Aerodactyl fulfill the function of Zapdos to decent success.
What is shown is that the "core" of the team can still function by replacing the usual other Baton Pass users by Pokémon that can handle the counters to the team, which leads me to agree with you when you say that this "core" is the problem here.
With this we conclude that limiting the number of Baton Pass users to four per team is not much of a nerf, but this is not what was implied by the post I quoted, as it reads "4 is still broken". An agreement that Baton Pass teams as they are used now are indeed "broken" has not yet been reached (the arguments that try to prove this only serve to prove that full Baton Pass is too unconventional to be countered by standard means; althought I hold the opinion that this has been refuted), and as such I felt that the message would be better put differently.
Your argument is entirely correct, but there's one thing you seem to overlook: it was decided that SwagPlay was unfavourable to keep around any longer because it regards a strategy that lets games be decided by luck entirely and as a result, its members weren't banned, but the playstyle was; you fail to explain to me why full Baton Pass teams, their members not being overpowering by themselves, are considered broken, or at least unfabourable to keep around, and should be rid of - quite a hole in your reasoning unfortunately.
That's a lovely signature you have there by the way :3
- Status