No Scald Ladder

Status
Not open for further replies.
If scald were to be suspected and banned, Im not sure how much this would affect the bulky water types, but im sure it would open up really gimmicky teams.
 
Last edited:
atomicllamas said:
Alright, I guess the weirdest thing to me is that UU is the meta game that decided to look into scald first, because, of all the meta games I've played, it is the easiest to fit a dedicated response to scald on any given team (maybe barring Suicune, but I'll get into that latter). There are a huge number of Pokemon in the UU meta game that absolutely don't care about switching into scald, and some number that even punish the scald user for using it too liberally. Meta relevant threats that fall into this category include Heracross (guts), Machamp (guts), Vaporeon (water absorb), Toxicroak (water absorb), Shaymin (grass-type, natural cure), Roserade (grass-type, natural cure), and Reuniclus (magic guard). That list includes things that benefit from or don't care about scald burns, and doesn't even account for Special attacking water resists (such as Hydreigon or Rotom-C) that while they don't appreciate the residual burn damage, they appreciate the chance to switch in and fire off nukes. Given the fact that there is such a diverse selection of Pokemon fitting on every play style from Stall to Hyper Offense (and that doesn't even include clerics that can fit on the bulkier playstyles), it is pretty clear, at least imo, that scald is not broken in UU.
Click to expand...

A lot of the Pokemon you listed, (Toxicroak, Machamp) might be great switch-ins to a Pokemon that runs Scald as a mono-attacking move, such as CroCune. However, Scald has a large variety of different users, and each of those users are capable of running a variety of different sets. So, while Toxicroak can freely switch into CroCune, it definitely cannot switch into Swampert. This is why Scald is much more difficult to prepare for than a move like Sacred Fire, which only one Pokemon in the entire tier can learn. And while Scald can make an appearance on dozens of potential sets, Entei has a grand total of 3 different sets, each with the same moves.

To illustrate my point, here are some of the mentioned Scald checks and corresponding Pokemon they can't switch into:
  • Heracross- Slowking OHKO's with psyshock. Mega Blastoise 2HKO's Heracross with dragon pulse, while guts Heracross cannot OHKO back unless it's both burned and wearing a choice band.
  • Machamp- Slowking OHKO's. Also, if it's assault vest (as opposed to Choice Band), Jellicent can beat Machamp by landing a burn and spamming recover as he slowly dies.
  • Vaporeon- It's pretty non-productive to discuss Vaporeon as an answer to Scald when it's one of the move's biggest perpetrators. Regardless, Vaporeon loses to CroCune as pressure will stall out Vaporeon's pp before Suicune's. Also, Vaporeon typically can't accomplish much if it switches into Tentacruel, as it just gives Tentacruel free turns to set up toxic spikes, rapid spin, etc.
  • Toxicroak- Dies to slowking. Dies to Swampert, Seismitoad, and Quagsire. Gets 2hko'd by Mega Blastoise's dragon pulse while failing to OHKO back, and thus can't switch into Mega Blastoise either.
  • Shaymin- Tentacruel almost always 2hko's with sludge bomb, while shaymin struggles to 2hko back. Grass is also a very easy weakness to cover due to all of its' resists.
  • Roserade- Slowking. Choice Band Swampert OHKO's the specially defensive set, while physically defensive Swampert does between 51-60%, forcing Roserade to recover pretty much every time it switches into an Earthquake. Mega Blastoise's ice beam does similar damage. Also struggles with Tentacruel sometimes depending on the set.
  • Reuniclus- This Pokemon can switch into most bulky waters safely, but if the bulky water in question is carrying a phazing move then Reuniclus can't really do anything. For instance, if it's a Vaporeon running roar it won't be able to set-up, and unboosted psychics can be easily recovered.
So, while these Pokemon are generally good answers to Scald, you can't just add them to your team and expect all your Scald problems to go away. And unless you want to carry two or more of the above listed Pokemon, the only real way to deal with Scald is to either A) run a cleric or B) accept the fact that one of your Pokemon has a strong chance of getting burned in every match. That might not sound like a big deal for a special attacker such as Hydreigion, but between burn damage and stealth rock alone a burned Hydreigon will lose a quarter of its health for the simple act of switching in. Add to that the damage taken from life orb recoil and resisted hits that it switches into and it gets worn down quickly. As a matter of fact, if a Hydreigon switches into say, Swampert's scald, gets burned, and stays in to fire off a Draco nuke, it can lose up to half of its health. Math:
  • Scald damage: 0 SpA Swampert Scald vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Hydreigon: 42-49 (12.9 - 15%) -- possible 6HKO after Stealth Rock
  • Stealth rock: 12.5%
  • Burn damage (two turns worth): 25%
  • Life orb recoil: 10%
  • Total (assuming minimum damage from scald): 60.4%, That's a hefty chunk of HP and thus shouldn't be considered a solution to Scald.
 
Last edited:
Nick420 said:
Well, in any case if scald were to be banned so would Entei (most likely).
Click to expand...

Ummm how would an increased prevalence of stronger water moves improve Entei? Enti isnt exactly mourning all the sweeps it has lost to scald burns
 
Shrug said:
Ummm how would an increased prevalence of stronger water moves improve Entei? Enti isnt exactly mourning all the sweeps it has lost to scald burns
Click to expand...
Sorry, i've forgotten the meta a lot. Probably a sign i should stay off smogon threads lol
 
UnicornDemon2 said:
A lot of the Pokemon you listed, (Toxicroak, Machamp) might be great switch-ins to a Pokemon that runs Scald as a mono-attacking move, such as CroCune. However, Scald has a large variety of different users, and each of those users are capable of running a variety of different sets. So, while Toxicroak can freely switch into CroCune, it definitely cannot switch into Swampert. This is why Scald is much more difficult to prepare for than a move like Sacred Fire, which only one Pokemon in the entire tier can learn. And while Scald can make an appearance on dozens of potential sets, Entei has a grand total of 3 different sets, each with the same moves.

To illustrate my point, here are some of the mentioned Scald checks and corresponding Pokemon they can't switch into:
  • Heracross- Slowking OHKO's with psyshock. Mega Blastoise 2HKO's Heracross with dragon pulse, while guts Heracross cannot OHKO back unless it's both burned and wearing a choice band.
  • Machamp- Slowking OHKO's. Also, if it's assault vest (as opposed to Choice Band), Jellicent can beat Machamp by landing a burn and spamming recover as he slowly dies.
  • Vaporeon- It's pretty non-productive to discuss Vaporeon as an answer to Scald when it's one of the move's biggest perpetrators. Regardless, Vaporeon loses to CroCune as pressure will stall out Vaporeon's pp before Suicune's. Also, Vaporeon typically can't accomplish much if it switches into Tentacruel, as it just gives Tentacruel free turns to set up toxic spikes, rapid spin, etc.
  • Toxicroak- Dies to slowking. Dies to Swampert, Seismitoad, and Quagsire. Gets 2hko'd by Mega Blastoise's dragon pulse while failing to OHKO back, and thus can't switch into Mega Blastoise either.
  • Shaymin- Tentacruel almost always 2hko's with sludge bomb, while shaymin struggles to 2hko back. Grass is also a very easy weakness to cover due to all of its' resists.
  • Roserade- Slowking. Choice Band Swampert OHKO's the specially defensive set, while physically defensive Swampert does between 51-60%, forcing Roserade to recover pretty much every time it switches into an Earthquake. Mega Blastoise's ice beam does similar damage. Also struggles with Tentacruel sometimes depending on the set.
  • Reuniclus- This Pokemon can switch into most bulky waters safely, but if the bulky water in question is carrying a phazing move then Reuniclus can't really do anything. For instance, if it's a Vaporeon running roar it won't be able to set-up, and unboosted psychics can be easily recovered.
So, while these Pokemon are generally good answers to Scald, you can't just add them to your team and expect all your Scald problems to go away. And unless you want to carry two or more of the above listed Pokemon, the only real way to deal with Scald is to either A) run a cleric or B) accept the fact that one of your Pokemon has a strong chance of getting burned in every match. That might not sound like a big deal for a special attacker such as Hydreigion, but between burn damage and stealth rock alone a burned Hydreigon will lose a quarter of its health for the simple act of switching in. Add to that the damage taken from life orb recoil and resisted hits that it switches into and it gets worn down quickly. As a matter of fact, if a Hydreigon switches into say, Swampert's scald, gets burned, and stays in to fire off a Draco nuke, it can lose up to half of its health. Math:
  • Scald damage: 0 SpA Swampert Scald vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Hydreigon: 42-49 (12.9 - 15%) -- possible 6HKO after Stealth Rock
  • Stealth rock: 12.5%
  • Burn damage (two turns worth): 25%
  • Life orb recoil: 10%
  • Total (assuming minimum damage from scald): 60.4%, That's a hefty chunk of HP and thus shouldn't be considered a solution to Scald.
Click to expand...

That's why trying to counter a move is stupid, but I think its pretty obvious that I (or a competent opponent) is not going to be switching a Toxicroak into a Swampert, maybe barring when Swampert is in KO range from an attack and you are predicting scald, and only if its a necessary risk. So that pretty much invalidates your entire list of situations, not that some of them weren't pretty ridiculous anyways (ie SpD Roserade vs CB Swampert, lol...). On top of that, the flaw with your second situation is that it assumes the worst scenario, not the best one as you imply, you are assuming 1) Scald burns (30% chance), 2) Rocks are up (this is standard in calcs I know, but you say minimum scald damage and then add shit like rocks as if the scald burn damage is from rocks) 3) ignore the fact that if Hydreigon has LO it can also run roost. If your point was that scald is broken, your post doesn't do a very good job making your point, if your point was Pokemon using the move scald can run other moves, no shit, lol. The thing is most people pushing for a ban have been saying scald isn't broken, its uncompetitive, which is a different argument and I addressed later in my post.
 
Shrug said:
No. Scald is in no way "too good". Scald is being evaluated because it has the ability to force gamebreaking luck in a way no other move does. In that sense, distribution does matter - if Lava Plume burns / not burns became sole difference in multiple high-leverage battles, then they would be looked at as well. Degree matters; Swagger was banned, but Confuse Ray is still allowed, due to the former's greater omnipresence as well as the difference in mechanics (I consider the +2 attack boost with Swagger comparable to the fact Scald gets super-effective damage on the sole type which cannot be burned). I don't like the arguments "you cant ban a move!" and "hax is part of pokemon!"; both are false. Moves have been banned, particularly when they cause gamebreaking luck. What makes Scald interesting is using it reflects a conscious decision on the part of the player to attempt to garner hax. Nearly all (all?) Pokemon with Scald get Surf, a move with similarly perfect accuracy and higher base power. There's no reason to use Scald over Surf aside from the chance to burn. Therefore, I think it's appropriate to view Scald as an inherently luck-based move - it's only value is found in the 30% burn chance. From that standpoint, the question needs to be: "Does Scald force an unreasonable number of game-deciding luck scenarios?" This factors in the entire spectrum of the move: which mons use it, which mons are unaffected by it, which (and how common are) situations would a Scald burn constitutes an undue factor of luck (that decides the outcome) in a UU game. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong btw but it just seems to me people are arguing over the validity of even looking at Scald, instead of examining / debating if the move itself is uncompetitive due to luck.
Click to expand...

The fact is, a lot of pokemon is based on luck. You say that scald is used for the burn chance. It is. Just like stone edge, fire blast, and focus blast are used, just to name a few, for their higher power. High jump kick, a move that every fighting pokemon that has it carries, has a crippling chance to miss. So much of pokemon is based on the roll of the dice, you can't really single out scald. Any one of those moves landing that I mentioned could decide a game just as easily as a burn.
 
Zartres said:
The fact is, a lot of pokemon is based on luck. You say that scald is used for the burn chance. It is. Just like stone edge, fire blast, and focus blast are used, just to name a few, for their higher power. High jump kick, a move that every fighting pokemon that has it carries, has a crippling chance to miss. So much of pokemon is based on the roll of the dice, you can't really single out scald. Any one of those moves landing that I mentioned could decide a game just as easily as a burn.
Click to expand...

Those moves, taken together, constitute a false equivalency - the most dangerous one in regards to Scald and one that is making this discussion unproductive. Stone Edge, the strong special moves, etc. are all moves with a miss chance, but they are moves consciously selected by the user. You're aware of the risk as you select Hydro Pump over Surf. In contrast to that, you do not intentionally accept the risks of getting burned by Scald when you play against it. Additionally, the strategy "i am going to try to win this game by picking up a Scald burn against a mon" is not present with moves with low accuracy; I have never seen someone say "i'm going to hope he misses this fire blast so i win" proposed as a viable strategy. I did address the "hax is part of pokemon; scald is hax; ergo, scald is part of pokemon, deal with it bad user" argument in my post, but maybe not clearly enough? Does Scald hax exert such a great influence on the metagame as to place too much pressure on teambuilding / cause too many games to be decided by the conscious invocation of luck? I think that's the main idea behind looking at Scald. If you think that Scald doesn't add too much luck to the meta, then fucking make a post saying that. But everyone challenging, essentially, the "right" of the people in charge to examine Scald because "hax is part of pokemon" is retarded - do you think they're unaware of the fact that moves can miss?

ffs idk if Scald is even harmful or not i just want people to actually discuss non-retarded things so i can learn
 
Gotta make this quick, but I think part of the false equivalency is that Scald has no downsides. If you miss HJK, Fire Blast, or Focus Blast, that turn is completely wasted. If you don't get the Scald burn, you still fired off a STAB 80 BP move with an excellent typing.

May add more to this later tonight.
 
atomicllamas said:
That's why trying to counter a move is stupid, but I think its pretty obvious that I (or a competent opponent) is not going to be switching a Toxicroak into a Swampert, maybe barring when Swampert is in KO range from an attack and you are predicting scald, and only if its a necessary risk. So that pretty much invalidates your entire list of situations, not that some of them weren't pretty ridiculous anyways (ie SpD Roserade vs CB Swampert, lol...). On top of that, the flaw with your second situation is that it assumes the worst scenario, not the best one as you imply, you are assuming 1) Scald burns (30% chance), 2) Rocks are up (this is standard in calcs I know, but you say minimum scald damage and then add shit like rocks as if the scald burn damage is from rocks) 3) ignore the fact that if Hydreigon has LO it can also run roost. If your point was that scald is broken, your post doesn't do a very good job making your point, if your point was Pokemon using the move scald can run other moves, no shit, lol. The thing is most people pushing for a ban have been saying scald isn't broken, its uncompetitive, which is a different argument and I addressed later in my post.
Click to expand...

Hmm... I don't think scald is broken. I suppose what I meant to say is that I find Scald very frustrating to prepare for while team-building. The reason Scald is annoyingly difficult to prepare for is because it is a decently powerful move with a fabulous potential side-effect and has such a wide distribution. So yeah, Toxicroak is a great switch-in to Suicune, but obviously you can't switch Toxicroak into Swampert. Which means when you're team-building you have to add another Pokemon to your team that can switch into Swampert, and of course this Pokemon also has to be able to deal with Scald (and again, it's a pretty small pool of Pokemon that don't mind being burned). So basically every team you create has to have like 2-3 different Pokemon that can deal with the multitude of Scald spamming bulky waters that inhabit the tier. That kind of influence is restrictive on team-building, extremely annoying, and makes the tier a lot less enjoyable.
 
So far on the no scald ladder I've noticed that bulky waters haven't really lost much defensive utility. Still need a fire check on pretty much all teams so bulky waters are still found very often. It actually feels like it opens up a lot more choices during battles because you can respond to more threats in different ways. Scald doesn't really check physical attackers consistently enough to warrant the argument that physical setup sweepers will dominate more than they already do. I'm sure we have all been in battles where its something like Tentacruel against Empoleon and they're both just spamming Scald hoping for that burn first. That does not sound like a healthy metagame aspect, while it can happen with other moves, those moves simply aren't seen enough compared to Scald. Literally almost every team can and will have Scald on somethings moveset. The Scald-less tier feels more diverse than current UU.
 
Last edited:
If Scald gets banned in RU and UU, Ill probably jump from RU to UU and run SD and DD sets all day while my NU and PU team is relatively uncaring about it.
But really banning Scald? Just keep it as a side ladder. This isn't funny nor should this be up for debate. This game has elements of luck. Deal with it.
 
cellgoondude said:
If Scald gets banned in RU and UU, Ill probably jump from RU to UU and run SD and DD sets all day while my NU and PU team is relatively uncaring about it.
But really banning Scald? Just keep it as a side ladder. This isn't funny nor should this be up for debate. This game has elements of luck. Deal with it.
Click to expand...
Yeah we should just deal with it.

Y'know.

Just like how we just deal with OHKO moves and evasion.
 
feel free. no ones gonna miss you here and no ones gonna notice you there n_n

would just like to say that some of the arguments being used against the POTENTIAL suspecting of scald (this isn't even a suspect test for fucks sake), are really disappointing. I mean I guess I should have expected it since I have always been strongly against letting everyone and their mother decide what happens with our tiering but Jesus christ why are people saying jackassery such as "pokemon involves luck just deal with it" when scald is clearly fucking different ?_?

I have been so busy lately I haven't even had a chance to get one game on the scaldless ladder but I for one can't wait to fucking try it. Thank you based lord for finally granting me with worthy successors that have some semblance of what we in my country call COJONES
 
kokoloko said:
feel free. no ones gonna miss you here and no ones gonna notice you there n_n

would just like to say that some of the arguments being used against the POTENTIAL suspecting of scald (this isn't even a suspect test for fucks sake), are really disappointing. I mean I guess I should have expected it since I have always been strongly against letting everyone and their mother decide what happens with our tiering but Jesus christ why are people saying jackassery such as "pokemon involves luck just deal with it" when scald is clearly fucking different ?_?

I have been so busy lately I haven't even had a chance to get one game on the scaldless ladder but I for one can't want to fucking try it. Thank you based lord for finally granting me with worthy successors that have some semblance of what we in my country call COJONES
Click to expand...

And a great, warm, welcoming attitude from kokoloko yet again... Really, what are you trying to do? Come across as a jackass who rants about the jackassery of other people? What the hell. If someone has a different opinion from you, don't be a douchebag about it.
 
So from what I've observed from this thread is that while scald is definitely not broke, opinions of scald range from it being mildly annoying to it being uncompetitive. But what makes something ban or even suspect worthy? From what I've noticed is that most pokemon or moves get banned if it is deemed overcentralizing or broken. Is scald overcentralizing? Does it force teams to run a "scald counter" as such or simply a bulky water counter in general? While I admittedly have not played much of No Scald ladder so I cannot say what a scaldless metagame is like, I can say that Suicune is really the only main abuser of scald. I would even say that scald acts as a balancing acts for other water types like Vaporeon or Empoleon. Suicune is overcentralizng because it can abuse scald effectively, scald is not overcentralizing itself. A person using Suicune is more inclined to hit the scald button considering it can take hits extremely well and can afford the no burn on scald for the most part. Suicune is what is forcing people to have an answer to water types and therefore scald. Not the other way around.
Let's take an example of a 1v1 situation with DD non-lum berry Haxorus. Against a Vaporeon for example, Haxorus can DD and OHKO the next turn with minimal prior damage on Vaporeon. The Vaporeon user, if he chooses to risk attempting a burn on scald is under a lot of pressure because if that 30% chance fails he's about to get swept.
But let's say that pokemon was Suicune instead. Suicune can freely scald under no pressure because the user knows that it has two chances to get the burn because even after a DD Outrage merely 2hkos. Not many people will take a 30% chance of not getting swept. But if people have the luxury of 2 or even 3 scald attempts depending on the opposing sweeper then scald will indeed appear overpowered.
My opinion is that scald is not inherently overcentralizing or uncompetive but rather Suicune makes it so.
As for the points that say even special attackers don't like scald as residual damage is annoying as hazards+scald damage+ LO+ burn damage, I personally would not consider it overcentralizing. Painful? maybe. But not enough to say that scald is overcentralizing.

EDIT: When I said I didn't play much no scald ladder I meant that my experience were from the regular ladder and I felt I could judge scald as non overcentralizng from the regular ladder itself
 
Last edited:
Serperior for Uber said:
So from what I've observed from this thread is that while scald is definitely not broke, opinions of scald range from it being mildly annoying to it being uncompetitive. But what makes something ban or even suspect worthy? From what I've noticed is that most pokemon or moves get banned if it is deemed overcentralizing or broken. Is scald overcentralizing? Does it force teams to run a "scald counter" as such or simply a bulky water counter in general? While I admittedly have not played much of No Scald ladder so I cannot say what a scaldless metagame is like, I can say that Suicune is really the only main abuser of scald. I would even say that scald acts as a balancing acts for other water types like Vaporeon or Empoleon. Suicune is overcentralizng because it can abuse scald effectively, scald is not overcentralizing itself. A person using Suicune is more inclined to hit the scald button considering it can take hits extremely well and can afford the no burn on scald for the most part. Suicune is what is forcing people to have an answer to water types and therefore scald. Not the other way around.
Let's take an example of a 1v1 situation with DD non-lum berry Haxorus. Against a Vaporeon for example, Haxorus can DD and OHKO the next turn with minimal prior damage on Vaporeon. The Vaporeon user, if he chooses to risk attempting a burn on scald is under a lot of pressure because if that 30% chance fails he's about to get swept.
But let's say that pokemon was Suicune instead. Suicune can freely scald under no pressure because the user knows that it has two chances to get the burn because even after a DD Outrage merely 2hkos. Not many people will take a 30% chance of not getting swept. But if people have the luxury of 2 or even 3 scald attempts depending on the opposing sweeper then scald will indeed appear overpowered.
My opinion is that scald is not inherently overcentralizing or uncompetive but rather Suicune makes it so.
As for the points that say even special attackers don't like scald as residual damage is annoying as hazards+scald damage+ LO+ burn damage, I personally would not consider it overcentralizing. Painful? maybe. But not enough to say that scald is overcentralizing.
Click to expand...

Apologies for calling you out in particular, but why do people keep making these long arguments without having any/much practical knowledge to back it up? I see these posts in every suspect discussion where people post 10+ lines of theorymon then somewhere in the middle of the text they bury the comment "but I haven't actually played much of the ladder yet".

Anyway on my opinion of the ladder so this isn't just calling people out, I haven't actually noticed a huge difference in the common styles / builds that have been effective on the ladder. Contrary to opinion, but bulky waters didn't just get effective because they got Scald, sure they improved but the reason they were ever useful in the first place is because they had the natural bulk and a solid defensive typing with which to take on many metagame threats. In fact the biggest change I've made to my teams has often been giving up a utility move such as Heal Bell on Vaporeon for Ice Beam or Roar, so threats that previously would have been scared to come in and set up on me before unless they had a Lum Berry still can't set up on me effectively. Sure this has compromised said bulky Water's effectiveness but that doesn't make it a bad pokemon, just that they don't have that ridiculously spammable move that they had before. It's been refreshing to play a metagame where my long term game plan hasn't needed to factor in the 30% chance that I could be cheesed at some point.
 
Last edited:
Serperior for Uber said:
So from what I've observed from this thread is that while scald is definitely not broke, opinions of scald range from it being mildly annoying to it being uncompetitive. But what makes something ban or even suspect worthy? From what I've noticed is that most pokemon or moves get banned if it is deemed overcentralizing or broken. Is scald overcentralizing? Does it force teams to run a "scald counter" as such or simply a bulky water counter in general?
Click to expand...

In every offensive team I build, I always make sure I include a dedicated Scald switch-in. Luckily there are some good ones that don't kill momentum too much - Guts Machamp or Heracross, Healing Wish Shaymin, Toxicroak, BP Vaporeon or Seismitoad have all made their ways onto offensive teams of mine for their ability to switch into a Scald. Even something like Hydreigon can do in a pinch, although it often can't do much in return to Scald users. But yeah, I'd say that Scald specifically is super centralizing, and anyone who claims otherwise is fooling themselves.

The problem that I see with Scald is twofold:

1. Burn fishing. People will often just spam Scald even when it's not ideal to do so just for a burn. Yeah, it's not reliable, and no good player will do this unless it's their only chance at a win, but it happens. People who use this as a primary strategy luckily don't tend to make it very far in the competitive scene, because the numbers are against them, but it happens. It's like beating a Swampert with a Jirachi locked into Iron Head - unlikely, not a reliable strategy, but it happens and it's disgusting and I have no desire to play with anyone who thinks that it's a good thing in competitive pokemon.

2. Switch-ins. This is where it's an issue on a competitive level. Say I bring in something that checks you and chases you out, like Suicune or Swampert against your Darmanitan/Entei/whatever. You now have to choose between staying in and getting bopped or switching in something else to take the Scald, and facing a 30% chance of being burned. If you're playing an offensive team then there's a pretty good chance you don't HAVE something that you can afford to see burned, since even if it's a Special Attacker it is now on a clock. One of the first UU SPL matches this round was arguably won because of a Serperior taking a Scald burn when it switched in, preventing it from sweeping later. Hell, the fact that mons like Seismitoad get used at all over otherwise superior options like Swampert on offensive teams speaks pretty highly to how centralizing this single move is.

I'm not actually arguing in favor of a Scald ban, necessarily - banning it would be a pretty big deal across multiple tiers, and I would need to think about it a lot longer before making a decision - but I think that arguing Scald isn't centralizing is misguided at best, and perhaps even intellectually dishonest.
 
This may not be a suspect, but it certainly seems to hint at one in the future.

I'm trying to draw a parallel between Scald and Swagger, as I have to assume that a possible argument for a ban stems from it being "uncompetitive" rather than it being "broken." I'll concede, without a doubt, that Scald is one of the best moves in the game. It has wide distribution, good base power, and a terrifying 30% chance of inflicting a burn on the opponent. On top of that, Scald has 100% accuracy, good PP and has no drawbacks, meaning players can spam Scald just to fish for the burn.

While Discharge and Lava Plume have an identical likelihood of paralysis and burn respectively, those moves have poor distribution and poor typing from a defensive standpoint. Even Sacred Fire's insane 50% burn chance is less of an overall threat as it's distribution in UU is limited to Entei.

What sets Scald apart from, let's say Lava Plume, is its water typing. Most water types in the tier can learn Scald and water is arguably the best defensive type in the game. Water types with access to Scald already have moderate to good bulk to begin with and are given an even further defensive buff by just clicking Scald. Furthermore, simply the risk of a water type scalding and burning actually changes the way players build teams and form play styles. Nothing outside of Magic Guard users or water immunities wants to switch in on a Scald. A burn is more than halved Atk, it's chip damage that can slowly wear down special attackers and walls. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's "over-centralizing", but the impact it has on the game is undeniable.

However, UU has some Water Immunities, some Magic Guard users, some special attackers that don't mind the burn, and a decent selection of reliable clerics. Although not plentiful by any stretch of the imagination, UU does have viable answers to Scald.

Does the burn chance add an uncompetitive aspect of luck to the outcomes of games? Absolutely. Is it any more of a detriment to competitive than other luck based mechanics? Honestly, I'm not sure.

I can't say I would support a suspect test for Scald, but I can see the merit in making a no-scald ladder and at least having a discussion.

The fact that the OHKO moves have even been uttered in the same discussion topic as the no scald ladder makes me worry for some of you.

I am by no means a veteran, mediocre at best honestly, but this conversation has needed to happen for a long time. Please, do not fall victim to the anti-ban rhetoric. Play the tier, gain the experience, form a viewpoint you can support and THEN come back and speak your peace.
 
There are a few non-gimmicky answers to Scald that surprisingly nobody has brought up yet, including but not limited to Safeguard (this move is just as good as dual screens for HO teams and it's a crime it's not used more often), sun teams (40 BP Scald suddenly looks much less attractive and there is no shortage of sun abusers in UU), RestTalk and Shed Skin.

I don't get why people outright refuse to try these solutions out when they have been fine with a momentum-killing 20 BP move to deal with entry hazards for years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top