np: ORAS OU Suspect Process, Round 3 - Wandering Ghosts [Aegislash remains in Ubers]

[Tramuntana]

Having checks and counters does not instantly make a mon not broken. Moreover, would you REALLY keep Aegi in against Mega Charizard X? Also, "coinflip" plays are not inherently uncompetitive, but KS is a special case. Lots of good players can use prediction in several cases, but not necessarily with KS. In combination with Aegi's versatility, KS turns the plays of solid tournament players into flat-out guessing games. Guess wrong, and you get punished dearly. Such cannot be said for simple situations that require prediction. You CANNOT discount King's Shield when accounting for Aegi.

Guy, switching out aegi on charizardX gives him a free DD and sweep, and sometimes (or thinking twice, nearly always) it is not a wise thing to do.
and everything turns the game a guessing game. pokémon is made of this: that heatran carries toxic, earth power, ancientpower? what i should send on that landorus? is that gallade going to SD on my switch or it will hit the mon i have to ensure it goes down? will that skarmory use roost? etc etc etc.

pokémon IS a guessing game to an extent. having to guess is natural here

 

[Hellochi]

Guy, switching out aegi on charizardX gives him a free DD and sweep, and sometimes (or thinking twice, nearly always) it is not a wise thing to do.
and everything turns the game a guessing game. pokémon is made of this: that heatran carries toxic, earth power, ancientpower? what i should send on that landorus? is that gallade going to SD on my switch or it will hit the mon i have to ensure it goes down? will that skarmory use roost? etc etc etc.

pokémon IS a guessing game to an extent. having to guess is natural here

If a mon will sweep you if you switch out, then it's not a 50/50 you are forced to stay in so it doesn't sweep you. as WCAR said last night in the OU room there are no 50/50's besides confusion and something else (I can't remember) because the user picks the move they want to go for, it's their decision

 

[Martin]

Ok i really have to address those stupid 50-50 arguments here because they are horrible.

Lets start with a few facts shall we? One statement that finds itself a lot is that Aegi causes "excessive" 50-50. Excessiv means that this happens quite often right? Like every one or two games?

No, that is how often a normal case of 50:50s should occur. Aegislash can easily force them 5-6 times every game. It isn't the best argument ever, I admit, but there are so many people which simply don't understand either what a 50:50 is or how often normal/excessive 50:50s occur.

edit: Also the problem with Aegi isn't that it is lacking checks. Far from it - it easily has some of the most soft checks of any pokemon when used in OU. However, I am putting extreme emphasis on soft - and by extention most of them are moves which rely on certain circumstances. Aegislash is a far stretch from being broken, but the fact that it is only being soft checked says a lot. The fact that a load of things are forced to carry EQ/special coverage for the sake of dealing with it also says a lot. Aegi is extremely overcentralising. Also, you yourself said that those examples are excluding KS. Of those Pokémon you listed, nine (assuming I missed none - which i prolly did for one) of them are crippled by KS. In addition, idk what you are talking about when you say that Mega Medi can beat Aegislash as the latter was the sole reason it was BL in early XY. In addition, I am going to remove anything that says stuff like "knock off [Pokémon]" (and Conk 'cause sheer force doesn't carry Knock Off and AV kinda sucks atm) as these usually don't do jack shit for Aegi uness it catches it on the switch, and does little but show that they do not check Aegislash due to being some insanely circumstantial situations. So, after factoring in the false claims and the bullshit situational crap that requires Aegi to switch in (and FYI there is no reason for Luke to carry Crunch in the Aegi Meta as it needs EQ to avoid contact) that leaves - out of those that you listed - Mega Lopunny, Zard X, Talonflame, *Mega* Gyara, Weavile. Of those five, three of them are screwed over by KS (srs Lopunny Scrappy is a double-edged sword) and/or do jack shit with their secondary STAB. So you have Mega Gyara (because lol EQ regular Gyara) and EQ Zard X. Now, Carrying EQ on zard means sacrificing Roost or one of your STABs, and... ok M-Gyara has no reason not to carry it. So here is what we have: three pokemon which are reliant on King's Shield being burned out/not present, one mon which loses out on a significant move to cater for EQ and sacrifices your mega slot (not that its that problematic 'cause Zard) and one hard check that involves sacrificing your mega slot (once again, somewhat inconciquential). Here is the issue. Of those 'checks' that you have listed, most of them do not fulfil their role as a supposed 'check' to Aegislash, and almost all of those that do are significantly restricted by its presence.

 

[p2]

First of all:



Second of all: When did I say talonflame is like aegislash? Like really.. when? I said talonflame is checked entirely by heatran, that is all.

Talonflame=hawlucha
Heatran=aegislash

Hawlucha is checked by aegislash the same way talonflame is checked if not hard countered by heatran.. people are basically saying hawlucha will be completely unusable with aegislash's presence, when it's checked just as hard as talonflame is to heatran, and that doesn't make talonflame suddenly unusable either.

I wasn't replying to your post, js
I was replying to this particular bit from thesecondbest's post
"lando has no hard counters besides cresselia, talon can set up easily and can beat its supposed counters with natural gift op. Rotom has so many different sets it can run. All of these are just as threatening as aegi/ is"
Even though that's just blatantly false, they aren't as centralising and they will never be.

Anyway, Heatran doesn't have a grip on the metagame that can literally make up to 10-15 pokemon simply unviable, nor does it have Ghost / Steel typing, a pseudo 720 BST, the ability to render nearly ALL choice users unviable, have nowhere near the same amount of splashability AND force physical attackers into constant coinflip plays with the thread of King's Shield. Plus, it can smack its "counters" with the appropriate coverage move, while Heatran relies on Power Herb Solarbeam to break past bulky waters (one turn use, weakened in sand, takes up Heatrans item slot).

 

[Nomark]

Okay, I got to 2650 coil, so i'll just drop my opinions here.

The main difference between heatran and aegis is the defensive typing. As has already been pointed out, the thing that makes tran comparable to slash is it's ability to blanket check a good portion of the meta and run both offensive and defensive sets. We already have a clearly non-broken mon that blocks half the meta, so why can't slash be allowed?

I think what makes tran less of a problem but makes aegislash so bad is removability. As we know, heatran has three weaknesses: water, fighting, and quad ground. This makes heatran a great check to many things, but also makes it susceptible to luring. Water is an uncommon attacking type, but water types are plentiful and fairly easily check heatran. The same can be said of ground types to aegislash. They're generally bulky and can 2hko fairly easily. The thing about heatran is it's two other weaknesses. Fighting coverage is both plentiful and high-powered, with so many things getting focus blast and superpower. These both smack tran for heavy damage, so it's not too difficult to catch on the switch. Ground, while not as plentiful, is still on many things. It's also a quad weakness, which is very important. This weakness makes heatran lure-able. A talonflame can run natural gift, anything can run hidden power ground. These can 1hko or 2hko and incoming tran that otherwise would have won. This makes a heatran user wary. There is an inherent risk to using tran as a blanket check because of this.

Aegislash, on the other hand, has a set of weaknesses that is very exploitable by the slash user. I would say it's one true weakness is ground, for reasons already detailed. Its other three, dark, ghost, and fire, are difficult to use to put slash in a bad position. Shadow ball and dark pulse need stab to reach superpower-level strength, but slash just bops ghost and dark types with shadow ball and sacred sword, respectively. Fire types are maimed by stealth rock, so they can't switch in very often, and fire coverage is hard to come by. Most special attackers have to resort to the piss-weak, speed-cutting hidden power. Physical fire moves are almost exclusive to stab users, and they have to worry about king's shield. In addition, aegis lacks a 4x weakness, so it really can't be lured. Single-use natural gifts can't 1hko and hidden powers can't 2.

In addition to all this, slash can't be trapped. Ghost removes vortexes and abilities while king's shield neuters pursuit. The main difference between slash and tran is the removability of their defensive typing. Slash has no fears of lures upon switching in so it has pretty much no risk. This is why being countered by aegis is a death sentence-- because it can't really be chunked.

tl;dr -- tran can be kicked if it's an issue for a team. slash can't.

 

[Force Majeure]

Howdy y'all. I just wanted to drop a couple of things.

These Heatran comparisons are a bit puzzling to me; I'm glad Norne pointed out how shallow this comparison is. I personally am completely fine with it remaining banned. Even though Aegis is easier to deal with than in XY, its addition to the tier amplifies already-powerful strats/Mons like GenieSpam, Lando-I, or M-Lop.

Pokémon is made of this: that heatran carries toxic, earth power, ancientpower? what i should send on that landorus? is that gallade going to SD on my switch or it will hit the mon i have to ensure it goes down? will that skarmory use roost? etc etc etc.

pokémon IS a guessing game to an extent. having to guess is natural here

Of course there's a guessing component; nobody is arguing otherwise. The problem I see with this line of thought is that it falsely equates "normal" prediction situations and ones that are skewed to one side. Thus, I have a huge problem with the "50/50" nomenclature that's sprung up around Aegis: against many opponents, these situations do not provide choices to players that grant roughly symmetrical outcomes. They're much more like 55/45 in the Aegis user's favor for a couple of reasons: free reversion to Shield when switching out, priority KS + Stance Change, and out slowing/out speeding possibility with combinations of slow attacking moves (or subToxic) followed by Shadow Sneak

I might Gentoo equivalent of MSPaint up a payoff matrix as an example as it's a bit harder to articulate what I'm trying to say.

 

[Tramuntana]

if so much those "50/50s" so much annoy yo (which in my opinion are more of a 30/70 in aegi's deterrent thanks to WoW or setup/recovery moves trolling you hard) Force Majeure, to coonsider it a 55/45, simply consider using the myriad of non-contact moves around, as those have no 50/50, they strike just as hard either if they got blocked by KS or not.

I might Gentoo equivalent of MSPaint up a payoff matrix as an example as it's a bit harder to articulate what I'm trying to say.

sorry, WHAT? i do not understand what the heck do you mean here

 

[D_what]

sorry, WHAT? i do not understand what the heck do you mean here

p.sure something like this was intended

only, like, not shit, actual stats provided and not horribly compressed. Pngs, people. Also, Excel spreadsheets.

Although, it is a wonder nobody's done a full set of these covering all the common use cases; complicated as they'd be, it would spell a definitive end to any further 50/50 debates. I'm thinking a cross section for Aegis's most common sets and common Aegis+Friends cores versus Aegislash's would-be checks and the moves they run. That would cover most things.

//ollies out having had no constructive comment on the 'slash debate

 

[Sanger Zonvolt]

if so much those "50/50s" so much annoy yo (which in my opinion are more of a 30/70 in aegi's deterrent thanks to WoW or setup/recovery moves trolling you hard) Force Majeure, to coonsider it a 55/45, simply consider using the myriad of non-contact moves around, as those have no 50/50, they strike just as hard either if they got blocked by KS or not.

This isn't always possible though. Almost every physical attack relies on contact moves, and not all of them can afford to run Earthquake, especially bulky ones like Mega Charizard X.

sorry, WHAT? i do not understand what the heck do you mean here

He's referring to a table that shows all the possible actions that Aegislash and the opponent could make in a turn that weighs the risk and reward of each action. Of course, given the myriad of scenarios, you'd need quite a few to weigh all of the possible gains and losses. Of course I'm easily distracted, so I made some:

matrices

Now this provides a general numeric representation (disclaimer: values are arbitrary, and I'll get more into them later):

utility

As you can see, if we give all the results the same utility (i.e. a boon for Aegi is a +1, a boon for the opponent is a -1, and a neutral outcome is a +0) Aegislash risks more using King's Shield than the opponent
Now the big issue with the numeric representation is that it's impossible to truly quantify the risk and reward due to the nature of battle. Does having the switch in take damage matter? Is the Aegislash able to deal out enough damage that the opposing mon is actually within Shadow Sneak Range? Does the opponent even have anything that can switch in and safely kill Aegislash? And of course this doesn't even cover Pursuit scenarios. This brings me to why I really don't like the 50/50 argument: it sounds reasonable on paper, but in actual battle these scenarios take on very different weights, and I feel like calling it a 50/50 gives it an inaccurate quantification that doesn't take into account individual nuances that occur throughout a battle.

 

[Force Majeure]

I think Sanger Zonvolt and D_what covered what I was trying to say. Usually competitive matrices note the results in [utility for Aegislash, utility for Opponent], which gives a more nuanced representation of the effect of the combination of decisions. So, for D_what's first square (KS + Contact Attack) it's really [:D, >:(]. If you're looking at Sanger Zonvolt's, which is second on the first matrix, it's (+n, -n). There are a couple of other things: the reversion to Shield when switching out makes switching out a net positive for Blade-Forme Aegislash in most circumstances unless the opponent boosts. Similarly, the usage of KS against a non-contact attack can still be a net positive because of the defensive value of a reversion to Shield Forme and the fact that you've blocked the attack + maybe scouted a bit.

D_what I wouldn't want to make an uber-matrix; that would take quite a long time and a fantastically large book of Excel spreadsheets. I was mostly viewing this as an exercise intended to cast some light on choice as regards Aegis, especially with KS and speed games. I also wanted to point out that "50/50" creates a false equivalency between outcomes that I find are actually tilted in the Aegislash user's favor, ceteris paribus.

 

[FlamingVictini]

I am greatly against Aegislash in OU, and would vote to keep it banned from ou. Aegislash serves little purpose in balancing the metagame, and causes many more problems than it resolves.

Aegislash is largely overcentralizing and limits creativity, stifling the metagame into using the same mons so they can handle Aegislash. Aegislash has amazing stats with Stance Change and KS, a movepool that allows it to beat a set that would "counter" a different set, and a great typing, allowing it to check/counter many of the tiers top threats and lesser used but still strong pokemon, making them significantly worse in ou (Aegislash has essentially no drawbacks and can be used on any playstyle and almost any team, which makes the game much less competitive). Since Aegislash's counters are really only defined by its set, people often resort to using the same mons to check it. Bisharp and Lopunny are good examples of among the mons that would rise in usage to an unhealthy level due to Aegislash's presence in ou (and often, they still cannot ohko aegi based on investment and/or drops, and can get ohko'd or cripped in return. This results in a metagame with a skew in usage percentages, and essentially, just screwing up the metagame by restricting so many options that become almost unviable or just significantly less effective thanks to aegislash. This is probably the most significant reason why I believe aegislash should stay banned. It restricts creativity so much, and makes the game much less competitive by limiting the metagame so much.

Some people argue that despite Aegislash being overcentralizing, it still serves to balance the metagame. This, however, is not really true. Some of the mons leaning towards the "broken" side in ou include Mega Metagross (which many players believe should be re-tested) and Lando-I. Altaria is another mon that is much stronger than "average" in ou. Aegislash doesn't even help much against Lando-I, and can still be beaten by the other two with coverage moves (although its ridiculous bulk makes it much more difficult to break through). In the end, Aegislash doesn't really solve many issues, and by creating more than it solves, Aegislash has a negative effect on the metagame.

Another way Aegislash severely affects the metagame is in the form of hazard removal. As a ghost type with such amazing bulk, the most common spinner in ou, starmie, has great difficulty in spinning, even if you catch aegi on the switch with an analytic H-Pump. Excadrill can arguably spin on it, but with an air balloon, even excadrill is limited in spinning. With such bulk and mixed offenses, it really becomes very difficult to spin. For defog, the most common defoggers are probably the latis. Both the latis become much worse with aegislash's existence, especially since it gets pursuit and isn't hurt much by the attacks of many mons it can trap. People can resort to using other defoggers such as Mandibuzz, Scizor, or maybe Zapdos, but all of them can be beaten by different sets, such as fast head smash, offensive life orb, crippled by subtoxic, etc. In reality, Aegislash constricts the metagame in an unhealthy manner in regard to hazard removal.

Another effect of Aegislash is the 50/50's it introduces. For the opponent, almost every turn is a 50/50. If they win, they can potentially force aegislash out with their "counter" or manage to defeat it. If they lose, or if the Aegislash user is aggressive and predicts right, they are rewarded by beating the "counter." This topic is a bit more iffy for me so I won't discuss it much, but aegislash does introduce many 50/50's that don't really make the game competitive (why play the game if flipping a coin and then picking an attack will have the same effect?).

Before, people weren't really sure if aegislash was broken because they hadn't played in the xy metagame without aegislash before the ban. After playing without aegislash, and then having it re-introduced in the suspect ladder, the negative effects of aegislash on the metagame have become crystal clear to me. As a mon that chooses its counters based on the set it runs out of a wide variety, and all the previous assets I mentioned, while having essentially no drawbacks to using it, it is clear that aegislash's introduction into the metagame will restrict much more of the metagame than just the "problem mons," making it a poor decision to re-introduce aegislash to ou.

 

[Tramuntana]

I am greatly against Aegislash in OU, and would vote to keep it banned from ou. Aegislash serves little purpose in balancing the metagame, and causes many more problems than it resolves.
(section cut to avoid flood)

it's funny how all the pro-ban players keep copying the same arguments over and over, long time after having been dismantled... please, at least get original, it's boring if we have to rebate the same thing AGAIN just because you didn't bother to read the previous one.

 

[teal6]

I don't find Aegislash particularly bad at this point. I think he's able to be handled the same way S rank mons of any variety are - you consider it when teambuilding, but you don't have to build your entire team around him. For example, Mamoswine regains a lot of viability with Aegislash in the meta - being able to both check Slash and, more importantly to me, functioning as a revenge killer on Landorus-I (and the other prominent genies as well, provided SR is up/they've taken a hit). I don't feel particularly constrained when I can fit a genie-killer, Aegislash check and stealth rocker, and Megagross killer (Mega Metagross can't come in as base form against Mamo because he'll be outsped and OHKOd) all in one spot.

 

[MZ]

it's funny how all the pro-ban players keep copying the same arguments over and over, long time after having been dismantled... please, at least get original, it's boring if we have to rebate the same thing AGAIN just because you didn't bother to read the previous one.

Define already dismantled? I agree with him and I don't think you guys disproved that at all. I also think the 50/50 argument still stands fine and you guys have incorrectly failed at countering it over and over, but others would disagree. Should we stop debating during a suspect because you think the arguments are all over?

 

[Martin]

it's funny how all the pro-ban players keep copying the same arguments over and over, long time after having been dismantled... please, at least get original, it's boring if we have to rebate the same thing AGAIN just because you didn't bother to read the previous one.

The anti-ban ones have been even more dismantled tbh...

While I feel that too much emphasis is being put on 50:50s, there is little-to-no reason for Aegi to come back as it really isn't fulfilling the purpose of the retest.

 

[Norne]

it's funny how all the pro-ban players keep copying the same arguments over and over, long time after having been dismantled... please, at least get original, it's boring if we have to rebate the same thing AGAIN just because you didn't bother to read the previous one.

Honestly is the anti ban side of the argument wich was dismantled over and over, if anything the weakest argument on the pro ban side is the perception of what it's an excessive amount of 50/50, and the optimal set for coverage options argument on top threats, wich works both ways.

If anything the anti ban side should start posting effective cores on the ladder rather than assumptions while trying to prove if aegislash is a positive force instead of an overcentralizing one and how it affects non aegislash themed cores as the entire point of this suspect is to see how the metagame and popular cores react to its presence.

 

[Sacrificial Lambtias]

Aegislash is a pocket knife. It accomplishes many things at the same time, and it does many more things with small alterations. Honestly, I can see this being a staple on every team. There is no opportunity cost to running it since it checks so many things, and it fits on every team archetype. In fact, the only loss with running Aegislash would be that only one of its sets can be used at a time. Aegislash is so proficient in almost every aspect it has that it becomes one of the best at whatever it tries to do. It is a jack of all trades, master of all. It could easily be on every team in the meta, and due to its omnipresence, anything Aegislash specifically beats suddenly finds itself struggling against every team. If that isn't overcentralizing, I don't know what is. I would envision Aegislash unbanned to sit at the top of S rank with the highest usage. I do not find this to be a healthy addition to the metagame.

 

[firehusky]

K got my reqs so I'll just post again why I think aegi should stay banned.

So the reason stated for why they wanted to restest aegi was because it "could provide a reliable and all-round check to many of the aforementioned threats, thus giving some stability to a tier that's currently heavily influenced by the match up component of the game." Anyways, I kind of disagree with this. If we're trying to stabilize this tier, bringing aegi back to OU isn't the best idea. The match up really is kind of over exaggerated; as long as you prepare for the major threats you're good to go. If you're weak to stuff like mega ampharos or something it really isn't that big of a deal when it isn't really that common. Bringing back aegi to balance this meta isn't really smart, in my opinion. As I said earlier, the match up factor is kind of over exaggerated and right now the meta isn't exactly stale or anything, and it's actually pretty balanced (well besides landorus-i, fuck that thing). If aegi comes to OU, the meta will get more unstable. Pokemon like mega lopunny and landorus are only going to get better, and aegi walls a shit ton of other pokemon and those pokemon are going to get worse.

Another point I would like to make is how diverse aegislash is and how hard it is to prepare for. Almost no other pokemon can accomplish all the things that aegislash can do. Need a decent check / counter to mega medicham or mega pinsir? Aegislash fits the bill. Powerful mixed attacker? Mixed aegi is very scary to face. Pure physical attacker / wallbreaker? SD aegi is extremely hard to wall and even has priority shadow sneak to somewhat mitigate its low speed. Special wallbreaker? LO aegi hits insanely hard and even stuff like choice specs aegi is viable to beat stuff like hippowdon:

252+ SpA Choice Specs Aegislash-Blade Shadow Ball vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Hippowdon: 211-250 (50.2 - 59.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock and Leftovers recovery

Want a blanket check to half the meta? Aegislash. Want a decently powerful cleaner? Automotize aegislash is even a thing. Even sets like subtoxic are viable to lure in and cripple pokemon such as mandibuzz. I think you get the idea. Aegislash is super unpredictable and can do many things for a team. Slapping one on your team literally has like no drawbacks at all as it doesn't even use up your mega slot and has an SR resistance and a decent defensive typing that synergizes well with a lot of common OU pokemon.

I mean if you want to stabilize the meta, reintroducing aegislash isn't the right way to do it. We want it to check stuff like mega metagross and diancie, so why not suspect those instead? Unbanning aegislash just makes stuff like landorus even better, and stuff like hawlucha and celebi much worse.

Got my reqs already and I'm confident that I'll be voting to keep this in ubers.

Edit: I also don't agree with banning king's shield. Aegislash without king's shield removes 50 / 50's but that wasn't really a super good argument to begin with. We still have sets like crumbler aegislash, SD + 3 attacks that don't even need king's shield to do well. Even without king's shield, aegislash can still switch in on a shitload of stuff and wall them. To be honest, king's shield is like only a minor part of the problem of why aegislash is so borked, even without king's shield it's still a monster.

Edit 2: Also huge shoutouts to Zamrock and I ABR I for passing me some great ladder teams :D

 

[NotSoClutch]

So my opinion has changed. While I was against the initial banning of Aegislash back in XY, I just don't think it fits now. Aegislash reminds me of Dr. Boom (for any hearthstone players out there). It can be kept in check and likely won't win you the game on its own, but it has so much value that it fits on every team archetype and always does something important for a team. You may have a counter to it, but this counter doesn't counter it well enough to make the Aegislash bad in the matchup necessarily. With a little luck, Aegislash will be able to win 50/50 matchups against so called checks. Aegislash is just too good. While it's not necessarily broken enough to Salamence sweep you or give you the utility of something like mega-Gengar, Aegislash is almost always the best option on any team you play and glues together numerous cores that nothing else could.

 

[ShadowMarioGalaxy64]

When I thought people couldn't stop arguing about a comparison with Mega Raquayza, here comes a new trend: "A long comment that mentions reqs, the 50/50, and long unhealthiness listings. Let's all do it." It's like a quick-changing cancer, but at least a wall of text gave more positives to the pro-ban side, whereas I believed both sides were pretentious and stubborn.

Looking back, Aegislash sure does plenty as a single Pokemon. Surprised there hasn't been too much talk about banning King's Shield, but...again, this goes back to improper testing ground. Some people have said it is still broke without it, but as I've mentioned before, it makes Slash more 1-Dimensional, meaning you can typically guess what it'll use. Problematic? Sure, but nowhere near as leaving it with KS.

Now there has been talk about metagame comparisons, with or without Slash, diversity and such. The most interesting thing is that when people make reqs, they believe more about keeping it banned.

Personally, if we keep Slash banned, the first thing I'd want suspected is Landorus-I. As much as I've loved using it, it's still pretty damn powerful. If Slash returns...there's no telling what's next.

Edit:

We want it to check stuff like mega metagross and diancie, so why not suspect those instead?

Yeah...something about the first one screams "tried and failed".

 

[Scotti]

This is all I have to say

True 50/50

True and fake 50/50

 

[Dee Train]

Ive dabbled a bit (liek very small amount into the ladder) so my opinion may change from now until when i do my ladder grind for reqs BUUUUTT... if and when I do get reqs I will vote to keep in Uber. this varied from my original opinion, but the metagame does not really improve with this thing back...it becomes more stale imo. Plus Aegi itself is a diversae enough mon where you cant be prepared for it easily (for all sets).

If diversity is a poor argument, then screw it i am leaning on a poor argument, keep this thing uber.

(admitedly this is a fun mon to play with though :) but i'll keep my fun confined to this suspect hopefully)

 

[Freeroamer]

This is all I have to say

True 50/50

True and fake 50/50

Completely agree with the first 50-50, the pedantic side of me has to point out for the second one that the Talonflame user's best play is to Flare Blitz assuming the last mon situation, because even if Aegi does King's Shield, the Tflame user might be able to crit next turn and still win regardless. I hate having to use a mention of relying on hax but mathematically it gives you your best chance to win.

 

[MANNAT]

This is all I have to say

True 50/50

True and fake 50/50

The drawing skills OMG!!!!!

Actually, I wanted to comment on that saying that most people don't think about using Aegi like this in regular ladder play, so both sides have to think about what gives them the best chance to win the game.

 

[radianthero156]

alright, i got my reqs after about 50 battles, and i must say i honestly prefer this metagame than the non-aegi one. i know aegislash is really broken and i think the optimal solution would be banning altaria/gross/lando-i, while keeping aegi banned, but if that's impossible, i'd rather unban aegi, and will explain in this post why i think the aegislash metagame is better than the current metagame.

one of the arguments used to ban the sword was that it restrained teambuilding, right? well i think teambuilding is made easier with aegi. if you slap it onto your team, you're shielding it from altaria, gross, garde, diancie, gallade, thundurus (a bit), zam, lati@s, clefable, jirachi, and a whole lot of A/S rank threats (which is arguably impossible to do in the non-aegi meta), so basically aegi counter + aegi leaves up 4 slots for you to be creative with the rest of the team.

as for the argument that aegi kills innovation and makes the metagame stale, i think it is kinda flawed, because while aegi does indeed kill stuff like medicham/celebi/rachi, it also makes stuff like diggersby/volcarona/hydreigon really good. you can run a really standard team with aegi/zard-y/hippo/keld/latios and be safe against A rank threats, but i can choose to be innovative, run zygarde and proceed to sweep you. and zygarde is a really flawed mon, ranked at C-, so it's not like i'm not purposedly taking a huge risk in running it; unlike in the current metagame, where cenarios like "oh i've covered every A rank threat besides zard-y, better hope he doesnt bring it xd" happen every day.

it makes the metagame overcentralized, not gonna lie. but would you rather have a metagame centralized around 15 threats or 40? plus stuff like snorlax in gsc, tauros in rby, etc are much more overcentralizing and you never see anyone complaining or saying those metas are bad because of it.