np: ORAS OU Suspect Process, Round 4 - Genie in a bottle

[styie]

I have been waiting for this suspect test for the longest and truthfully im proud to say I'm happy it is here.

I'm going to try and mix things up and state my reasonings on why or why not Landorus-I should/shouldn't be banned. Well to start things off I personally say (probably like every other person that uses this monster would say) this pokemon, is very versatile but very fun to use, if I do say so myself. Thats not the point, the point is when I look further into the metagame and focus on it's sheer power and the damage it can cause, something needs to happen.

For starters, Landorus-I is an extremely broken pokemon, it's also very meta defining and 100% restricting to a proper well thought out build. It has the ability to shape it's way around the metagame giving it no counters except for mega latias and cresselia. It's only counters are fucked by Tyranitar or other pursuit trappers and apparently because you slap those two mons on a team, you're considered good? lol no, this is poor structure with none to very little team support as it can utterly destroy and completely annihilate these teams and so called "checks" or "counters". Just like anyone else would would say and/or agree with me on, it's very easy to click "ez mode" aka rock polish and sweep. Yeah winning, or getting points is fun but you're not looking into how much of a threat this is. Just like Aegislash, this thing restricts team building and it's very unhealthy for the metagame. This monster isn't much healthier for the meta then Greninja was. When teambuilding every thought running through my head was "how do I alleviate the fact that lose to Landorus-I?" Depending on my style of play or what type of style I am building at the time I would say for hyper offense, I'll add Weavile, Mamo, or Azumarill or Balanced, I would say Assault Vest Torn-T, SpDef Zapdos, or Mega-Lati. Stall would be Cresselia or to an extreme degree, skarmory depending on it's set. That's the problem "depending on it's set". I, nor anyone else for that matter should have to run a ice Shard user, or Aqua Jet user just to beat this broken mon. As I previously stated, I mentioned the fact that I would slap on a AV Torn-T or SpDef Zapdos. As aim stated, it gets smacked by a rock slide as that move alone is rising in popularity, so that just makes it worthless. On to calm mind sets. Calm Mind sets isn't nearly as common as Rock Polish or SR sets it's still very unhealthy and in an all-in-all conclusion this thing has no true counters. In my opinion, this mon has no thinking to it, whatsoever. So, with all my reasonings with proper arguments to support my claim, once I get reqs, it's an obvious ban for me, this thing needs to go. It'll clear the metagame up and give us that fun and balanced or fair metagame that we have been looking for.

 

[Limelight]

so i just read the entire previous page and i'm so clueless as to why we were even discussing landorus's ability to switch into stuff. like no duh landorus isn't switching into keldeo or latios... offensive mons aren't designed to do that. landorus is being suspected as an offensive presence, not a defensive wall. if you're really arguing to keep landorus in ou based on its ability to switch into hard-hitting pokemon, then you're not doing a good job of convincing me to vote no ban. watch any kind of high level play. almost 100% of the time, landorus comes in from a double switch which adheres to its typical offensive playstyle. the reward for getting landorus in safely is where landorus begins to be problematic. and dont forget that landorus can come in after another pokemon faints and a volt switch or u-turn not even necessarily a slow one (raikou and scizor attract a lot of things that landorus likes to come in on like heatran and ferrothorn, ttar for raikou, hippowdon for scizor, theres obviously more stuff and more u-turns and volt switches). landorus can even come in on weak moves or choice locked moves like scarf lando-t's earthquake. landorus even has enough bulk to come in on some hard-hitting moves like m-altaria's modest hyper voice or adamant frustration and then kill with sludge wave 100% of the time after stealth rock
252+ Atk Pixilate Mega Altaria Return vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Landorus: 231-273 (72.4 - 85.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252+ SpA Pixilate Mega Altaria Hyper Voice vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Landorus: 225-265 (70.5 - 83%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Sludge Wave vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Mega Altaria: 309-367 (87.2 - 103.6%)

the real discussion starts where landorus is in and applies unbelievably unhealthy offensive pressure to too many teams without 100% consciously-picked counters. and the revenge killing argument is hardly relevant as well. every pokemon can be revenge killed. that doesn't mean it's any less centralizing for the metagame or provides low risk high reward advantage. it excels versus balance and stall and has tools (rock polish) to beat offense.

 

[JoshHarmony]

If only this thing would have been gone by the end of XY yet it helped with Maw and Aegi so much, even Mega Lucario, so there was no way possible at the time. Now though, now it's getting the suspect it always needed.
Lando-I WILL be getting banned for a number of reasons, so I won't talk about why, I'll talk about the healthy meta post-ban.
A meta where if you just so happen to be Hyper O, opposing RP Lando doesn't face fuck you. A meta where I could potentially run Bulky O without Calm Mind Lando destroying me. Lando randomly picked off plays styles at will essentially making the way you play the game a gamble.

tldr; I'm going to Mexico and doing a ton of blow when Lando gets banned. This suspect couldn't have come soon enough.

Edit: I will miss volt-turn with with t-tar and scizor to pursuit trap and lando to fucking obliterate everything.

 

[Analytic]

Now, the REAL argument is that Landorus breaks stall teams too easily. As a user who has used CM Landorus, I can see why stall would not appreciate fighting Landorus, especially as the match progresses.

I have not played stall enough to know whether or not it's truly restricted by this thing, but I can say this: I've lost to stall teams with CM Landorus. It's possible. Landorus isn't a KILL STALL! pokemon. Stall can play around it.

How does stall play around CM Landorus-I?(Cresselia is the only thing that is good against it but it's still so passive). Only Quagsire and Clefable are the existing Unaware users in OU and they're both dealt with by Earth Power and Sludge Wave respectively. CM Landorus IS a killstall pokemon and is a pain for any stall team, it can't be revenge killed by any mons on a stall team nor can it be switched into so idk why you say it can be played around.

As far as Landorus goes on balance, it has a decent number of checks. Tornadus-T, Azumaril, Keldeo, Serperior, Rotom-W, Scizor, SDef Zapdos, Bulky Starmie, Talonflame, Latias, Latios, MCharizard-Y, MCharizardX, etc., etc.

M-CharizardX, Scizor and Serperior are really shaky checks. ZardX isn't a check at all to begin with while Serperior fails to OHKO with LO Leaf Storm while Sczior takes a shitton from E Power. Bulky Starmie is invested in HP and Def but even then, Earth Power still does a lot.

Calcs:

Hide

252+ SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Earth Power vs. 248 HP / 16 SpD Starmie: 281-331 (86.9 - 102.4%) -- 18.8% chance to OHKO
0 SpA Starmie Scald vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Landorus: 206-246 (64.5 - 77.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

252+ SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Earth Power vs. 248 HP / 0 SpD Scizor: 302-356 (88 - 103.7%) -- 25% chance to OHKO
252+ SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Earth Power vs. 248 HP / 0 SpD Scizor: 302-356 (88 - 103.7%) -- guaranteed OHKO after Stealth Rock
252+ Atk Choice Band Technician Scizor Bullet Punch vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Landorus: 177-208 (55.4 - 65.2%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

252 SpA Life Orb Serperior Leaf Storm vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Landorus: 231-273 (72.4 - 85.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252+ SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Sludge Wave vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Serperior: 369-437 (104.2 - 123.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO

Landorus does not have 4MMS. LEARN WHAT IT ACTUALLY MEANS PLEASE. But people take the whole It has so much move coverage! way out of proportion. Sure, it can hit Tornadus-T with Rock Slide, but my Tornadus-T can hit Diancie with Iron Tail guess that means Diancie doesn't count as a CHECK or anything.

What? I agree it doesn't have 4MSS but the part you said after that was confusing, I think you aren't quite clear on what 4MSS is because its final moveslot is the only thing that varies. Sludge Wave, Earth Power and Psychic/Focus Blast are almost mandatory on Landorus-I and it's the last moveslot that most struggle with.

For starters, Scarf Gothitelle easily nullifies Landorus. In fact, Gothitelle can switch into an Earth Power, live, and cripple it with a Choice Scarf, rendering Landorus useless for the remainder of the match. Now, Gothitelle isn't a pokemon that is used solely to beat Landorus or is nonviable or whatever the crap argument is it has going against Latias / Cresselia (which I'll get to later) but rather, used to combat opposing stall.

252+ SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Earth Power vs. 252 HP / 4 SpD Gothitelle: 231-273 (67.1 - 79.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

Really risking it just to "nullify" one mon here. Keep in mind I have calc'd 252 HP here, not something TrickScarf runs.

252+ SpA Life Orb Sheer Force Landorus Earth Power vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Gothitelle: 231-273 (82.2 - 97.1%) -- 68.8% chance to OHKO after Stealth Rock

Not a good answer to Landorus at all.



Anyways, I'd just like to point out that you have some flawed arguments in your post. You said you lost to Stall with a CM Landorus-I whereas that should win you the game then and there. Switching in Gothitelle on a Landorus E Power just to trick it a scarf is really asking for it imo and since when is MegaZardX and Scizor checks to Landorus?

One last thing.

2) no discussion on other potential suspects;
3) no discussion on the Suspect process;

 

[Shurtugal]

Its like you didnt even read my entire post. I never said those checks werent shaky i actually admitted they were so why are you pointing that out?

4Mms is when something NEEDS more than four moves to function and Landorus doesnt NEED to run all its coverage moves to be successful.

Anyway if you dont want to read my post and post arguments i never disagreed with then im not going to bother adressing your arguments.

 

[Analytic]

I double checked your post and still didn't find any mention of shaky checks.

Heck, you went even far enough to say that Landorus-I isn't a team building restrictor. It's one of THE most restricting in OU. It ploughs through balance, gets a kill almost every single time it comes in so why did you say that? I want to know what your thought process was before you went and said this.

 

[Random Passerby]

Non-Landorus OU Metagame Comments:

There wasn't much variance between the Landorus metagame and a Landorus metagame without, except that stall was perhaps seen a bit more than usual (but it's used frequently even with Landorus?). People assumed Tornadus-T was a pokemon only useful for Landorus, so it dropped in usage and, oddly, I saw a few more Serperior roaming around (the normal, anyway) - which was quite funny, seeing as one of my personal teams was still carrying the Tornadus-T (I hadn't even added it for Landorus - the check was a bonus).

I still saw a few M-Latias teams, so I don't think players using them feel obligated to for Landorus's sake, and yes, I still saw Cresselia and Gothitelle on opposing stall teams, too.

The only variance I saw was a lack of offensive teams (tho I ran one alongside some other teams to make my req.).

I think the lack of variance actually shows that Landorus's impact is not one that is strong enough to warrant a ban.

-.-.-

Landorus's Teambuilding Impact / Check n Counters

Let me start by saying: I am not a stall player. I only have experiences facing them, so I know how they play and general builds, but am not a player that has to teambuild them, and as such, will be a hard player to sympathize in these regards.

So, the argument is that Landorus is a strain on teambuilding, except I fail to see this at all.

There's an argument floating around this thread, one that's saying "OMG Landorus so broke IT HAS LIKE NO COUNTERS please ban!" and, if this were a previous generation, that argument would be solid.

However, this metagame is one where something doesn't need counters to be "broken" (and I use "broken" as a word to describe "presence which is unhealthy for the metagame" since, come on, we don't care if it's broken - we'll ban it anyway).

As far as Landorus goes on balance, it has a decent number of checks. Tornadus-T, Azumaril, Keldeo, Serperior, Rotom-W, Scizor, SDef Zapdos, Bulky Starmie, Talonflame, Latias, Latios, MCharizard-Y, MCharizardX, etc., etc.

OK, so some of you are typing your But these pokemon can't switch into Landorus! or They can't even achieve a OHKO! or something along those lines.

See, I'm an offensive player at heart. Checks have loose terms to me. A check is anything that can KO at 75%+, can switch into a common move or so, or can revenge kill it. I am not saying this is THE defintion for checks, only that it is mine.

I am NOT saying a player needs to rely soley on one check to beat Landorus or implying that one check is enough.

What I'm saying is that checks are so multiple on balance and can easily fit in groups of pairs to make 2-3 checks, and these checks aren't ONLY being use for Landorus, and they will continue to see usage even if Landorus is banned. Landorus isn't restricting balance teambuilding, rather, it's just another threat it has to deal with. Much like Manaphy or Kyurem-B in these regards. Actually, I'd say Kyurem-B is a bigger threat to balance; it breaks the common Rotom-W + Landorus-T + Heatran core with ease, has about-above-ish average speed, and is relatively hard to switch into. I understand that Kyu is not as great as Landorus since Landorus accomplishes a lot more and has more versatility, but for balance in particular, Landorus is not the only threat of its caliber.

-o-o-

Meanwhile, on offensive teams, Landorus is a joke. In terms of combating these teams, Landorus's speed is mediocre on a good day. With threats like Sand Rush LO Excadrill, Talonflame, Thundurus, Keldeo, Serperior, Latios, Latias, Mega Manectric, LO Starmie, Weavile, Bisharp (Sucker Punch), Gengar, etc., etc., offense can easily stop it.

As for this legendary Rock Polish set, it needs a lot of hazards to achieve OHKOs, and quite often, it cannot achieve such KOs. It'd have to set up on an offensive team really late in the game to clean up, because otherwise, there's probably a threat that's going to take Earth Power for 80%+ and retaliate with a OHKO.

And offfense isn't fragile balance / stall. It doesn't care if it has to take 80% to stop Landorus. Offense is all about sacking anyway and, in terms of offense, there are many other Pokemon that are like Landorus in this regard and this playstyle has already adjusted to combat situations such as this.

-o-o-

Now, the REAL argument is that Landorus breaks stall teams too easily. As a user who has used CM Landorus, I can see why stall would not appreciate fighting Landorus, especially as the match progresses.

I have not played stall enough to know whether or not it's truly restricted by this thing, but I can say this: I've lost to stall teams with CM Landorus. It's possible. Landorus isn't a KILL STALL! pokemon. Stall can play around it.

For starters, Scarf Gothitelle easily nullifies Landorus. In fact, Gothitelle can switch into an Earth Power, live, and cripple it with a Choice Scarf, rendering Landorus useless for the remainder of the match. Now, Gothitelle isn't a pokemon that is used solely to beat Landorus or is nonviable or whatever the crap argument is it has going against Latias / Cresselia (which I'll get to later) but rather, used to combat opposing stall.

And let's be real here: what stall team is running Landorus? Gothitelle is virtually useless against the type of teams Landorus is run on anyway, so sacking Gothitelle to cripple Landorus isn't a statement that Landorus is broken or something that would effect the chances of the stall player's chance of winning in the regards that it's going to need Goth later to win; it won't. Goth's role is to trap and cripple / KO threats to the team; it cripples Landorus, henceforth doing its job superbly.

As for Latias and Cresselia: the pursuit argument is garbage. Landorus isn't trapping its counters with pursuit; therefore, it is not a viable argument to pose. I didn't like that argument in BW2 and I don't like now.

-.-.-

Landorus Sets

Landorus does not have 4MMS. LEARN WHAT IT ACTUALLY MEANS PLEASE. But people take the whole It has so much move coverage! way out of proportion. Sure, it can hit Tornadus-T with Rock Slide, but my Tornadus-T can hit Diancie with Iron Tail guess that means Diancie doesn't count as a CHECK or anything.

Oh wait. Right.

Landorus might have an obscure move or so that can combat common counters / checks / whatever, like Rock Slide for Talonflame / Charizard / Tornadus-T, but using this precision usually means that its other three moves cover less, meaning that the chances of it carrying this moves are minimal, and as such, you have little to no risk.

However, let's say you switch Tornadus-T in and it gets decked by Rock Slide. Oh no! What ever do you do now?

Wait. Perhaps, if Landorus is carrying Rock Slide, it probably doesn't carry the coverage move it needs to defeat one of your checks (like Sludge Wave for your Azumaril or whatever)?

"But Shurtugal, carrying multiple checks limits teambuilding and proves ban worthy-ness!"

No. This metagame is designed to revolve around checks. Counters are sparse nowadays. Checks are easy to put on team, there is simply NO strain to having checks. Take a look at your teams; you probably accidentally check a lot of threats in the metagame. Have clutch responses to certain threats; Landorus is no different.

Having the possibility to run an obscure move does not make the check / counter in question any less of a legitimate argument.

As for the Landorus sets themselves, you always know Landorus carries Earth Power, so you always have a coinflip to switch into your EQ immunity as a check (like, pretty much anything immune to EQ becomes a check if it can live a hit afterward / outspeeds and can OHKO or come close to a KO after rocks). Depending on the team's structure, you can usually deduce some of its other coverage moves, too; it's not that difficult, takes a bit of skill I suppose, but still.

I know it makes itself versatile and that adds presence, but I just feel it's highly exaggerated in an attempt to get it banned.

-.-.-


Too Long To Read?

1.| No-Landorus-OU made balance and stall slightly used more, but not much variance apart from a limited amount of offensive teams (and I saw a few on my run).

2.| Landorus has a lot of checks that are easily applicable to balance and offensive teams alike. Stall can cripple with Gothitelle and being pursuit weak doesn't make these checks or counters any less of a check or counter; just that the player needs to be more skillful.

3.| Just because Landorus can run Rock Slidge or whatever to hit a stray counter or check doesn't make the counter or check any less of a counter or check; and usually, if it forgoes a coverage move to hit that one check or counter, it lacks the movepool to stop another check or threat your team posses, and due to how many checks are in the metagame, this is a likely scenario.

4.| Equilibrium can only be achieved after BOTH offensive / defensive meet at the same point. By suspecting only offensive threats, our metagame cannot achieve equilibrium.

There are several points here that I didn't quite agree with you:

1) Non-Landorus OU Metagame Comments:

- Is it not possible that because one of the biggest threats to Stall has gone (yes, I know Manaphy and Kyurem-B are big threats, just bear with me here), people were just hyped up and were eager to try Stall once more? In response to that, Mega Latias sees a rise because apart from phazers, Stall really can't do much to it.

- Furthermore, Stall teams are normally build when the metagame is centred around a few dominant threats (since they aim to counter as much dominant threats as possible). Since the ladder hasn't settled down yet (apart from the Mega Latias rise), perhaps Stall players were just reusing their old teams from the regular ladder (as a stable metagame hasn't been formed in the short time period).

2) Landorus's Teambuilding Impact / Check n Counters + Landorus's Sets (I'll just group them together since they get clustered up anyway)

- I admit that Landorus-I has multiple Checks which can be fit on a team. Yes, you did mention that they lose to a specific coverage move (say, Rock Slide for Zapdos). However, there is no telling which move Lando can carry except for Earth Power and the price for guessing wrongly is pretty high as it can get your check crippled or KO-ed. Now, let's go back to our Zapdos example. Your opponent has just switched his Lando-I in and is threatening to KO your mon with Earth Power. You switch your Zapdos in (and take SR damage). Now, what are you going to do? Switch Zapdos out again to scout for Rock Slide? If he Earth Powers again, you risk losing another Pokemon and is put into a worse situation as another switch-in to Rocks means Zapdos will be KO-ed by Rock Slide. Although this is just an an analogy (and you should have more than 1 Lando-I check in a team), it shows that Lando-I skews the odds immensely in the user's favour.

- Secondly, suppose I have lured your Zapdos and KO-ed it with my Landorus. Yes, you may have another check to Landorus left but I have just removed an obstacle to a Thundurus clean-up later on in the game. What I meant to illustrate was because Landorus-I's checks rely on it not having a specific move to check it properly, they can be lured and KO, providing a room for another sweeper to clean-up or just sweep it by itself later.

- Thirdly, while Offensive teams have many Pokemon that outspeed Landorus, if your attacks don't OHKO, chances are Landorus will OHKO back because Sheer Force + LO hits very hard. Furthermore, very few Pokemon (especially in teams that play HO) can outspeed a +2 Lando to take it out, forcing you to rely on priority moves (as a positive-natured SpA Landorus can KO mons like Keldeo from full health while the Lati@s and Gengar simply gets picked off by Knock Off. I feel you are underselling it's power here).

- Fourth point; Landorus-I doesn't need to change its set or way of playing much to get past a specific threat. Pokemon like Talonflame needs to give up a boosting item to lure in and KO their checks with Natural Gift. However, Lando just needs to change 1 out of its 4 moves to get past a specific threat. Yes, I admit losing X move makes it unable to get past threat Y but the point is you don't know which coverage move it is running without seeing all of its moves, allowing it to lure your Pokemon easier (such as the scenario I outlined in the Zapdos example. )

- Finally, even with different sets, Lando-I still causes major troubles to other playstyles and the sets don't play that much differently from each other (except maybe the Rock Polish set). AoA Lando-I and CM Lando-I can still be huge threats to the opponent's team and doesn't change much in its ability to be a pain to the opponent as it still beats most of the threats it's supposed to while losing to the same mon (and maybe a couple more). This is in contrast to the way Talonflame behaves as a Swords Dance Talonflame plays very differently to a Stallbreaker Talonflame as it checks different Pokemon. This example shows that Landorus-I excels against most team and doesn't diminish in effectiveness even when not using a set that is particularly suited to take on that playstyle.

 

[Shurtugal]

I double checked your post and still didn't find any mention of shaky checks.

Heck, you went even far enough to say that Landorus-I isn't a team building restrictor. It's one of THE most restricting in OU. It ploughs through balance, gets a kill almost every single time it comes in so why did you say that? I want to know what your thought process was before you went and said this.

Original Text: OK, so some of you are typing your But these pokemon can't switch into Landorus! or They can't even achieve a OHKO! or something along those lines. See, I'm an offensive player at heart. Checks have loose terms to me. A check is anything that can KO at 75%+, can switch into a common move or so, or can revenge kill it. I am not saying this is THE defintion for checks, only that it is mine.

Translation: I know these check examples are shaky at best or might not qualify in the eyes of some; however, each can stop Landorus under certain circumastances if you play your squad right, and due to how abundant these type of checks are, I feel like whole Landorus threat is blown out of proportion; it restricts as much on teambuilding as the commonly accepted OU wallbreakers do, like Manaphy and Kyu-B.

Note: I thought it was implied. My apologizes. This way, it should be 100% obvious that I had admitted they were shaky. It's outright said instead of just implied! Anyone with an IQ two standard deviations below the mean should understand this now.


-o-o-o-o-

Random Passerby You make some good points!

a.) and b.) - Landorus isn't the only Pokemon that does that; lots of wallbreakers function this way. Also, technically, if I remove Landorus with my other threats, then perhaps MY sweeper can stop YOUR sweeper - it's all a matter of teambuilding and plays and that's not something that warrants a ban, although I can see your concern.

c.) you're not really trying to argue that Landorus's performance against offense is enough to warrant a ban. I never said it wasn't good against offense, just that it has nowhere near broken capabilities against it.

d.) You just said Landorus only needs to change one move. So if it has Rock Slide in lieu of another move, and since you know it has Earth Power, it can only have two moves left, and it's pretty easy to infer from team structure. I mean, this is being blown out of proportion. Landorus won't run Rock Slide unless the lure benefits its teammates; if Land is on a team where it has 2-3 counters to Torn-T, you can safely infer it probably lacks Rock Slide. If the team Landorus is on generally can't get around stall, chances are it has Knock Off / Substitute / Calm Mind on its set for the "filler move" slot. It's not that difficult.

 

[Random Passerby]

Original Text: OK, so some of you are typing your But these pokemon can't switch into Landorus! or They can't even achieve a OHKO! or something along those lines. See, I'm an offensive player at heart. Checks have loose terms to me. A check is anything that can KO at 75%+, can switch into a common move or so, or can revenge kill it. I am not saying this is THE defintion for checks, only that it is mine.

Translation: I know these check examples are shaky at best or might not qualify in the eyes of some; however, each can stop Landorus under certain circumastances if you play your squad right, and due to how abundant these type of checks are, I feel like whole Landorus threat is blown out of proportion; it restricts as much on teambuilding as the commonly accepted OU wallbreakers do, like Manaphy and Kyu-B.

Note: I thought it was implied. My apologizes. This way, it should be 100% obvious that I had admitted they were shaky. It's outright said instead of just implied! Anyone with an IQ two standard deviations below the mean should understand this now. (I see what you did there :-) )


-o-o-o-o-

Random Passerby You make some good points!

a.) and b.) - Landorus isn't the only Pokemon that does that; lots of wallbreakers function this way. Also, technically, if I remove Landorus with my other threats, then perhaps MY sweeper can stop YOUR sweeper - it's all a matter of teambuilding and plays and that's not something that warrants a ban, although I can see your concern. (Perhaps this is something we have to agree to disagree as I feel that Landorus-I forces you to have at least 2 checks for it or you would have to sac a mon each time it comes in. Perhaps Offense players have it better in this aspect)

c.) you're not really trying to argue that Landorus's performance against offense is enough to warrant a ban. I never said it wasn't good against offense, just that it has nowhere near broken capabilities against it. (I wasn't. I was merely responding to your allegation that Lando-I is a joke against Offense. For me, it's performance against Offense, although not spectacular, is still quite decent. I would compare it to something like Tailwind Zard-X which can give Offense a hard time but was nowhere near broken)

d.) You just said Landorus only needs to change one move. So if it has Rock Slide in lieu of another move, and since you know it has Earth Power, it can only have two moves left, and it's pretty easy to infer from team structure. I mean, this is being blown out of proportion. Landorus won't run Rock Slide unless the lure benefits its teammates; if Land is on a team where it has 2-3 counters to Torn-T, you can safely infer it probably lacks Rock Slide. If the team Landorus is on generally can't get around stall, chances are it has Knock Off / Substitute / Calm Mind on its set for the "filler move" slot. It's not that difficult. (Point taken. But as I said over and over again, if the opponent was over-compensating for a certain threat, you might be in for a nasty surprise. )

Replies in bold.

 

[Snowy]

Been a few days since I've posted in this thread, but I've got reqs and am sitting in first atm (not that this means shit on suspect ladder). I bring this up, as I think I now have a some what better collection of thoughts and am now able to cement my answer (I won't be crapping on about shit I mentioned pages back).

After playing for the day or two that I have, I have had a wonderful experience playing the ladder, as I was not worried about the constant threat and burden that Landorus-I provides to a majority of my teams. This left me very open to experiment with forgotten things like Scarf Terrakion (shout outs my nigga Invok3r), as it is not gravely punished by locking it self into CC and risking a free switch for Lando, which can then go onto smack the shit out of your team with retarded amounts of damage through multiply coverage and stab moves or freely rp or cm. This is just a small example of the imdiate viability that removing this mon opens up, therefore making it a much more creative and expressive meta to play. These small viability changes help impact the metas growth and rejuvenate it from it's current stale and selective market of choices (not saying this is going to fix the meta imidiately, but it's sure as hell going to make it a lot more playable and work towards the goal of fixing it).

In conclusion, whether or not you are for or against the banned, I recommend you take a step back and see how much healthier the meta will become with this change and also the amount of creativity that will be able to flourish and grow, which I believe will add a refreshing touch which many of us have been seeking for a while now.

 

[Dee Train]

Pretty interesting suspect.... Lando I imo is very very powerful force, and with sheer force boosting its insane coverage options for the most part, and the potency of rock polish sets, this thing is a monster. Switching in safely is so difficult. I want to ladder a bit and mull it over if I do end up with the reqs...however I am leaning towards BAN

 

[Starmei]

I've already posted my opinion about Landorus and am pro Ban.

After playing a bit both on ladder and just against some friends and am enjoying OU without Landorus more than with. I find that playing w/o Landorus allows more freedom in teams and as mentioned before, something like Scarf Terrakion can click Close Combat without fearing giving Lando a free switchin where it can either get a kill or set up a Rock Polish and clean up your team and just makes it more fun to play and also as mentioned before, allows for more creativity which will hopefully revive playing OU for some of us. Personally I've found OU a little boring recently and hope that this is a step in the right direction.

Some of the arguments here for both sides have been a little lacking or have been off topic. Arguing about things not really related to the thread and some others just posting without using their brains. I'm no mod but for the sake of everyone else reading this, I'd advise everyone to use your head before posting :)

 

[Level 56]

Really glad that landorus-I is being suspected as it unhealthy for the current metagame.

Landorus-I is very threatening in the current metagame as it is blessed with great speed and power + sheer force and a great movepool. The real problem why landorus-I is such a threatening mon is due to its ability sheer force + life orb, which makes it special attack even more powerful and forces many switch-ins when it comes in the battlefield. Its speed maybe low than threats like keldeo, lati twins, tornadus etc but even these mons find it difficult to switch-in vs landorus-I. Its just incredible how many roles landorus-I plays in a battle, like its wallbreaking ability, due to which stall teams have a hard time facing it. The only true counter it has is mega latias, which landorus-I doesn't mind much as mega latias is pursuit weak and the landorus user can just go into tyranitar for example when mega latias comes in and pursuit it, the next time, mega latias can't come in directly vs landorus-I. Its a deadly late-game cleaner as it has access to rock polish. It also makes teambuilding difficult in the current metagame.

Though it still has decent weaknesses, like it is weak to aqua jet, ice shard, other priority moves and easy to revenge kill.

All in all, there are multiple roles it plays in a battle and the opportunity cost is very small. Which is the reason, it should get banned, so that the metagame gets much more better than now.

 

[FlamingVictini]

I am personally leaning towards banning landorus-I. I'm going to use ABR 's posts to illustrate my points.

I'm going to have to say that Landorus is not worthy of a ban from the OU metagame for several reasons. Most of these arguments will involve diminishing the arguments of the pro-ban players, simply because of the fact that the burden of proof is on the pro-ban side.

Landorus is not a large contributor to matchup issues: This sort of has to do with my theory of the matchup issue in general, which is that this issue is largely caused by the players' team selection, and not necessarily the state of the metagame. The kind of teams that Landorus beats, the slower ones, are inherently susceptible to matchup. If a team is largely based around slow walls that perform in a reactionary way, it is obvious that they are going to have overwhelming matchup issues. In addition to this, bulkier teams cause longer games, which makes each turn less meaningful to the outcome of the game. The individual plays that are made in a game with slow teams have a small impact on the game as a whole when compared to matchup. Matchup is simply a much larger factor than plays when it comes to these kinds of teams. The playerbase needs to accept that the problem stems from their own choices, not from pokemon like Landorus.
Landorus has the potential to beat all of its checks (besides two), but can not beat all of them at once and is easy to revenge kill: A lot of people like to say that Landorus is too good versus every style, and that it can sweep and wallbreak at the same time, but this is just untrue. While Rock Polish sets have the potential to sweep, using this move makes Landorus a much worse wallbreaker. Limiting it to only three attacking moves greatly hinders its breaking capabilities, and allows many checks to be consistent. In addition to this, Rock Polish does not even beat offense that easily. Firstly, Landorus does not have many opportunities to set up versus offense. Many common offensive pokemon, such as Keldeo, Weavile, Thundurus, and Latios, all easily prevent set up and revenge kill Landorus. Saying that Landorus is anything better than mediocre versus offense is just untrue. Landorus does not have the raw speed or bulk to withstand offensive threats. As far as wallbreaking goes, Landorus is somewhat overrated. Keep in mind that this is not to say that Landorus is not a great wallbreaker. It is true that Landorus has fantastic raw power and coverage, but people often mistake potential success for actual success. There are plenty of prevalent pokemon that naturally defensively check many Landorus sets, such as Chansey, Gliscor, Spdef Gyara, Lati@s, Skarmory, Slowking, Torn-T, Cresselia, and other less common ones. It is also true that Landorus can potentially beat all of these pokemon with viable coverage options, but it is impossible to beat all of them with one moveset. Scouting is a very natural, competitive part of pokemon battling and should not be dismissed as an unhealthy aspect. Sometimes scouting is just unnecessary because a team could have more than one Landorus check, and thus will likely not lose to a single set. This leads me to my next point.

Landorus does not restrict teambuilding to an unhealthy extent: As I just stated, Landorus checks are naturally on competitive OverUsed teams. Pokemon like Gliscor, Lati@s, Skarmory, and Torn-T are all very viable in this OU metagame and are thus very common. Very often one could build an OU team and happen to have Landorus checks as is. Even if the aforementioned scenario does not occur, taking threats into account when teambuilding is very natural. Landorus does not restrict building any more than lets say, Bisharp or Keldeo. Having to double check to make sure one has a Landorus switchin is no different from having to check for an (insert different offensive mon here) switchin.

TL;DR: Read the bold. The playerbase needs to take some responsibility and accept that they are the cause for the "problems" that are allegedly caused by Landorus. Landorus is not the culprit of these issues, and the aforementioned points prove this.

First issue is about matchup. Here, ABR argues that the matchup issues are due to players choosing slower, bulkier, and more balanced teams rather than taking an offensive approach to the meta. I personally know that ABR is a primarily offense player (as am I), but that doesn't mean that one can argue that people shouldn't use fat teams because landorus-I exists. Rather, we should promote more diversity (which would mean making fat teams more viable) by banning landorus. If landorus doesn't promote diversity because the only thing we see are very fat, hard-to-break cores (without landorus), them keeping it would be better. Obviously, we don't want people to spam stall/semi-stall because we remove mons that break it apart. My vote will largely depend on whether i feel the slower, bulkier teams that die to wallbreakers like lando-i become unhealthy for the metagame.
A major point I would like to make is that bar M-Latias or maybe cress, Landorus-I is able to choose his counters based on his moveset. That means that the player on the defensive has to adapt to what the opposing lando-i is running, while the lando gets of free damage / kills as the opponent attempts to respond with a prediction, sack, scout, etc. Some anti-ban players argue that they can just put a few checks and predict around landorus and they will be fine. They are not considering that the landorus player can also predict, and until the set is revealed, the one trying to react is on the backside by quite a bit in almost any situation. Lando-I requires very little team support to do well (while other less potent threats need a bit more support), and can shred through teams with ease if their answer is removed. This basically answers the thing about landorus not being able to beat everything at once, and about how scouting is naturally part of the game. Bluffing is another possibility to consider. Unlike bisharp or keldeo, the movesets are all very similar, landorus is much more diverse in sets/movepool, hits harder without a downside (choice locked, lo recoil, etc.).

It has amazing bulk for an offensive mon, amazing sweeping/wallbreaking potential, etc. As an all around great mon with few downsides and checks/counters, it arguably breaks the metagame. As the arguably best mon in OU atm (besides maybe Altaria and Metagross), Landorus is just so much more diverse and can run coverage to atleast get sizeable damage on anything that tries to come in, lure "counters", etc.

In summary, landorus is a great mon that arguably breaks the metagame. It is very good without a doubt, the argument differentiates between whether banning landorus would improve the metagame and teambuilding, or not. Personally, I currently believe banning landorus-I would be beneficial for the OU metagame.

 

[Sabella]

Abr you cant simply blame the user because they choose to use slow teams, the idea of a healthy metagame is to be able to use multiple styles of play with equal advantage not have one style of play dominate the metagame. I dont really consider that healthy. The other problem i see with lando is that many of its counters are absolutely demolished by bisharp. They can be easily trapped or pure set up bait for sharp which makes its offensive presence even more deadly

 

[give me an A]

Just wanted to point out that some of the no-ban arguments seem really flawed, especially the ones relating to how the balance teams will take over the universe if Landorus leaves. Firstly, Landorus is not the only excellent balance breaker. Yes, its by far the best, but tail glow Manaphy, calm mind Reuniclus, dragon dance mega Altaria, life orb Tornadus-T and Hydreigon can bring many balance archetypes to their knees, though certainly not as effectively. If anything, banning Landorus will shake up the metagame rather then sterilize it as people would be forced to think of more creative ways to beat balance without picking the easiest way out. Also, Landorus is the "only thing keeping balance from being a broken play style (read this extremely sarcastically)" then isn't that just another indication of over centralization?

As for Landorus itself, I think its departure would solve a lot of problems people seem to whining about, including the preparing for threats issue. Landorus has an extremely limited pool of switchins, and only Cressilia and Mega Latias can really switch in to all possible movesets (unless you have the urge to run outrage Landorus, which I would extremely discourage). Landorus has the tools to pretty much screw over every single play style, breaking stall and balance with calm mind and all-out attacker sets and murdering many offensive builds with rock polish sets. Landorus's extensive movepool allow it to mix and match its options to the point where very few teams will be able to handle Landorus and its teammates. Landorus is extremely versatile and splashable, unlike many of the mega pokemon, and can fulfill pretty much any offensive role possible. Its just to much for the metagame to handle.

Another thing to note is that a lot of the latest metagame trends revolve around Landorus. The rise of ice priority and weavile? Landorus revenge killer. AV Tornadus-T. Landorus. Mega Alakazam? Can copy sheer force and destroy tons of stuff. Mega Latias's huge usage spike? You know the story. Overall, Landorus meets the criteria of a ban worthy pokemon. Its splashable, dangerous in every matchup, near impossible to counter and centralizes the meta around it. I am fully on board with banning Landorus.

 

[tehy]

hey there; this is a request at OU team / moderation

i've gotten reqs, being one of the first to do so (certainly the first to post, though I saw people on ladder with 2700 COIL before me). And yet, I wasn't playing OU before the suspect for some time (ever since ORAS came out, i was too lazy to rebuild my team for the new meta) so I have no idea if Landorus-I is broken or not, and I don't see as there's a way for me to find out. as such, can we please get a regular OU ladder up?

personally I would've voted to ban Landorus-I in XY, so i'm going to vote ban unless I see some very compelling arguments against it. that said i'd like to base my vote on something more than forum posts and old metagame knowledge so, please?

edit: That certainly works but i'd like a ladder now, too

still thanks for letting me know

 

[Analytic]

hey there; this is a request at OU team / moderation

i've gotten reqs, being one of the first to do so (certainly the first to post, though I saw people on ladder with 2700 COIL before me). And yet, I wasn't playing OU before the suspect for some time (ever since ORAS came out, i was too lazy to rebuild my team for the new meta) so I have no idea if Landorus-I is broken or not, and I don't see as there's a way for me to find out. as such, can we please get a regular OU ladder up?

personally I would've voted to ban Landorus-I in XY, so i'm going to vote ban unless I see some very compelling arguments against it. that said i'd like to base my vote on something more than forum posts and old metagame knowledge so, please?

voting doesn't take place till like a week after the suspect ladder ends. In this time, the regular ladder will be up and you'll be able to use landorus-i. Feel free to hmu if you need any battles to showcase Landorus :)

 

[Gradient Facade]

After spending a decent amount of time trying to get the requirements in order to vote, I question more and more why it was thought that a 2-1 win ratio was a good idea as part of voting requirements. 2700 COIL already takes a considerable amount of battles in order to earn, but being forced to win two thirds of battles is not something sustainable at all.

While it is true that you can gain a large amount of wins initially by preying on less experienced players in low ladder, the difficulty in battling opponents increases dramatically higher up on the ladder. When you are a competent battler facing someone who is essentially your equal in skill and mindgames, then it becomes extremely impractical to maintain a 2-1 win ratio when most battles become quite close and sometimes a bit reliant on luck.

I myself was laddering initially with a 5-1 win ratio early in the suspect test and gained a lot of COIL, but my win rate has since plummetted to closer to 50/50 all while only gaining about 25 COIL per battle with 600 more to go, which means that my initial lead in my wins has utterly dissolved to only just above the 2-1 threshold and I am still not even close to gaining the required COIL to qualify.

Personally, I find it pretty disappointing that one of the more important suspect tests is so incredibly hard to even get the chance to vote on. Last time I checked, only about 16 people have the requirements to vote at the moment.

landorus-i is a pokemon that is certainly capable of bringing pain to balanced teams, but it being banned would, as many have already said, spice up the metagame and allow more balance team breakers like manaphy and mega gardevoir to show what they can do all while not resticting teambuilding in such a straight-forward way. If I could vote, I'd give it the boot as well.

 

[Analytic]

After spending a decent amount of time trying to get the requirements in order to vote, I question more and more why it was thought that a 2-1 win ratio was a good idea as part of voting requirements. 2700 COIL already takes a considerable amount of battles in order to earn, but being forced to win two thirds of battles is not something sustainable at all.

While it is true that you can gain a large amount of wins initially by preying on less experienced players in low ladder, the difficulty in battling opponents increases dramatically higher up on the ladder. When you are a competent battler facing someone who is essentially your equal in skill and mindgames, then it becomes extremely impractical to maintain a 2-1 win ratio when most battles become quite close and sometimes a bit reliant on luck.

I myself was laddering initially with a 5-1 win ratio early in the suspect test and gained a lot of COIL, but my win rate has since plummetted to closer to 50/50 all while only gaining about 25 COIL per battle with 600 more to go, which means that my initial lead in my wins has utterly dissolved to only just above the 2-1 threshold and I am still not even close to gaining the required COIL to qualify.

Personally, I find it pretty disappointing that one of the more important suspect tests is so incredibly hard to even get the chance to vote on. Last time I checked, only about 16 people have the requirements to vote at the moment.

landorus-i is a pokemon that is certainly capable of bringing pain to balanced teams, but it being banned would, as many have already said, spice up the metagame and allow more balance team breakers like manaphy and mega gardevoir to show what they can do all while not resticting teambuilding in such a straight-forward way. If I could vote, I'd give it the boot as well.

I think that's the point of hard reqs, makes sure players who know what they are doing are the ones able to vote

 

[Machi]

Personally, I find it pretty disappointing that one of the more important suspect tests is so incredibly hard to even get the chance to vote on. Last time I checked, only about 16 people have the requirements to vote at the moment.

Well if the Aegislash test is anything to go by I wouldn't worry about numbers there was still a sizable amount even with the 2:1 ratio instituted, besides there is still ample time to gain requirements so the numbers being small right now is only temporary. It is difficult but as stated above they're trying to scrutinize the quality of players better.

 

[AM]

After spending a decent amount of time trying to get the requirements in order to vote, I question more and more why it was thought that a 2-1 win ratio was a good idea as part of voting requirements. 2700 COIL already takes a considerable amount of battles in order to earn, but being forced to win two thirds of battles is not something sustainable at all.

While it is true that you can gain a large amount of wins initially by preying on less experienced players in low ladder, the difficulty in battling opponents increases dramatically higher up on the ladder. When you are a competent battler facing someone who is essentially your equal in skill and mindgames, then it becomes extremely impractical to maintain a 2-1 win ratio when most battles become quite close and sometimes a bit reliant on luck.

I myself was laddering initially with a 5-1 win ratio early in the suspect test and gained a lot of COIL, but my win rate has since plummetted to closer to 50/50 all while only gaining about 25 COIL per battle with 600 more to go, which means that my initial lead in my wins has utterly dissolved to only just above the 2-1 threshold and I am still not even close to gaining the required COIL to qualify.

Personally, I find it pretty disappointing that one of the more important suspect tests is so incredibly hard to even get the chance to vote on. Last time I checked, only about 16 people have the requirements to vote at the moment.

landorus-i is a pokemon that is certainly capable of bringing pain to balanced teams, but it being banned would, as many have already said, spice up the metagame and allow more balance team breakers like manaphy and mega gardevoir to show what they can do all while not resticting teambuilding in such a straight-forward way. If I could vote, I'd give it the boot as well.

If you can't maintain a 2:1 W/L Ratio you shouldn't be voting, and that's as blunt as I can put it. With that said we're moving on from this topic so it doesn't sidetrack to complaints of how people can't maintain this for whatever reason it may be. Thanks.

 

[Freeroamer]

Just got my reqs, so going to post my thoughts on the metagame with Landorus compared to without.

I found the new metagame significantly more enjoyable compared to the one containing Landorus as I felt there was greater freedom in teambuilding and I saw a variety of builds that simply wouldn't have been possible in the previous metagame due to the pressure Landorus exerts on teams and the fact you have to be able to stop it in some way. This could be applied to lots of other threats such as Manaphy and Kyurem-Black who also put huge pressure on balanced builds, but each have their own flaws that mean they are to some degree easier to handle in the teambuilding process. This is not something I feel that Landorus shares, as it has the movepool and stat distribution to cater itself to taking on particular team styles and beating particular threats as it pleases, meaning it's very hard to justify not using it on offensive builds. I feel this is especially true as it's only opportunity cost comes with not being able to use Landorus-Therian, it doesn't even take up the mega slot unlike some of the other behemoths in OU, further increasing it's value. I am very much leaning towards voting ban, but I am receptive to anti-ban arguments as there have been some good ones, such as ABR's.

 

[Martin]

edit: idk if the topic has changed 'cause i posted this from a few pages back so sorry if this is a little off-topic.

I've seen some people using the fact that it doesn't have the easiest time switching in as an argument for it to not be banned when a: it isn't being suspected for its ability to switch in and b: some of Lando's best partners are slow VoltTurners, Healing Wish/Lunar Dance/Memento users and Lagging Tail Whimsicott. I'm not saying that it isn't a discussion point, but some people are just blowing it way out of proportion. Also I saw an argument talking about how choiced Electric-types are a liability due to their main STAB having an immunity. By that logic, Choice Scarf Lando-T, Scarftran, Scarf/Specs Raikou, Specs/Scarf Keldeo and Scarf Kyu-B are also liabilities because their spammable STAB(s) has an immunity (Flying-types/Levitators, Flash Fire, Ground-types/Volt Absorb/Lightningrod(/Motor Drive (Electavire/Zebstrika OP), Ghost-types/Water Absorb/Storm Drain and Fairy-types, respectively) when we all know that is not the case. Please don't use that as an excuse to say that choiced Electric-types are a liability when they really aren't to that scale. Sure they give free switch-ins to some 'mons, but so does every other choiced 'mon - making that argument insanely tenuous.

 

[Raiza]

Ok I finally got reqs so I will post my last considerations about Landorus in the metagame at the moment. Almost everything has been already posted to forget me if I repeat something. also I will skip the fluff about coverage because I already talked about it and it has been treated enough.. If my decision was a bit pending at the start, I'm now fully convinced in giving the ban to Landorus. From a personal experience, during this ladder session, the tier just felt better than it was before, as there was possibility to run different playstyles and variety of teams, and because defensively-oriented teams such as balanced ones, of course benefit from that and also were allowed to run some different patterns and builds, but were still struggling against things such as Manaphy and Kyurem-B(I actually used them and I didn't feel a major struggle against balanced teams). Manaphy and Kyurem-B, still aren't no brainers and have an higher risk if you compare them to Landorus, as they carry some drawbacks and can be handled more easily, therefore need a bigger support, also Manaphy and Kyurem-B(w/out outrage) actually have counters and still struggle with things such as Chansey, which fears Knock Off from Landorus and can get past easily by it (Manaphy also needs a Tail Glow boost most of the times to put in work).