it's not even slightly offense crazy you're making that up completely.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Ladder Almost Any Ability
- Thread starter Klang
- Start date
Stall as a current strategy is barely viable as it is, there are a huge number of threats that just terrorize stall. Adapt/Tinted Lens Dnite has almost no switch ins, if any at all. CM Tinted/Adapt Lati@s is totally terrifying. Tough Claws Pangoro 6-0's stall.
Have you played the meta? On the ladder? There are barely any stall teams. The stats clearly stated 11% HO and 4% Stall. Stats don't even tell the whole picture. And if you play the meta, you are probably aware that offense teams are far more successful then stall teams.
I don't feel that Tinted Lens/Adapt/Tough Claws are the most pressing issues though. Skymin and the Deo forms are a more pressing matter. I've already talked about why both are broken, and now is a good time to do something about them. Skymin in particular, as its high speed and special attack make it a threat to every play style.
I've already responded to those stats of yours, and shown why they don't support your argument at all. I do play the meta and despite the fact that I am an offense player I STILL do better on aaa with stall because stall is better in AAA.
skymin is walled by levi steel types and deoxys is completely necessary for offense or else no leads beat skarm (except azelf) and not having deoxys would be completely devastating for offense as there would be no other good ways of getting hazards. I'd rather you replied to my older comments on the matter on page 11 as the debate was more well developed at the time.
You combined semi stall and stall and claimed that since there was more of those two playstyles then just Hyper Offense that made it a stall meta, which doesn't make sense. Hyper Offense is the extreme form of Offense, and Stall is the extreme form of Semi Stall. Stats aren't everything even if your interpretation is correct. And I already explained to you why more fat mons show up in AAA offense teams. Offense teams needs fat mons as pirority checks. Hence making teams appear more stally then they really are.
As for your personal experiences with stall and offense I don't think that's too relevant.
Okay so Skymin can possibly be walled by levitate steels, but you aren't thinking of Tinted Lens. Anyway Skymin isn't just a huge threat to bulky teams, its high speed and ridiculous power makes it very difficult to deal with offensively. Yes, priority kills it, i've heard that argument before. But can pirority switch in? Hell no. And even offense teams have trouble with something they can't switch into. Its pretty flexible, and a possible adapt/tinted ban doesn't hurt it too badly. Serene Grace is still really damn good.
Not sure how Deo-s beats lead Skarmory. Brave Bird 2hkos and hazards Deo-S generally runs Knock off or Psycho Boost, and neither of those 2 options does much. It can taunt to insure Skarm can't defog, but then it can't get hazards down thanks to Gale Wings! So unless you run Thunderbolt specfically for Skarmory, you don't win. Deo-D can taunt and Recover off Brave Bird, if you were referring to that as "beating skarm." I also find the idea that offense can't find a replacement hazard setter kinda ridiculous. I also find the notion that offense needs to set SR and Spikes to win against stall ridiculous. You aren't even considering how hard it is to prevent Deo from setting hazards for the opposing team. Every Pokemon should have counterplay, and the Deo's counterplay is super limited. The only thing is try to kill it before it sets more then SR and 1 layer of Spikes. There are no other answers. Deo's support movepool ensures this. Moldy Taunt/Twave pave the way for easy hazard setting. You can't even take advantage of the "free turns" and set up with something offensive. While Deoxys isn't broken in the traditional sense of lacking checks/counters, it is broken in the sense that there is little to no way to prevent it from doing it's job.
xJownage
Even pendulums swing both ways
Its more like he compared AAA stall vs HO usage stats to most other metas and standard metas (bar TS because that's doomed to be a stallwar) and AAA stall stats were much higher than most metas on the server. I don't see how you can make the assumption that every person makes the choice between playing HO and Stall - 99% of people find HO more fun to play than Stall and consequently the ratio of the teams is heavily slanted.
We can argue about how offense is "unbeatable" or whatever bullshit we want to spout, but it's not realistic. You're being heinously idealistic about the notion that a certain stall team should be able to beat every threat. It shouldn't, because that doesn't support a balanced meta.
You said it yourself about skymin - its easier for stall to handle than offense, and for that reason, a ban would support OFFENSE, not stall. There is no argument there.
If you want to argue that Deo-s is broken, be my guess. Recycle some of those OU arguments, considering it's issues here are very similar (it's just as hard to beat, even though you can't magic bounce here (MB was basically unviable att in OU)). It's just important for you to understand that people naturally prefer to play offense instead of stall, so just because HO has a much higher playrate than Stall doesn't speak for the balance of the meta alone - only when comparing it to other metas will you actually be able to make actual conclusions.
My response was going to be much longer but you pretty much said everything I was going to say but I'd like to add that a few things.
the amount of offense being played on the aaa meta is pretty consistent with smogon tiers, but stall is much higher.
there are several threats in aaa that's counters change depending on what it's ability is. Latios and heracross and skymin are all examples of this.
The difference between deo-s/d in ou and in aaa is that in aaa your pokemon that have stealth rocks go full hazards set up because they have to use mold breaker, you can't just throw sr on a garchomp that's already a strong pokemon.
You're kinda missing my point in several spots. Yeah a Skymin ban would probably help out offense more then stall. I don't really care which playstyle it helps out more. If its broken it should be banned, simple as that. And i believe its broken for reasons already stated. And my arguments on the Deo forms also having nothing to do with playstyle. Its just about impossible for any playstyle to stop the Deo forms from setting hazards. The only reasons i'm making any arguments in regard to playstyle is because Grurk brought it up first. He said it would be catastrophic to offense if the Deos were banned. I said offfense doesn't need to set SR and Spikes to beat Stall, and its highly unlikely offense would take a serious blow from the loss of the Deos because its doing so well in the current meta.
I also never even came close to implying offense was unbeatable, i simply said it was far more successful then stall in the current meta. Yes this is partly because more people like offense. It is also because Offense is really damn good in AAA and has very powerful tools to work with. I also never said Stall should be able to counter every threat. I just listed a few threats that can easily take apart Stall teams. I didn't even say they were broken. I feel like you are putting words in my mouth. I never made any of those arguments you claim i'm making (In regard to the "offense is unbeatable" section). Maybe you should reread my posts.
As for that note on SR Garchomp Grurk, SR Chomp is still quite viable without Mold Breaker. A Swords Dance and Rocks set can easily pressure Magic Bounce users and prevent them from coming in, allowing Garchomp to safely set rocks. It is also worth noting that attacks in general are more unreliable in AAA, not just Stealth Rocks. That is just the nature of the meta. Immunity Abilities are incredibly common. But you don't have to run Mold Breaker Victini to be effective with your fire type attacks. So i'm not sure how you need Mold Breaker to make hazards effective.
Last edited:
shaymin sky doesn't hurt stall more than latios or heracross. Shaymin sky doesn't hurt offense that much due to it being checked by skarmory and genesect and revenged by any priority which is mandatory for offense. Honestly, while playing againainst it on offense it's not as much of a threat as you're making it seem, honestly I think braviary is more threatening to offense even though you always carry a braviary counter. It is not just about impossible for any play-style to stop deo from getting hazards. as you've said before offensive skarmory beats it. Also I've beaten it before with some magic coat users. You don't even have to use those sets to beat it though because you don't have to beat it, You can say the same thing about azelf in uu. While you may argue that azelf can't get up spikes so that's not as bad, however deoxys doesn't get explode either.
you genuinely have no proof that offense is doing better than stall I've called you out on it and you've provided stats that don't support your argument. He also only said that because you are pro banning a number of offensive tools.
You absolutely do need mold breaker to make hazards effective, not being able to get hazards up if your opponent is smart is not really an option.
xJownage
Even pendulums swing both ways
I think you're missing my point as well. I'm saying that instead of looking at everything like it's in a vacuum, let's try to do what's best for the meta. Simple enough.
Like I said, I'm not going to stop you from making a Deo-S argument. Personally, I don't believe Deo-D is broken at all, but Deo-S is something I just don't know about. Sure, it's the best hazard setter, and is almost unstoppable, but would offense not take a big hit? Anybody who says offense would be "just fine" is probably biased or has never played offense in AAA. I'm not accusing you of saying this, I'm just pointing out there are factors that need to be accounted for.
And again, you said "far more successful than stall in the current meta"(I took the liberty of correcting then to than). If you want to suggest offense is better than stall here, you are basically saying that offense is superior to stall in almost every metagame bar tier shift based on the ladder stats. In terms of relativity, you would have to argue for all of those metas if you wanted a chance at making that argument. You haven't defined that offense is more successful than stall, and have said nothing to support that statement objectively. That's why you don't have a solid argument right now, and why I'm responding to this: I still see the wrong mindset and approach to your calling for bans. Your not covering all your bases, and aren't making objective arguments to support your claims of imbalance that are critical in your arguments for the banning of certain mons.
Also, what's our objective? Are we trying to create a balanced meta, where all playstyles are viable and effective, or are we trying to eliminate broken threats? This is arguably where STABmons went wrong - they tried too hard to find reasons to ban mons that were broken rather than trying to find ways to balance the metagame. It's still happening as well, and there is still to little talk about how to balance the metagame over there. We want to achieve balance, not ban everything that is broken by traditional definitions. Banning things by traditional definitions will rarely lead to true balance.
yoman5 we aren't banning anything right now because of just that.
Because it was deemed uncompetitive enough that the tournament would have been better without it, even if the ban had to happen mid Open. It's more of a gimmick then a top threat anyway.
The only way to "prove" offense is doing better is to have a breakdown of win percentages and GXEs per team, and we don't have access to that. Pure usage doesn't actually prove a damn thing. I"m not even sure why thats relevant. Playstyles are so subjective trying to create a meaningful ban argument based on playstyles ends up being impossible and full of bs and holes. We could sit here all day and argue about playstyles without getting anything meaningful accomplished.
Thats why i wouldn't have even brought up playstyle. I"m arguing that the Deo forms and Skymin are broken, and since they are broken, they should be banned. Real simple. They stand out above all the rest, and they have very limited counterplay. Unless Kl4ng decides to set a new standard of ban for AAA, i'm going to base my arguments on the OU one. That seems reasonable to me.
And i think Skymin fits the "broken" section pretty well. It's high speed tier allows it to outspeed the vast majority of offense threats, and most of its checks don't have a chance of switching in. Genesect is 2hkoed by Vanilla Air Slash. So it needs to be Fridge -ate or Scarf to switch in and win. Which is actually pretty common. But it only can switch in once and its super weakened. And if that is one of Skymin's best checks, I'm pretty sure there is a problem. Because Genesext still falls under the "pirority and Scarf" umbrella, which can be used to revenge kill most offensive threats, and really isn't a good argument IMO.
Thats why i wouldn't have even brought up playstyle. I"m arguing that the Deo forms and Skymin are broken, and since they are broken, they should be banned. Real simple. They stand out above all the rest, and they have very limited counterplay. Unless Kl4ng decides to set a new standard of ban for AAA, i'm going to base my arguments on the OU one. That seems reasonable to me.
And i think Skymin fits the "broken" section pretty well. It's high speed tier allows it to outspeed the vast majority of offense threats, and most of its checks don't have a chance of switching in. Genesect is 2hkoed by Vanilla Air Slash. So it needs to be Fridge -ate or Scarf to switch in and win. Which is actually pretty common. But it only can switch in once and its super weakened. And if that is one of Skymin's best checks, I'm pretty sure there is a problem. Because Genesext still falls under the "pirority and Scarf" umbrella, which can be used to revenge kill most offensive threats, and really isn't a good argument IMO.
Last edited:
xJownage
Even pendulums swing both ways
What did I already say about banning things based on broken? Instead of arguing that something is broken in a traditional sense, argue that it's banning makes the metagame more balanced. If it doesn't, then we shouldn't ban it, because ultimately, it's better to have a balanced metagame than one without the broken threats. Again, read what I said in my last post.
A balanced metagame has no broken threats. Removing Skymin would make the metagame much more focused on player skill. Motherlove and myself have already made some points on why Skymin needs ban. I don't understand how you can have a balanced meta with broken threats. It literally makes no sense to me. The definitions don't fit.
xJownage
Even pendulums swing both ways
How many times have we seen metas try to ban something that is perceived as "broken" and it turns the metagame into a shithole? How many times have we seen a balanced metagame, where all playstyles are viable and there is solid diversity and options, still have broken mons? They do coexist in some cases, and can. If we want to ban something, we need to do it to balance the metagame playstyle-wise, add diversity, etc. This is probably the reason Adaptability and tinted lens would be a bad ban; it unbalances the playstyles and only breaks more threats. In terms of Skymin, I never argued that it wasn't broken, but what does the metagame gain? I'm pointing this out as a matter of fact, not because I disagree with you.
Gonna paraphrase something I read somewhere (can't remember if it was on smogon or inanother competitive community, but it applies here so w/e):
"For a game to be truely balanced, all of the available options must be equal in capability. However, what Game Freak have provided us with is not balanced, so we ban any elements which lead to substantial unbalance, and we create new ways to play in order to maximise the range of viable options so that there are minimal levels of unbalance. This includes removing any broken or non-competitive elements, because they lead to unbalance."
Following the logic of what I just paraphrased, to say that a metagame can be balanced while retaining any broken elements is to contradict yourself. In order to maximise the level of balance, no element must be considered broken or uncompetitive. If Shaymin-S is broken, then it should be on the chopping block in order to reduce the number of factors leading to unbalance. If its banning leads to something else becoming broken, then that will subsequently be removed for that same reason. "Broken checks broken" would be a poor policy to follow in this situation because that would mean there will never be anything even remotely close to balance.
Imo, Shaymin is broken due to most of its stops on offense being one-time at best and can be played around if using a solid team (using the Refridgerate Gene example, this can be beaten through the use of an ice resist or Thick Fat user due to Gene only being able to switch in on Air Slash once). This makes it unhealthy for offense and, as such, it should be removed. As for the deos, they are not broken in the traditional sense, but rather they are uncompetitive given how easy it is for them to lay hazards and how easy it is to retain said hazards due to their access to Taunt to prevent Defog and how well they pair with spinblockers. Therefore, they should be removed in order to improve the level of balance.
"For a game to be truely balanced, all of the available options must be equal in capability. However, what Game Freak have provided us with is not balanced, so we ban any elements which lead to substantial unbalance, and we create new ways to play in order to maximise the range of viable options so that there are minimal levels of unbalance. This includes removing any broken or non-competitive elements, because they lead to unbalance."
Following the logic of what I just paraphrased, to say that a metagame can be balanced while retaining any broken elements is to contradict yourself. In order to maximise the level of balance, no element must be considered broken or uncompetitive. If Shaymin-S is broken, then it should be on the chopping block in order to reduce the number of factors leading to unbalance. If its banning leads to something else becoming broken, then that will subsequently be removed for that same reason. "Broken checks broken" would be a poor policy to follow in this situation because that would mean there will never be anything even remotely close to balance.
Imo, Shaymin is broken due to most of its stops on offense being one-time at best and can be played around if using a solid team (using the Refridgerate Gene example, this can be beaten through the use of an ice resist or Thick Fat user due to Gene only being able to switch in on Air Slash once). This makes it unhealthy for offense and, as such, it should be removed. As for the deos, they are not broken in the traditional sense, but rather they are uncompetitive given how easy it is for them to lay hazards and how easy it is to retain said hazards due to their access to Taunt to prevent Defog and how well they pair with spinblockers. Therefore, they should be removed in order to improve the level of balance.
xJownage
Even pendulums swing both ways
Broken checks broken is a poor policy, but it's more than possible to have a broken metagame without any broken mons due to playstyle imbalance and a lack of diversity due to a high number of elite threats that tend to outclass many other options. Again, i'm not saying no to a skymin ban, i'm saying no to "lets blindly ban things in a vacuum without thinking of the consequence on the metagame" We want to create the MAXIMUM range of viable options - does a skymin ban change the metagame in a way to which there are more viable options, or less? IMO it does neither, but this is something that HAS to be accounted for when we are talking about banning anything.
well if you agree skymin is broken, and you are saying banning skymin wouldn't change the metagame very much, then what exactly is the downside of removing skymin from the metagame?
Last edited:
xJownage
Even pendulums swing both ways
I didn't say there was, I'm saying that the fact that there is no mention of it means that we are looking at banning things from the wrong direction and that this might be a problem in the future (will)
You are the one saying that offense is doing better so you are the one that has to provide the proof, I have provided proof from the ladder (which whether you like it or not does help in regards to things like common playstyles even if it isn't always filled with the most competent of opponents.)
I do not understand why you think that deoxys is broken, you've made statements like it's nearly impossible to get rid of hazards, but that's not true for the reasons I'm not going to explain again.
"III.) Providing justification is the onus of the side changing the status quo.
A.) It is important to note that the status quo can be changed in the case of releases. This is the situation with Hoopa-Unbound, where it started directly in OU unlike other 680 BST legendaries which start as Ubers and then potentially get suspected to drop to OU.
B.) If a proposal is made to ban a Pokemon, Ability, Item, or Move, the side suggesting this ban must demonstrate all of why this is necessary, how it affects the ladder and the tournament scene, and provide evidence for both.
C.) If a proposal is made to unban a Pokemon, Ability, Item, or Move, the side suggesting this unban must demonstrate all of why this is necessary, how it affects the ladder and the tournament scene, and provide evidence for both.
D.) Complex bans proposals must provide additional information into why the simpler bans are not sufficient."
No you didn't provide proof. You provided some proof that there is a decent amount of offense and stall being used on the ladder. That nothing to do with winning (being successful.) There could be a ton of stall players just losing!
I didn't say it was impossible to get of hazards, i said it was all but impossible to stop Deo from getting them up. An offense team can keep hazards up with pressure and punish defog with Defiant. I already explained what Deo can do to prevent the prevention of hazards.
Just going to say that I'm seeing a lot of people that are asking why we shouldn't ban Skymin, but it's the other way around. Anyone who is pro ban should bring up all the arguments for Skymin's ban, why you think it's broken, why you think removing it would make for a better metagame, and how the meta would change as a consequence. After that is done the counterarguments and the discussion can start, but I don't really see the arguments to begin with. (okay there were a couple short paragraphs here and there, but I think we could have a much better discussion if we organized it a bit more. Also keep in mind that any suspect/ban would most likely start after the Open anyway)
the fact that it is being used implies that players are being conditioned to use it meaning that when they are playing hyper offense they aren't doing as well as when they are in ou or any of the other tiers and when they play stall or semi stall they are doing better than they are in ou or any of the other tiers.
You didn't read what I said, if you lead with skarmory, rapid spin or magic coat your opponent willl not get off hazards. Also what the idiot ninja said.
Saying that you can stop them getting up hazard with Magic Coat, Spin or Skarm leads is kinda missing the point though. Sure you /can/, but that is dependent on such a large number of factors that calling them reliable stops is a whole other matter. The fact is that all of those are reliant on a: the Deo user leading with Deo, and b: the Deo user not doing what any player with a brain would do (switching out of the coat user to lay hazards later or them going to a spinblocker/using the essentally free switch that Spin provides to steal momentum). Prankster Skarmory can't Taunt through Mental Herb, meaning that the Deo user is guaranteed at least one layer of Spikes before it gets Taunted, meaning that it can just keep using Spikes until the Skarm Taunts a second time and then proceed to punish the incoming Defog with a Defiant/Competitive mon. Once those hazards are up, offense is capable of putting huge pressure onto the opposing team which allows for them to be protected well and for their removal to be easily punished, which is why the Deos start to cause problems, because being unable to use Magic Bounce as a buffer v.s. a Spikes stacker is a huge problem because it means there is no way to guarantee that they don't get the first layer of hazards up and start the vicious cycle. You are right to say that they aren't /broken/ in the traditional sense, but the support that they provide is uncompetitive due to there being no reliable counterplay to it.