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.
In order to prevent the need for a mass-ban of Z-move abusers,the 2v2 council has decided to BAN all Z-Crystals from 2v2 until further discussion.
We simply deemed that the users were too many to rely on individual bans,so instead Z-Crystals has been banned as a whole.If you want more information as to why Z-Moves were banned,feel free to read the posts above.
Together with that,we have decided to ban Final Gambit due to the fact that it is extremely unhealthy for the metagame,since turning the match into an 1v1 could ruin a lot of strategies that people may have put thought into.It is entirely different than focus firing since it only requires one of the pokemon to attack.Common users of Final Gambit include Victini and Accelgor.The problem was bigger at the time Focus Sash was banned,because the only reliable counters to Final Gambit were Ghost-types,Pokemon with higher than 100/80 HP,Protect and Priority.And while most of them are common,Protect turns the game into a 50/50 unless both foes Protect,in which case the Final Gambit user is free to use another move like Trick,and priority can be simply blocked by Quick Guard.Pokemon with more than 100 HP are by no means abundant in a metagame where one of the best strategies is to hit hard and fast.
Banning Z-Moves in 2v2 makes the so called “disable+encore” strat even better, since you can use it almost every time (except against dark types). The only way you can beat this strat is to use with both the two mons a move that either OHKO’s Whimsicott or Mega-Banette or to use protect on the exact moment and mon on which the opponent uses “disable+encore”, and a quick guard and magic bounce/coat can stop this as well (but are not a big threat because they are not used a lot). If the opponent has one of these counters you just use the other 2 mons.
The strategy (I understand that some people will hate this strat):
Banette-Mega @ Banettite
Ability: Frisk
EVs: 252 HP / 4 Def / 252 SpD
Careful Nature
- Disable
- Night Shade/Shadow Claw
- Protect
- Taunt/Destiny Bond
In turn one Banette frisks the opponents items (which can't be a zmove anymore), you Mega evolve it to get the prankster ability and you use protect with both mons to see what moves they do. If one move is a threat for you, you use encore and disable on that mon (and because you prankster you can move first most of the time) which makes that one mon use struggle for 2 turns (the first turn that mon uses no move at all). After you did this to the first mon of the opponent, you use this on the second mon. When both mons struggle themselves to death you support the recoil damage by using moonblast/night shade depending on their typings and the mon on which you used encore and disable first. Predicting what the opponent wants to do makes this strat easier, you can use taunt for example on stall like mons. What you can do as well is using encore on the mon that used protect, or any status move in turn 1 and disable on the other. This way you can deal with the mon you used disable on first and let the other use that status move the whole battle. Without Z-moves you can be 100% sure that after the disable+encore the mon will use struggle and will not surprise you with a Z-move. Also if the opponent uses a Z-move turn 1 you can't use the strat on that mon because you can't use disable and encore on a Z-move.
I'm not saying this is the best strat and this will work everytime, I just want to say that the Z-move ban makes this strat even better. (Also sorry to the people who don't like the strat at all).
Banning Z-Moves in 2v2 makes the so called “disable+encore” strat even better, since you can use it almost every time (except against dark types). The only way you can beat this strat is to use with both the two mons a move that either OHKO’s Whimsicott or Mega-Banette or to use protect on the exact moment and mon on which the opponent uses “disable+encore”, and a quick guard and magic bounce/coat can stop this as well (but are not a big threat because they are not used a lot). If the opponent has one of these counters you just use the other 2 mons.
The strategy (I understand that some people will hate this strat): View attachment 105724
Banette-Mega @ Banettite
Ability: Frisk
EVs: 252 HP / 4 Def / 252 SpD
Calm Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Disable
- Night Shade
- Protect
- Taunt
In turn one Banette frisks the opponents items (which can't be a zmove anymore), you Mega evolve it to get the prankster ability and you use protect with both mons to see what moves they do. If one move is a threat for you, you use encore and disable on that mon (and because you prankster you can move first most of the time) which makes that one mon use struggle for 2 turns (the first turn that mon uses no move at all). After you did this to the first mon of the opponent, you use this on the second mon. When both mons struggle themselves to death you support the recoil damage by using moonblast/night shade depending on their typings and the mon on which you used encore and disable first. Predicting what the opponent wants to do makes this strat easier, you can use taunt for example on stall like mons. What you can do as well is using encore on the mon that used protect, or any status move in turn 1 and disable on the other. This way you can deal with the mon you used disable on first and let the other use that status move the whole battle. Without Z-moves you can be 100% sure that after the disable+encore the mon will use struggle and will not surprise you with a Z-move. Also if the opponent uses a Z-move turn 1 you can't use the strat on that mon because you can't use disable and encore on a Z-move.
I'm not saying this is the best strat and this will work everytime, I just want to say that the Z-move ban makes this strat even better. (Also sorry to the people who don't like the strat at all).
motogp Going beyond merely disliking your decision and thinking that it is wrong, the way you made your decision is a way that no decision should be made. Ever. For any meta.
To summarize: Motogp gets on the 1v1 room, the 1v1 room, mind you, not even the OM room, which is really where he should be going for big decisions on a non-1v1 OM, and proceeds to ask the room for six mons that are “broken” with Z Moves outside of terrain or weather. After he gets six opinions, not even backed up with any form of facts, a list that quite possibly includes Kingdra, which was suggested by Kentari and which is only vaguely good in rain, he posts on Smogon saying that Z is banned. At this point I thought that motogp had perhaps gone mad or had his Showdown and Smogon accounts stolen by his councilman Rumplestiltskin , a user so violently biased against Z that he carried on in a tirade for thirty minutes about how the non-used and horrible set of Groundium Slaking “proved” that Z moves were broken. This is not how you make administrative decisions! This is like Donald Trump saying to a roomful of people, “give me six reasons you don’t personally like Syria and we’ll nuke them”. DOES NO ONE SEE THE SHEER INSANITY IN THIS?!
Edit: not trying to offend any Syrians, just using an example
motogp Going beyond merely disliking your decision and thinking that it is wrong, the way you made your decision is a way that no decision should be made. Ever. For any meta.
To summarize: Motogp gets on the 1v1 room, the 1v1 room, mind you, not even the OM room, which is really where he should be going for big decisions on a non-1v1 OM, and proceeds to ask the room for six mons that are “broken” with Z Moves outside of terrain or weather. After he gets six opinions, not even backed up with any form of facts, a list that quite possibly includes Kingdra, which was suggested by Kentari and which is only vaguely good in rain, he posts on Smogon saying that Z is banned. At this point I thought that motogp had perhaps gone mad or had his Showdown and Smogon accounts stolen by his councilman Rumplestiltskin , a user so violently biased against Z that he carried on in a tirade for thirty minutes about how the non-used and horrible set of Groundium Slaking “proved” that Z moves were broken. This is not how you make administrative decisions! This is like Donald Trump saying to a roomful of people, “give me six reasons you don’t personally like Syria and we’ll nuke them”. DOES NO ONE SEE THE SHEER INSANITY IN THIS?!
Edit: not trying to offend any Syrians, just using an example
The only thing keeping me from banning Z-moves was the worry that it could be the users,instead of the mechanism.After realising that Z-Move abusers were more than I thought,I decided to ban them.Again,this IS susceptible to change in the next few days,especially with all the chaos around it.Instead of complaining about the decision,post about why you think Z-Moves are healthy for the metagame.
The only thing keeping me from banning Z-moves was the worry that it could be the users,instead of the mechanism.After realising that Z-Move abusers were more than I thought,I decided to ban them.Again,this IS susceptible to change in the next few days,especially with all the chaos around it.Instead of complaining about the decision,post about why you think Z-Moves are healthy for the metagame.
Due to ongoing controversy, the 2v2 council and I have decided to suspect all Z crystals for an unban.
The requirements will be 1500 ELO with at least 70 GXE.
A 55% supermajority will have to be reached in order for Z-Moves to be unbanned.
In order to acquire requirements,you will have to make a new account that has 2v2reqs in the name since there will NOT be a new ladder.
When you have acquired the requirements,PM me on Smogon with a screenshot of them together with your vote.
Z-Moves will be unbanned during the suspect test.
The suspect test will end in 2 weeks from now,which would be the 31st of March
Happy laddering!
Once again,apologies for quickbanning Z-Moves.
Due to ongoing controversy, the 2v2 council and I have decided to suspect all Z crystals for an unban.
The requirements will be 1500 ELO with at least 72 GXE.
A 55% supermajority will have to be reached in order for Z-Moves to be unbanned.
In order to acquire requirements,you will have to make a new account that has 2v2reqs in the name since there will NOT be a new ladder.
When you have acquired the requirements,PM me on Smogon with a screenshot of them together with your vote.
Z-Moves will be unbanned during the suspect test.
The suspect test will end in 2 weeks from now,which would be the 31st of March
Happy laddering!
Once again,apologies for quickbanning Z-Moves.
1st of all I'd like to make something clear, you say the 2v2 council decided to suspect all Z crystals for unban, but I wasn't even made aware of such a plan. 2nd of all I wouldn't have made that decision if asked, so no, I did not decide on such a suspect. And the reason for that is that for one it was just banned, and secondly, there hasn't been any convincing arguments for an unban.
3rd of all, controversy?
You're referring to the post by Osra that ignores the entire discussion and goes on to instead focus an aspect clearly explained and even brought up in the post above? Which is that banning a bunch of Z users wouldn't solve anything as there would still be Z users, aka problems due to Z would still be there as outlined by the analysis, and new users would still rise to the subjective standard set in that post.
motogp Going beyond merely disliking your decision and thinking that it is wrong, the way you made your decision is a way that no decision should be made. Ever. For any meta.
To summarize: Motogp gets on the 1v1 room, the 1v1 room, mind you, not even the OM room, which is really where he should be going for big decisions on a non-1v1 OM, and proceeds to ask the room for six mons that are “broken” with Z Moves outside of terrain or weather. After he gets six opinions, not even backed up with any form of facts, a list that quite possibly includes Kingdra, which was suggested by Kentari and which is only vaguely good in rain, he posts on Smogon saying that Z is banned. At this point I thought that motogp had perhaps gone mad or had his Showdown and Smogon accounts stolen by his councilman Rumplestiltskin , a user so violently biased against Z that he carried on in a tirade for thirty minutes about how the non-used and horrible set of Groundium Slaking “proved” that Z moves were broken. This is not how you make administrative decisions! This is like Donald Trump saying to a roomful of people, “give me six reasons you don’t personally like Syria and we’ll nuke them”. DOES NO ONE SEE THE SHEER INSANITY IN THIS?!
Edit: not trying to offend any Syrians, just using an example
A post criticizing you for the way you acted in PS chat and connecting it to your decision to ban Z here, and then going on about me being "violently biased" when I'm the one who's given a detailed analysis of the situation and countered all arguments for no ban while the user of said post hasn't even come with a reason for no ban.
There will always be opinions about balance subjects/decisions, the important thing is to consider ones that are backed by relevant arguments.
While I agree that you could have handled the ban better in both reasoning and execution, it was a good, neeeded, and objectively justified ban. And suspecting Z for unban now? Even ignoring every reason for why that's wrong, doing it now when we have a lot of issues to deal with and could use the great opportunity in that 2v2 Doubles is OM of the Month and has a ladder? Last omotm the meta barely progressed, and the issues could have at least been discussed, but there was radio silence from the leadership at the time, and now when there's finally a step towards progressing the meta you instantly single handedly decide to set it back?
In any case, what you did now is what's controversial, and I suggest cancelling this unwarranted suspect and focusing on the remaining problems at hand.
Due to ongoing controversy, the 2v2 council and I have decided to suspect all Z crystals for an unban.
The requirements will be 1500 ELO with at least 72 GXE.
A 55% supermajority will have to be reached in order for Z-Moves to be unbanned.
In order to acquire requirements,you will have to make a new account that has 2v2reqs in the name since there will NOT be a new ladder.
When you have acquired the requirements,PM me on Smogon with a screenshot of them together with your vote.
Z-Moves will be unbanned during the suspect test.
The suspect test will end in 2 weeks from now,which would be the 31st of March
Happy laddering!
Once again,apologies for quickbanning Z-Moves.
Thankya
It’s nice to see a decision that isn’t a hastily made choice on a big decision Rumplestiltskin I’m tired of arguing with you, you never admit that any point that doesn’t conform to your beliefs has any merit, nor do you admit that you possibly could have been wrong about anything. Yes, my post was rather incendiary, but I was merely trying to draw attention to the fact that 2v2 as a meta may not want the biggest decision ever made for the meta to be done by asking a couple people for their opinions. But that’s just me, hell, maybe that is good for the meta. If I’m ever TL of gen7 OU, I’ll make sure to ask a couple people in the room if lando-T is broken, and if they say yes, then it’ll be gone before 5 minutes have passed.
Banning a concept that has been in the metagame for months and discussed thoroughly for weeks is hasty but rushing to suspect unbanning it hours later isn't?
Stating the obvious, it's easy to say with absolute certainty that the execution here was the absolute issue. If you wanted community input, you should have suspected it initially. But you already know this, haha asking for six opinions in a chatroom. It doesn't help either that the null hypothesis is that Z-moves should be permitted, but oh well, what's done is done.
Conducting a suspect test claiming council approval when Rumple wasn't even alerted of it? That's really concerning to say the least. It seems weird to have a council if you're not even going to consult them on large decisions. Even if you decide you're not going to consult them, don't claim you did zzz.
TGC Disunited, I don't think criticising Rumple's opinions is all that fair if you're not even going to bother to argue against it. Calling bias without offering valid counter arguments admits to everyone that you don't have any logical refutal. Why is your entire post one large circumstantial ad-hominem?
In terms of pro-unban posts, Glyx's post isn't the best but at least she offers an actual reason to keep them in the metagame. Whereas posts that just claim Rumple is heavily biased and bandwagon that the decision was irrational accomplish nothing at all.
Regardless, I do think that the suspect is fair though given the circumstances. I'm just baffled over how asinine this whole situation is. Please try to avoid screwing up this badly in future. :(
1st of all, you don't suspect something you can't afford to stay in the meta (Z moves fit that description as explained in my analysis), which is what an unban turnout would result in.
2nd of all, this is just gonna waste the remainder of 2v2 Doubles having a ladder when it could be used for testing problems that are not as apparent as Z moves, and there's a lot of stuff to deal with. This Z move ban is like the 1st initial things you do when a new gen comes out so you can get to the actual problems, unfortunately it wasn't dealt with already. After it finally being banned so the meta can finally progress, why allow further delay to the development of the meta? Especially given that there are other problems that are in dire need of being dealt with.
Due to ongoing controversy, the 2v2 council and I have decided to suspect all Z crystals for an unban.
The requirements will be 1500 ELO with at least 72 GXE.
A 55% supermajority will have to be reached in order for Z-Moves to be unbanned.
In order to acquire requirements,you will have to make a new account that has 2v2reqs in the name since there will NOT be a new ladder.
When you have acquired the requirements,PM me on Smogon with a screenshot of them together with your vote.
Z-Moves will be unbanned during the suspect test.
The suspect test will end in 2 weeks from now,which would be the 31st of March
Happy laddering!
Once again,apologies for quickbanning Z-Moves.
I think it would be better to undo the original decision and have a normal suspect test. It should have been suspect tested from the beginning, I'm sure you'll agree. This quickban -> unban test is rather unusual, especially since only 45% is required to have it banned.
Banning a concept that has been in the metagame for months and discussed thoroughly for weeks is hasty but rushing to suspect unbanning it hours later isn't?
Stating the obvious, it's easy to say with absolute certainty that the execution here was the absolute issue. If you wanted community input, you should have suspected it initially. But you already know this, haha asking for six opinions in a chatroom. It doesn't help either that the null hypothesis is that Z-moves should be permitted, but oh well, what's done is done.
Conducting a suspect test claiming council approval when Rumple wasn't even alerted of it? That's really concerning to say the least. It seems weird to have a council if you're not even going to consult them on large decisions. Even if you decide you're not going to consult them, don't claim you did zzz.
TGC Disunited, I don't think criticising Rumple's opinions is all that fair if you're not even going to bother to argue against it. Calling bias without offering valid counter arguments admits to everyone that you don't have any logical refutal. Why is your entire post one large circumstantial ad-hominem?
In terms of pro-unban posts, Glyx's post isn't the best but at least she offers an actual reason to keep them in the metagame. Whereas posts that just claim Rumple is heavily biased and bandwagon that the decision was irrational accomplish nothing at all.
Regardless, I do think that the suspect is fair though given the circumstances. I'm just baffled over how asinine this whole situation is. Please try to avoid screwing up this badly in future. :(
I would like to clarify that I did not know that a suspect was feasible,and I only learned so thanks to lost heros.Otherwise,we would have suspect tested Z-Moves like usual.
Furthermore,the council does include lost heros,who himself suggested suspect testing Z-Moves.Since I agreed to that suggestion,we did not consult Rumplestiltskin since he had already explained me his opinion on the matter and instead moved forward to start the suspect,because of the limited time availiable until the end of the month.
I think it would be better to undo the original decision and have a normal suspect test. It should have been suspect tested from the beginning, I'm sure you'll agree. This quickban -> unban test is rather unusual, especially since only 45% is required to have it banned.
1st of all I'd like to make something clear, you say the 2v2 council decided to suspect all Z crystals for unban, but I wasn't even made aware of such a plan. 2nd of all I wouldn't have made that decision if asked, so no, I did not decide on such a suspect. And the reason for that is that for one it was just banned, and secondly, there hasn't been any convincing arguments for an unban.
3rd of all, controversy?
You're referring to the post by Osra that ignores the entire discussion and goes on to instead focus an aspect clearly explained and even brought up in the post above? Which is that banning a bunch of Z users wouldn't solve anything as there would still be Z users, aka problems due to Z would still be there as outlined by the analysis, and new users would still rise to the subjective standard set in that post.
Or are you referring to this?
A post criticizing you for the way you acted in PS chat and connecting it to your decision to ban Z here, and then going on about me being "violently biased" when I'm the one who's given a detailed analysis of the situation and countered all arguments for no ban while the user of said post hasn't even come with a reason for no ban.
There will always be opinions about balance subjects/decisions, the important thing is to consider ones that are backed by relevant arguments.
While I agree that you could have handled the ban better in both reasoning and execution, it was a good, neeeded, and objectively justified ban. And suspecting Z for unban now? Even ignoring every reason for why that's wrong, doing it now when we have a lot of issues to deal with and could use the great opportunity in that 2v2 Doubles is OM of the Month and has a ladder? Last omotm the meta barely progressed, and the issues could have at least been discussed, but there was radio silence from the leadership at the time, and now when there's finally a step towards progressing the meta you instantly single handedly decide to set it back?
In any case, what you did now is what's controversial, and I suggest cancelling this unwarranted suspect and focusing on the remaining problems at hand.
Since I was mentioned and consulted in this decision and do care about the 2v2 meta despite my activity on PS!.
First of all, I do agree with a suspect test on Z Crystals and regardless of current opinions on all whether Z Crystals are broken or balanced a suspect test is the best choice currently. Many good players have strong opinions for both sides for a ban and no ban. Even if you do think some of these arguments are poorly made or missing key aspects of the situation, everyone deserves their chance to vote on their opinion.
Secondly (and this is a message for everyone), while 2v2 is very similar to 1v1 in many regards please do no let your opinions about Z moves in 1v1 justify our dominate your opinion on Z moves in 2v2. There are several differences, that I shouldn't have to highlight, between 1v1 and 2v2. Please try to keep in mind the partner dynamic of 2v2 which can both help and hinder Z users. Please also not try to draw parallels between a 1v1 ban (for example against mega Salemence back in gen 6) and this potential ban.
Thirdly, everyone please remember that this is a different kind of suspect test. We are not suspecting a pokemon or item or even a move. We are suspecting a whole mechanic. Smogon by and far tries very hard to avoid these suspects and are only done if absolutely necessary. As a suspect voter, you need to not only just considered any and all potential abusers but also how Z moves enable strategies and potential counterplay for it.
Do not, and I beg of you all, do not bring up banning individual crystals or try and compare Z crystals with each other.
I would like to clarify that I did not know that a suspect was feasible,and I only learned so thanks to lost heros.Otherwise,we would have suspect tested Z-Moves like usual.
Furthermore,the council does include lost heros,who himself suggested suspect testing Z-Moves.Since I agreed to that suggestion,we did not consult Rumplestiltskin since he had already explained me his opinion on the matter and instead moved forward to start the suspect,because of the limited time availiable until the end of the month.
You're still supposed to ask or make all of the council aware of a plan, at the very least to have everyone provide input, that may change other's opinions, basically to at least allow the possibility for an open minded discussion. I hadn't explained nearly everything about my stance, and there was for sure stuff to be said that might have made a difference.
Many good players have strong opinions for both sides for a ban and no ban. Even if you do think some of these arguments are poorly made or missing key aspects of the situation, everyone deserves their chance to vote on their opinion.
There's a difference between opinions and arguments. Turns out Wikipedia already has articles explaining what I've been / am trying to say. Opinion I'm entitled to my opinion
Wikipedia's article on Opinion said:
In general, an opinion is a judgment, viewpoint, or statement that is not conclusive. It may deal with subjective matters in which there is no conclusive finding, or it may deal with facts which are sought to be disputed by the logical fallacy that one is entitled to their opinions.
...
An opinion may be supported by facts and principles, in which case it becomes an argument.
Wikipedia's article on I'm entitled to my opinion said:
I'm entitled to my opinion or I have a right to my opinion is a logical fallacy in which a person discredits any opposition by claiming that they are entitled to their opinion. The statement exemplifies a red herring or Thought-terminating cliché. The logical fallacy is often presented as Let's agree to disagree. Whether one has a particular entitlement or right is irrelevant to whether one's assertion is true or false. To assert the existence of the right is a failure to assert any justification for the opinion. Such an assertion, however, can also be an assertion of one's own freedom or of a refusal to participate in the system of logic at hand.[1][2][3]
Philosopher Patrick Stokes has described the expression as problematic because it is often used to defend factually indefensible positions or to "[imply] an equal right to be heard on a matter in which only one of the two parties has the relevant expertise".[4]
In this case there are no standing arguments in favour of keeping Z moves in the meta, all have been countered.
Again, suspects where everyone gets to affect the outcome is for cases where the thing suspected in question is not a clear case, where there are valid arguments for both sides, and where the suspected things existence in the meta can be afforded.
None of the above conditions are met for Z moves, as demonstrated by the discussion so far.
This is a clear case of where a quickban applies, and it's very much needed to get some real develoment in before the month is up, and with it the OMotM ladder.
Again, suspects where everyone gets to affect the outcome is for cases where the thing suspected in question is not a clear case, where there are valid arguments for both sides, and where the suspected things existence in the meta can be afforded.
None of the above conditions are met for Z moves, as demonstrated by the discussion so far.
This is a clear case of where a quickban applies, and it's very much needed to get some real develoment in before the month is up, and with it the OMotM ladder.
There isn't really much of a case for banning them either. Upon reading your main post for your decision to support a ban, all you seem to have done is compare apples to oranges by analyzing 2v2 in comparison to 6v6 metagames, which is already a mistake, as well as a demonstration of a lack of understanding of how your own metagame even works. The entire premise of 1v1 and 2v2 is that they are bitesize metagames, meaning that battles will naturally go by faster in comparison to traditional 6v6 metagames.
The main reason: Z was balanced by its creator Game Freak by being limited to being used once per battle, with a battle being 6v6. Which means that Z is usable on 1/6 of your team and usable once per battle. In 2v2 Doubles it’s usable on ½ of your team, which corresponds to z being usable on 3/6 of your team in a 6v6 battle and usable 3 times per battle. That’s 3 times the impact on the battle. Getting hit by a Z attack in 2v2 Doubles is the same as getting hit by a Z attack 3 times in 6v6. This enough is reason for a ban, however simple you might think the reason is.
This entire argument can also be applied to Mega Evolution, yet you don't seem to be trying to convince us that Megas are broken, hmmm? You're just cherry picking based off of your own personal agenda. And before you try to undercut the argument by saying that "Mega Evolution is limited to certain Pokemon", bear in mind that there are more Mega Evolutions total than there are problematic Pokemon that abuse Z-Moves, as outlined in my previous post.
A Z-move KO in 6v6 is not much of a big deal, you lost 1 poke, that’s 1/6ths out of your team. In 2v2 you lost half your team, turning it into a 1v1, which could quite possibly be the worse match-up for you, decided by the z-move user, simply due to its sheer power. Now of course OHKO’s can happen without Z-moves, but when they happen it’s because of a really strong move (covered below), type advantages, and difference in stats. And in the case where the Z-attack didn’t KO, it still does significantly more damage than it ever would have done otherwise, which is devastating (aka most likely game ruining) for the surviving poke.
You say all of this as if you yourself cannot do the same unto your opponent. This really isn't even an argument against Z-Moves as much as it is just an argument against Offense as a whole, which emphasizes the point of your lack of understanding as to how bitesize metagames even work.
Other strong moves are limited by their distribution, negative side effects, accuracy, and conditions. Which also means that you can play accordingly. And the distribution limit is significant because it incorporates all of the limits that the poke the move is limited to has, and if a poke with access to such a strong move doesn’t have enough limits, you usually see it banned in Smogon tiers/metas.
Speaking of which- Near every Pokemon has access to a strong move that they can use without having to be Z. Unfortunately, though, the matter of "how much limitation is enough limitation" is an objective question that can only be given subjective answers, which ties in to the lacking clarity that you yourself acknowledge is a prerequisite for suspect testing.
Where such power was once due to a selection of pokes with big offensive stats, pokes with access to devastating moves, and pokes with type advantages, it is now available to pretty much any poke without utterly horrible offensive stats (which is the majority of viable pokes, if not the majority of all pokes). Where such pokes were once utilized for their other traits, traits for strats such as setup, support, walling, or whatever else, they can now have a strong attack (as in strength comparable to pokes that specialized in attacking) in addition to their role/use. That alone makes for unfair gameplay as such pokes now in addition to their specialization also get to nuke. This scales down the entire system of pokemon archetypes. And due to the sheer power of Z attacks, even the system of type effectiveness is scaled down to almost nothing. Who needs type effectiveness when you can just use Z to nuke everything not immune? Edit: A more accurate description of the reality is that the battle heavily hinges on type effectiveness more than anything else, with Z still being able to nuke its way through type disadvantages to varying extents, moreso than regular moves ever could. Again keep in mind that even if the same applies to 6v6, the impact is tripled here. Now if Z-moves can provide such power to pokes that didn’t specialize in attacking, what do they provide to pokes that do? They make them unmanageable to deal with through any means other than outspeeding them and KO’ing them before they do the same to you.
This all just ties into the concept of optimal move selection that I brought up briefly in my previous post. When would you ever not pick the best move you can to use in most situations? Aromatisse would never use Fairy Wind over Moonblast, Tapu Koko would never use Thunder over Gigavolt Havoc unless you already have, etc. The main matter is outlining what constitutes as being "too much", and a good couple of minutes in the damage calculator will show you that most Z-Moves used by non-offensive Pokemon amount to little more if even more than just a regular attack from a standard Offensive Pokemon, which mainly just makes it a contextual matter, certainly not "too much" for the metagame to handle. The real issue comes when you get into Offensive Z-Moves, as those are the real issues, and should be handled on a case-to-case basis, especially if you want your metagame to have any kind of longevity behind it.
“But Rumplestiltskin, why not just ban the pokes that you say become unmanageable due to Z-moves?”
Because it would mean losing a majority (if not all) of all offensive pokes at the very least, and the meta would still be unbalanced due to the massive power boost to everything (the unfair gameplay mentioned above).
Actually proven wrong. My previous post showed that there are actually only a handful of threats that can abuse Z-Moves to an extent that cannot be emulated without the use of Z-Moves. As for the "unfair gameplay", it's only literally unfair for people who either don't know that Z-Moves exist, or purposefully choose not to use them :eyes:
In a meta where surviving is a massive struggle due to focus fire, and where power dominates, the addition of Z-moves, taking said power to a whole other level unbalances the meta too much and takes it even more in the direction of outspeed-and-KO ASAP type of battles. It utterly dumbs down the meta when not even type effectiveness or poke archetypes matter much any more.
This is literally the way bitesize metagames are played. Just because it's your preference that the metagame shouldn't be inherently one way or the other doesn't mean that your preference is anything more than just a preference. And everyone has a preference, which ties even further to lack of clarity and thus the need for a suspect.
Just because some of the most used pokes resist the Bug type doesn't mean that Buginium-Z does what it does any differently than the other Z crystals. It just means that it will do less damage against the pokes that resist the Bug type, which shouldn't hold any relevance to balancing unless you're saying “screw the pokes that don't resist Bug”. You could also mean that no currently strong popular poke has X-type to use X-type Z-crystal with, which again shouldn't hold relevance because I'm arguing that Z is broken for what it is and does nonetheless, regardless of how popular a certain type Z-crystal is.
No, that's exactly what it means. Everything that has been banned for being broken, ever, was banned because it performed too well within the specific context of the metagame it was removed from. Please do not try to push your agenda of favoritism towards irrelevant Pokemon that hold little to no impact on the metagame.
First of all, while some pokes become more viable, others take a hit. Second of all, become viable at what cost? You don’t allow something broken just because it makes more pokes viable. In fact, I’d wager it’s a given that broken moves would make more pokes viable. If Perish Song was allowed on more pokes, we would get more viable pokes then too. And when it got banned in 1v1 for example Lapras and Murkrow fell real hard in viability. Just because something makes more pokes viable doesn’t mean it’s not broken, and you don’t keep broken stuff in a metagame just because they make more pokes viable.
I do agree that broken elements shouldn't be included for the sake of influencing other elements within the metagame, however, Z-Moves aren't broken; a mechanic of a game cannot be inherently good, bad, "too" good, or "too" bad, as they are just tools for the users that can become all of these things. You cannot remove an entire concept or mechanic from something simply because you lack the desire to adapt to the environment changing around you. If an individual element or elements become a problem, then each of those elements should be handled individually.
ok since logic and reasoning clearly dont apply to this discussion, i will keep it simple. sand (exca + megattar) and either sun (venu + zard y) or rain (politoed/pelliper and megapert) is super broken with z. upon laddering with it basically all my losses were due to me having my strategy rely on htting sleep powder and missing, or getting slept / cheesed by opposing sun. without z, this team wouldnt be broken, although this is a complete 100% hypothetical. here are the teams im talking about. theyre super brainless with z and the easiest reqs ive ever gotten (im Guest 7782054, 79.3 gxe aint bad) this team shouldnt be consistent in a matchup / 5050 meta.
ok since logic and reasoning clearly dont apply to this discussion, i will keep it simple. sand (exca + megattar) and either sun (venu + zard y) or rain (politoed/pelliper and megapert) is super broken with z. upon laddering with it basically all my losses were due to me having my strategy rely on htting sleep powder and missing, or getting slept / cheesed by opposing sun. without z, this team wouldnt be broken, although this is a complete 100% hypothetical. here are the teams im talking about. theyre super brainless with z and the easiest reqs ive ever gotten (im Guest 7782054, 79.3 gxe aint bad) this team shouldnt be consistent in a matchup / 5050 meta.
I've been running similar weather teams (or at least, sun and rain) without Z, and they don't suffer that much or are improved. Life Orb Venusaur Hits either almost as hard with the grass stab, and the added power on Sludge Bomb is useful in quite a few matchups while the loss in bulk is rarely relevant. You do end up wanting to run Leaf Storm over Solerbeam somewhat, though. Maybe you'll disagree, but I do suggest you give it a try to see for yourself that Zmoves aren't the issue / arent the only issue there.
Z-moves are the hot topic in 2v2 dubs right now, so I decided on weighing in with my opinion, which I shall try to back up with facts.
So one of the big reasons that people say we shouldn't ban Z-Moves is that, well, Smogon metagames rarely ban anything other than actual Pokémon. But it has happened that other parts of the game have been banned. In this post, I will show some applicable examples, namely Items, Mechanics, and Moves, to decide whether Z-moves fit the mold that these earlier bans do.
Short answer: no.
Long answer: read on.
MOVES
In the history of Generation 7's official ladders, exactly five different moves have been banned that I could find after going through banlists. These are:
Move(meta)
Sonic Boom(LC)
Dragon Rage(LC)
Perish Song(1v1, 2v2)
Dragon Ascent(Ubers)
Swagger(pretty much everywhere)
and ohko moves everywhere but AG but I'm not listing them individually
Now, we can rule out Dragon Ascent, as it is merely a part of the ban of Rayquaza-Mega, which requires Dragon Ascent to Mega Evolve, which is banned under the Mega Rayquaza Clause in Ubers. And Swagger is only banned because Pokémon becomes a coinflip.
So what do the remaining moves have in common? They each OHKO the opposing Pokémon, regardless of attacker or defender, barring sturdy/Focus Sash or an immunity. Yes, in LC nothing gets above 40 hp so nothing can live Dragon Rage, and the number of things that get above 20 HP(for Sonic Boom) is few. Perish Song OHKOes both after 3 turns, so if no one can switch, gg xD.
OHKO moves obviously OHKO everything, albeit with shaky accuracy.
So do Z-Moves do this? Do they all OHKO the opposing Pokémon no matter what uses it and what defends against it, barring SturdySash or an immunity? No! As I can testify, Ludicolo does not always even OHKO Charizard X with Icium Z-boosted Ice Beam (yes, I've been in that matchup. Don't ask.) As an added detriment vs. those other moves, Z-Moves use up your item slot! No more UltraSweeper(tm) Charmander with dragon rage running Scarfed through the meta. No more Choice Scarf to let your Kartana beat Tapu Koko or Choice Band to let it beat Charizard. Instead, you get a one-off item that only boosts one move, maybe not even your STAB.
Z-Moves, therefore, do not fit the precedent of move bans.
ITEMS
Item bans are realllllly fucking rare, just gonna say that. After looking through like everything I could find, there's some mega stones, Soul Dew, and like... uh... Light Ball in Mediocremons?
oh yeah also Kommonium here and Eevium in LC
So what do these bans all have in common, kids? Well, gee, Mister TGC, it looks like they're all items that are mon-specific!
Correctamundo! As Z-Moves can be applied to all Pokémon, for the most part (obviously mimikium can't be), they do not create an imbalance in mon power like these Mega Stones and other items do.
Hence, they do not fit the precedent.
MECHANICS
All of Smogon's clauses are really kinda metagame specific, and none of them are even applicable, bar Swagger and MRay, which I already brought up, so uhh... I DONE NOW
there I finally posted some facts
oh yeah Osra you could, in theory, run Fairy Wind as it has the same targeting as Earthquake, hitting both foes as Moonblast hits only one.
After playing 2v2 Doubles for the entirety of gen 7, analysing Z moves, I’ve come to the conclusion that they need to be banned ASAP. I will address frequently asked questions / frequently made arguments against a Z ban for 1v1. I know they’re different metagames, but the questions / arguments could still be applied, and I’m addressing them pre-emptively for 2v2 Doubles.
The main reason: Z was balanced by its creator Game Freak by being limited to being used once per battle, with a battle being 6v6. Which means that Z is usable on 1/6 of your team and usable once per battle. In 2v2 Doubles it’s usable on ½ of your team, which corresponds to z being usable on 3/6 of your team in a 6v6 battle and usable 3 times per battle. That’s 3 times the impact on the battle. Getting hit by a Z attack in 2v2 Doubles is the same as getting hit by a Z attack 3 times in 6v6. This enough is reason for a ban, however simple you might think the reason is. Everything said here forth is additional analysis and justification for anyone who ignores that it’s banworthy on that sole merit.
A Z-move KO in 6v6 is not much of a big deal, you lost 1 poke, that’s 1/6ths out of your team. In 2v2 you lost half your team, turning it into a 1v1, which could quite possibly be the worse match-up for you, decided by the z-move user, simply due to its sheer power. Now of course OHKO’s can happen without Z-moves, but when they happen it’s because of a really strong move (covered below), type advantages, and difference in stats. And in the case where the Z-attack didn’t KO, it still does significantly more damage than it ever would have done otherwise, which is devastating (aka most likely game ruining) for the surviving poke.
Okay, it is statistically true that ZMove kills impaction is more on a 2v2 setting than on a 6v6, but the same can be said for a Pokemon holding a offense-boosting item, like Choice items, attack type-boosting items. In fact, while Z-Move can be successfully used to kill 1 Pokemon on the field, other offense-boosting items can be used over successive turns to successfully complete KOing opponent Pokemon. This part of the post seem to suggest that you seem to overlook a particular style of gameplay, ie Hyper Offense, which is(in a 2v2 setting) based on either focus firing one of the two Pokemon present in the field or double damage by both Pokemon present on the field.
Where such power was once due to a selection of pokes with big offensive stats, pokes with access to devastating moves, and pokes with type advantages, it is now available to pretty much any poke without utterly horrible offensive stats (which is the majority of viable pokes, if not the majority of all pokes). Where such pokes were once utilized for their other traits, traits for strats such as setup, support, walling, or whatever else, they can now have a strong attack (as in strength comparable to pokes that specialized in attacking) in addition to their role/use. That alone makes for unfair gameplay as such pokes now in addition to their specialization also get to nuke. This scales down the entire system of pokemon archetypes. And due to the sheer power of Z attacks, even the system of type effectiveness is scaled down to almost nothing. Who needs type effectiveness when you can just use Z to nuke everything not immune?Edit: A more accurate description of the reality is that the battle heavily hinges on type effectiveness more than anything else, with Z still being able to nuke its way through type disadvantages to varying extents, moreso than regular moves ever could. Again keep in mind that even if the same applies to 6v6, the impact is tripled here. Now if Z-moves can provide such power to pokes that didn’t specialize in attacking, what do they provide to pokes that do? They make them unmanageable to deal with through any means other than outspeeding them and KO’ing them before they do the same to you.
This again comes back to the former part of the post, that is, Hyper Offense. There seems to be a flawed perspective in this post in that you seem to think that ZMoves nullifies type effectiveness to varying extent depending on the Pokemon the ZMove is being fired upon. The flaw in this logic is that any offfense-based strategy, with or without the ZMove role in it, will be aiming at using the strongest move it possesses regardless of type effectiveness, unless the move in question is gonna do like really crap damage. You again compared the 2v2 gameplay to 6v6 gameplay, but the fact remains that even in 6v6 gameplay, people are gonna be wary of which Pokemon they gonna switch in on a ZMove user, to not make some other die in the process; this is made irrelevant by the fact that you can't switch in 2v2, but there is also the aspect of predictions, which is even important in a 2v2 gameplay than in 6v6.
“But Rumplestiltskin, why not just ban the pokes that you say become unmanageable due to Z-moves?”
Because it would mean losing a majority (if not all) of all offensive pokes at the very least, and the meta would still be unbalanced due to the massive power boost to everything (the unfair gameplay mentioned above).
In a meta where surviving is a massive struggle due to focus fire, and where power dominates, the addition of Z-moves, taking said power to a whole other level unbalances the meta too much and takes it even more in the direction of outspeed-and-KO ASAP type of battles. It utterly dumbs down the meta when not even type effectiveness or poke archetypes matter much any more.
There is this one tiny problem in both parts of the answer. The problem with the first part of the answer is that you seem to assume all ZMove users are broken, and by extension banworthy, while it clearly is not the case. The problem with the second part of the answer is that you again, through the wording of it at least, seem to cast out Hyper Offense as a strat, and seem to want to move 2v2 into a purely strategy/gimmick-based meta. While this might not be entirely wrong, the fact that the HO part or strategy of the game seems to misguidedly make you think ZMoves are broken, and that HO dumbs down the meta, causes me worry, because after reading that line , every other argument seems to fall in place. The fact remains that playstyles are not judged in 1v1 or 2v2 is pretty evident by the fact that it is stated in 1v1's outdated suspect philosophy any strategy gets you wins both on a ladder and a tournament setting, and by the fact that the bans dont seem to suppress any particular playstyle, what with PSong ban, Marshadow ban, MegaMence ban, Sash ban bringing this point to the fore. So, I don't think considering HO an "non-brain based strat" and dumbing it down is gonna make the meta the ideal Balance you want to strike in every meta
“Rumplestiltskin, what makes Z attacks any different from other high BP attacks?”
Other strong moves are limited by their distribution, negative side effects, accuracy, and conditions. Which also means that you can play accordingly. And the distribution limit is significant because it incorporates all of the limits that the poke the move is limited to has, and if a poke with access to such a strong move doesn’t have enough limits, you usually see it banned in Smogon tiers/metas.
Let’s go over distribution first (excluding banned pokes, smeargle, NFE’s unless relevant, and moves with not so limited distribution (those will be covered in the other list)), and I hope I don’t have to go over the weaknesses and limits of each poke to get this point across.
As you can see all the moves listed (bar Boomburst) have accuracy deficiencies / negative side effects / conditions, with most of them also having limited to extremely limited distribution. This applies to all attacks down to 110 BP in one or multiple ways. I don’t know why I felt I had to make this list, it’s just ridiculous that someone actually thought Z attacks and regular high BP attacks are the same.
You have countered this "High BP moves have negative side effects" in a different context, but which is still applicable here: (excuse the wording, this is just the gist of that) Why wouldn't you forego the better boosting effects of Band/Specs if ZMoves can effectively do the same here.
It seems to be quite applicable here, and there is no reason why you wouldn't run Draco Meteor or VCreate if it can successfully knock out one Pokemon due to its high BP. This is 2v2, and you do choose to finish opponent based on 1) your offense vs opponent's defense , and 2) your remaining pokemon's capability in handling the other present in the field (assuming your Pokemon gets KO'd after defeating its intended target)
“But Rumplestiltskin, what about choice band and choice specs, don’t they boost moves base power to Z levels and even slightly above? How can you want Z banned, but not choice items?”
Except that there is a drawback to using choice, which is that you're choice locked, which can very much be exploited/punished in 2v2 Doubles. And choice can be used on all 6 pokemon in 6v6, unlike Z. Z's drawback, which is that you can only use it once per battle is extremely diminished in 2v2 Doubles, that's a clear difference. Being choice locked, if you think about it thoroughly, means that any poke that didn’t use choice band/specs is uniquely able to profit from Z due to the nature of sets that prefer not to use or don’t work with band/specs. Pokes such as the ones mentioned above, i.e. pokes that didn’t specialize in attacking, or pokes that setup. Even pokes that would previously use choice items, can now opt for setup + Z.
This point seems to leave behind the fact that in a team, usually not every of the two Pokemon on the field is likely to be holding a Choice item, which means while one Pokemon can nuke with the Band/Specs item, the other can use its gimmick/strategy to overpower the other opponent. So, Specs Band does the same offense mindgames that a ZMove user usually does.
“But Rumplestiltskin, Smogon’s guidelines is to only ban the absolute necessary. What if not all Z-crystals are banworthy? Are you saying that Buginium-Z for instance is broken? LOL”
If one Z-crystal is broken then they all are, this isn't monotype where you ban things based on type. If a Z-crystal is broken, it isn't because of its type, but because of the other reasons mentioned. Just because some of the most used pokes resist the Bug type doesn't mean that Buginium-Z does what it does any differently than the other Z crystals. It just means that it will do less damage against the pokes that resist the Bug type, which shouldn't hold any relevance to balancing unless you're saying “screw the pokes that don't resist Bug”. You could also mean that no currently strong popular poke has X-type to use X-type Z-crystal with, which again shouldn't hold relevance because I'm arguing that Z is broken for what it is and does nonetheless, regardless of how popular a certain type Z-crystal is.
“But Rumplestiltskin, just use Substitute or Protect.”
That’s overcentralizing. Protect is one of the best moves to have in Doubles, but being forced to bring Substitute or Protect just for Z, even in cases where you otherwise wouldn’t have is not an indicator of a healthy metagame. And unless you’re a psychic in real life, you don’t know the exact turn your opponent will use their Z-attack, meaning Substitute and Protect are not very reliable answers.
And speaking of Protect, due to Z-attacks’ ability to bypass Protect, that damage, even while cut to 25%, is still in some cases enough to do a number (talking 75% HP in some cases) on pokes at a type and/or stat disadvantage, while also doing a decent chunk when hitting neutrally.
Protect provides some interesting gameplay to the meta and allows for some cool outplays. Z-attacks bypassing Protect reduces Protects usefulness in the meta, which allows more of just blindly and mindlessly attacking, with (unless mega stones) items such as Z-crystals and choice items.
Here is where the best part is. The biggest disadvantage of ZMove on Protect/Substitute is that once the ZMove is used, that Pokemon is as good as itemless. So, even though ZMove attacks through Protect/Sub, the point to be understood while arguing for "ZMove vs Protect" is that ZMove is the point of that Pokemon; if you protect through a ZMove user, it becomes of no much use in the scheme of things (usually). In this context, that's why people call for ban on things which can do extra-ordinary stuff after its ZMove purpose is done
“But Rumplestiltskin, Z moves make more pokes viable, how can you not want that? There’s no way that something that makes more pokes viable should be banned.”
First of all, while some pokes become more viable, others take a hit. Second of all, become viable at what cost? You don’t allow something broken just because it makes more pokes viable. In fact, I’d wager it’s a given that broken moves would make more pokes viable. If Perish Song was allowed on more pokes, we would get more viable pokes then too. And when it got banned in 1v1 for example Lapras and Murkrow fell real hard in viability. Just because something makes more pokes viable doesn’t mean it’s not broken, and you don’t keep broken stuff in a metagame just because they make more pokes viable.
This point is almost laughable in that every new concept introduced is gonna boost some while hindering some others. The key point to be addressed is whether the positively impacted Pokemon are not banworthy. Again, in this context, that's why it's usually advisable to ban individual broken elements, and resort to a conceptual ban only if too many individual elements are to be banned for balance's sake.
I don't see the problem of giving up scarves and sashes, especially when Z can be used on any poke, and all pokes certainly don't use need sash or scarf, sash is useless on pokes that can take a hit, and scarf is actually detrimental for any poke that utilizes more than one move in the battle. Don't ignore everything Z moves do and everything I said about them just because you don't find them overcentralizing. What I said in my post still applies, and keeping them is detrimental for the meta.
This was the point i was trying to get to earlier, that you wouldn't mind giving up the negative side effect if the desired effect is met. With regard to this specific post, might I add that Choice Scarf is used on a Pokemon which does not rely on more than one (current) move to either completely or aid in KOing some or part of the opposing Pokemon(s).
In the history of Generation 7's official ladders, exactly five different moves have been banned that I could find after going through banlists. These are:
Move(meta)
Sonic Boom(LC)
Dragon Rage(LC)
Perish Song(1v1, 2v2)
Dragon Ascent(Ubers)
Swagger(pretty much everywhere)
and ohko moves everywhere but AG but I'm not listing them individually
Dragon Ascent isn't banned in Ubers, it's just that Rayquaza cannot mega evolve with Dragon Ascent.
As for Swagger, that only applies in Generation 6. The only Generation 7 format where Swagger is banned is Doubles OU and Doubles UU.
Again, suspects where everyone gets to affect the outcome is for cases where the thing suspected in question is not a clear case, where there are valid arguments for both sides, and where the suspected things existence in the meta can be afforded.
None of the above conditions are met for Z moves, as demonstrated by the discussion so far.
This is a clear case of where a quickban applies, and it's very much needed to get some real develoment in before the month is up, and with it the OMotM ladder.
There isn't really much of a case for banning them either. Upon reading your main post for your decision to support a ban, all you seem to have done is compare apples to oranges by analyzing 2v2 in comparison to 6v6 metagames, which is already a mistake, as well as a demonstration of a lack of understanding of how your own metagame even works. The entire premise of 1v1 and 2v2 is that they are bitesize metagames, meaning that battles will naturally go by faster in comparison to traditional 6v6 metagames.
A Z-move KO in 6v6 is not much of a big deal, you lost 1 poke, that’s 1/6ths out of your team. In 2v2 you lost half your team, turning it into a 1v1, which could quite possibly be the worse match-up for you, decided by the z-move user, simply due to its sheer power. Now of course OHKO’s can happen without Z-moves, but when they happen it’s because of a really strong move (covered below), type advantages, and difference in stats. And in the case where the Z-attack didn’t KO, it still does significantly more damage than it ever would have done otherwise, which is devastating (aka most likely game ruining) for the surviving poke.
Comparing to 6v6 because thats what the standard battles are, and to highlight that Z was made and balanced for standard battles. You're trying to discredit my argument just by stating that there is a difference in the things compared, without addressing the actual point. And bitesize? What? You coming up with a collective name for 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles, and describing how they currently play out doesn't demonstrate a lack of understanding of said metas on my part, let alone address any of my arguments regarding this case. What does battles going faster have anything to do with what I've been talking about? How does battles going faster justify reducing skill and allowing a broken and unhealthy element?
The main reason: Z was balanced by its creator Game Freak by being limited to being used once per battle, with a battle being 6v6. Which means that Z is usable on 1/6 of your team and usable once per battle. In 2v2 Doubles it’s usable on ½ of your team, which corresponds to z being usable on 3/6 of your team in a 6v6 battle and usable 3 times per battle. That’s 3 times the impact on the battle. Getting hit by a Z attack in 2v2 Doubles is the same as getting hit by a Z attack 3 times in 6v6. This enough is reason for a ban, however simple you might think the reason is.
This entire argument can also be applied to Mega Evolution, yet you don't seem to be trying to convince us that Megas are broken, hmmm? You're just cherry picking based off of your own personal agenda. And before you try to undercut the argument by saying that "Mega Evolution is limited to certain Pokemon", bear in mind that there are more Mega Evolutions total than there are problematic Pokemon that abuse Z-Moves, as outlined in my previous post.
Another thing that should be obvious, but might not be to everyone (thanks qsns), is the factor that compared to 6v6, 2v2 Doubles doesn't have the rest of the game to even out the impact of the Z moves. This could probably already be inferred from my analysis here, but to clarify further, with Z allowed, 2v2 Doubles is centered around the part of the game where Z is used, a part which in regular games is only a fraction of the entire game. Which as I keep stressing, takes the metagame way more into the "kill or be killed ASAP" type of battles, which is undesirable for a healthy metagame.
where as I'm going to explain, isn't the same impact a mega has.
I have already conceded that megas should be held to more scrutiny here due to the reduced opportunity cost, however, there are still major differences from Z. Smogon classifies megas as their own pokes (Separate Tiering of Mega Pokemon). The differences that each mega stone brings can vastly differ from stone to stone, and ultimately in many cases bring the users to a level that existing pokes already are on, meaning there isn't any difference facing a poke that used a mega evolution to become said poke or not, in contrast to how Z attacks provide a previously unavailable nuke, with none of the usual and accepted costs, to every poke.
“But Rumplestiltskin, why not just ban the pokes that you say become unmanageable due to Z-moves?”
Because it would mean losing a majority (if not all) of all offensive pokes at the very least, and the meta would still be unbalanced due to the massive power boost to everything (the unfair gameplay mentioned above).
Actually proven wrong. My previous post showed that there are actually only a handful of threats that can abuse Z-Moves to an extent that cannot be emulated without the use of Z-Moves.
And regarding your previous post, you picked the pokes based on a subjective standard that doesnt reflect on reality in the 1st 2 steps. There's no reason to only pick 100 pokes when I've been arguing about how Z affects the entire meta. Even ignoring why the list is bad, a lot of pokes that used sash opt for Z now. And in the second step where the list is shortened, the standards used to make it are subjective and unjustified.
The reason why the 23 pokemon are being removed from the list is because they only emulate the process of optimal move selection, ie Thunderbolt>Thundershock. The Pokemon that stayed are all either those that are capable of doing something they otherwise couldn't without Z-Moves, or are capable of setting up in order to launch a nuclear attack that far surpasses anything the pokemon would otherwise be capable of. This list also abided by the ruling of a setup move being at least 5% usage among all of their most used moves.
"Optimal" is being used subjectively here, there might be some pokes which absolutely always have no reason to use Z over an established item, but there will always be uses for Z, or other items for that matter that results in them being able to deal with different things, or aid their partners in certain ways. And the difference of using Z over an established item is nowhere near as significant as the difference of "Thunderbolt>Thundershock".
The fact that Z users can setup was never the sole argument for ban.
Having Z is already doing something they otherwise couldn't, which is being able to deal extra damage without being choiced, losing HP with every attack, or ignoring the various negative effects of stronger attacks.
And the last step, where the list is shortened based on OU usage is entirely irrelevant when the meta only had a ladder for 1 month, and I hope I shouldn't have to explain why, just look up how Smogon tiers work.
In any case, as I pointed out before,
banning a bunch of Z users wouldn't solve anything as there would still be Z users, aka problems due to Z would still be there as outlined by the analysis, and new users would still rise to the subjective standard set in that post.
A Z-move KO in 6v6 is not much of a big deal, you lost 1 poke, that’s 1/6ths out of your team. In 2v2 you lost half your team, turning it into a 1v1, which could quite possibly be the worse match-up for you, decided by the z-move user, simply due to its sheer power. Now of course OHKO’s can happen without Z-moves, but when they happen it’s because of a really strong move (covered below), type advantages, and difference in stats. And in the case where the Z-attack didn’t KO, it still does significantly more damage than it ever would have done otherwise, which is devastating (aka most likely game ruining) for the surviving poke.
You say all of this as if you yourself cannot do the same unto your opponent. This really isn't even an argument against Z-Moves as much as it is just an argument against Offense as a whole, which emphasizes the point of your lack of understanding as to how bitesize metagames even work.
The argument against Z rather than offense as a whole is literally in the quote. The differences are explained and there's no implification of or even a hint at offense as a whole being unfair. Not sure what you're trying to do here apart from trying to discredit my argument to make me seem biased by just making an absolutely baseless statement.
Other strong moves are limited by their distribution, negative side effects, accuracy, and conditions. Which also means that you can play accordingly. And the distribution limit is significant because it incorporates all of the limits that the poke the move is limited to has, and if a poke with access to such a strong move doesn’t have enough limits, you usually see it banned in Smogon tiers/metas.
Speaking of which- Near every Pokemon has access to a strong move that they can use without having to be Z. Unfortunately, though, the matter of "how much limitation is enough limitation" is an objective question that can only be given subjective answers, which ties in to the lacking clarity that you yourself acknowledge is a prerequisite for suspect testing.
There's no need to be "speaking of which", strong moves were already detailed right below the passage you're replying to, where it showed that no, not "near every pokemon".
Let’s go over distribution first (excluding banned pokes, smeargle, NFE’s unless relevant, and moves with not so limited distribution (those will be covered in the other list)), and I hope I don’t have to go over the weaknesses and limits of each poke to get this point across.
As you can see all the moves listed (bar Boomburst) have accuracy deficiencies / negative side effects / conditions, with most of them also having limited to extremely limited distribution. This applies to all attacks down to 110 BP in one or multiple ways. I don’t know why I felt I had to make this list, it’s just ridiculous that someone actually thought Z attacks and regular high BP attacks are the same.
And it's not subjective when Z is usable on all pokes, with the only cost being that it's usable once, and that it requires an item slot, while attacks with BP as low as 110 start having worse accuracy deficiencies / negative side effects / conditions, compared to Z's 200's, with most of them also having limited to extremely limited distribution. So no, there is no lack of clarity here.
Where such power was once due to a selection of pokes with big offensive stats, pokes with access to devastating moves, and pokes with type advantages, it is now available to pretty much any poke without utterly horrible offensive stats (which is the majority of viable pokes, if not the majority of all pokes). Where such pokes were once utilized for their other traits, traits for strats such as setup, support, walling, or whatever else, they can now have a strong attack (as in strength comparable to pokes that specialized in attacking) in addition to their role/use. That alone makes for unfair gameplay as such pokes now in addition to their specialization also get to nuke. This scales down the entire system of pokemon archetypes. And due to the sheer power of Z attacks, even the system of type effectiveness is scaled down to almost nothing. Who needs type effectiveness when you can just use Z to nuke everything not immune?Edit: A more accurate description of the reality is that the battle heavily hinges on type effectiveness more than anything else, with Z still being able to nuke its way through type disadvantages to varying extents, moreso than regular moves ever could. Again keep in mind that even if the same applies to 6v6, the impact is tripled here. Now if Z-moves can provide such power to pokes that didn’t specialize in attacking, what do they provide to pokes that do? They make them unmanageable to deal with through any means other than outspeeding them and KO’ing them before they do the same to you.
This all just ties into the concept of optimal move selection that I brought up briefly in my previous post. When would you ever not pick the best move you can to use in most situations? Aromatisse would never use Fairy Wind over Moonblast, Tapu Koko would never use Thunder over Gigavolt Havoc unless you already have, etc.
Are you sure you're replying to the right thing there? Optimal move selection has absoluetly nothing to do with the passage you're quoting and why Z moves are bad for the meta.
The main matter is outlining what constitutes as being "too much", and a good couple of minutes in the damage calculator will show you that most Z-Moves used by non-offensive Pokemon amount to little more if even more than just a regular attack from a standard Offensive Pokemon, which mainly just makes it a contextual matter, certainly not "too much" for the metagame to handle. The real issue comes when you get into Offensive Z-Moves, as those are the real issues, and should be handled on a case-to-case basis, especially if you want your metagame to have any kind of longevity behind it.
and a good couple of minutes in the damage calculator will show you that most Z-Moves used by non-offensive Pokemon amount to little more if even more than just a regular attack from a standard Offensive Pokemon
That's exactly the point. You're literally reiterating my argument. Non-offensive pokes are non-offensive and don't do the same damage as offensive pokes because they give that damage up for being whatever archetype they are, for being able to do whatever they're able to do that offensive pokes can't. Them getting access to that damage without any turns used scales down the entire system of pokemon archetypes. This by itself is already sufficient enough reason for quickban.
“But Rumplestiltskin, why not just ban the pokes that you say become unmanageable due to Z-moves?”
Because it would mean losing a majority (if not all) of all offensive pokes at the very least, and the meta would still be unbalanced due to the massive power boost to everything (the unfair gameplay mentioned above).
... As for the "unfair gameplay", it's only literally unfair for people who either don't know that Z-Moves exist, or purposefully choose not to use them :eyes:
A Z-move KO in 6v6 is not much of a big deal, you lost 1 poke, that’s 1/6ths out of your team. In 2v2 you lost half your team, turning it into a 1v1, which could quite possibly be the worse match-up for you, decided by the z-move user, simply due to its sheer power. Now of course OHKO’s can happen without Z-moves, but when they happen it’s because of a really strong move (covered below), type advantages, and difference in stats. And in the case where the Z-attack didn’t KO, it still does significantly more damage than it ever would have done otherwise, which is devastating (aka most likely game ruining) for the surviving poke.
So you're admitting that Z-moves allow for unfair gameplay, but that it can be avoided by simply using the very thing in question brought up for ban. You realize that argument is in direct conflict with Smogon's Tiering Policy Framework?
Tiering Policy Framework said:
III.) Broken - elements that are too good relative to the rest of the metagame such that "more skillful play" is almost always rendered irrelevant.
These aren't necessarily completely uncompetitive because they don't take the determining factor out of the player's hands; both can use these elements and both probably have a fair chance to win. They are broken because they almost dictate / require usage, and a standard team without one of them facing a standard team with one of them would be at a drastic disadvantage.
In a meta where surviving is a massive struggle due to focus fire, and where power dominates, the addition of Z-moves, taking said power to a whole other level unbalances the meta too much and takes it even more in the direction of outspeed-and-KO ASAP type of battles. It utterly dumbs down the meta when not even type effectiveness or poke archetypes matter much any more.
This is literally the way bitesize metagames are played. Just because it's your preference that the metagame shouldn't be inherently one way or the other doesn't mean that your preference is anything more than just a preference. And everyone has a preference, which ties even further to lack of clarity and thus the need for a suspect.
You're referring to that 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles are inherently fast paced, and accusing me of preferring them to not be like that, while I didn't allude to such a preference. Of course 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles are going to be faster paced than 6v6, but my argument was about Z causing the meta being disproportionately so, it's an argument about having balanced meta. Preferring the meta to be balanced is valid, while preferring the meta to be unbalanced (proven to be the case in the discussion about Z) doesn't make sense to cater to. Again, this is not simply preference or opinion.
If one Z-crystal is broken then they all are, this isn't monotype where you ban things based on type. If a Z-crystal is broken, it isn't because of its type, but because of the other reasons mentioned.
Just because some of the most used pokes resist the Bug type doesn't mean that Buginium-Z does what it does any differently than the other Z crystals. It just means that it will do less damage against the pokes that resist the Bug type, which shouldn't hold any relevance to balancing unless you're saying “screw the pokes that don't resist Bug”. You could also mean that no currently strong popular poke has X-type to use X-type Z-crystal with, which again shouldn't hold relevance because I'm arguing that Z is broken for what it is and does nonetheless, regardless of how popular a certain type Z-crystal is.
No, that's exactly what it means. Everything that has been banned for being broken, ever, was banned because it performed too well within the specific context of the metagame it was removed from. Please do not try to push your agenda of favoritism towards irrelevant Pokemon that hold little to no impact on the metagame.
You're not refuting the point that for instance "Buginium-Z does what it does any differently than the other Z crystals", by saying "no, that's exactly what it means". In any case you don't see certain Arceus formes like Arceus-Bug unbanned in OU for example, because it's still Arceus, and it still does what it does. And STABmons didn't only ban certain Silvally formes based on type.
And regarding the "agenda", where did I even hint at having such an agenda? And how is said agenda even relevant to banning all Z crystals over only some? If I have any "agenda" it's to have the metas I play be competitive, balanced, and healthy.
First of all, while some pokes become more viable, others take a hit. Second of all, become viable at what cost? You don’t allow something broken just because it makes more pokes viable. In fact, I’d wager it’s a given that broken moves would make more pokes viable. If Perish Song was allowed on more pokes, we would get more viable pokes then too. And when it got banned in 1v1 for example Lapras and Murkrow fell real hard in viability. Just because something makes more pokes viable doesn’t mean it’s not broken, and you don’t keep broken stuff in a metagame just because they make more pokes viable.
I do agree that broken elements shouldn't be included for the sake of influencing other elements within the metagame, however, Z-Moves aren't broken; a mechanic of a game cannot be inherently good, bad, "too" good, or "too" bad, as they are just tools for the users that can become all of these things. You cannot remove an entire concept or mechanic from something simply because you lack the desire to adapt to the environment changing around you. If an individual element or elements become a problem, then each of those elements should be handled individually.
So you're saying evasion can't be inherently uncompetitive, instead ban only the "evasion abusers" or ban only some evasion moves, OHKO moves can't be inherently uncompetitive, instead ban only the "OHKO abusers" or ban only some OHKO moves, Eviolite can't be broken in Averagemons, instead ban only the Eviolite abusers, Perish Song can't be broken, overcentralizing, and unhealthy, instead ban only the Perish Song abusers.
And regarding wanting Z banned because I can't adapt, that really isn't a valid argument. 1st of all you have no idea of whether me or anyone who wants Z banned hasn't adapted to it. Second, adapting to something doesn't make it lose all of the traits that made it banworthy.
Also regarding
...Please do not try to push your agenda of favoritism towards irrelevant Pokemon that hold little to no impact on the metagame.
Z-moves are the hot topic in 2v2 dubs right now, so I decided on weighing in with my opinion, which I shall try to back up with facts.
So one of the big reasons that people say we shouldn't ban Z-Moves is that, well, Smogon metagames rarely ban anything other than actual Pokémon. But it has happened that other parts of the game have been banned. In this post, I will show some applicable examples, namely Items, Mechanics, and Moves, to decide whether Z-moves fit the mold that these earlier bans do.
Short answer: no.
Long answer: read on.
MOVES
In the history of Generation 7's official ladders, exactly five different moves have been banned that I could find after going through banlists. These are:
Move(meta)
Sonic Boom(LC)
Dragon Rage(LC)
Perish Song(1v1, 2v2)
Dragon Ascent(Ubers)
Swagger(pretty much everywhere)
and ohko moves everywhere but AG but I'm not listing them individually
Now, we can rule out Dragon Ascent, as it is merely a part of the ban of Rayquaza-Mega, which requires Dragon Ascent to Mega Evolve, which is banned under the Mega Rayquaza Clause in Ubers. And Swagger is only banned because Pokémon becomes a coinflip.
So what do the remaining moves have in common? They each OHKO the opposing Pokémon, regardless of attacker or defender, barring sturdy/Focus Sash or an immunity. Yes, in LC nothing gets above 40 hp so nothing can live Dragon Rage, and the number of things that get above 20 HP(for Sonic Boom) is few. Perish Song OHKOes both after 3 turns, so if no one can switch, gg xD.
OHKO moves obviously OHKO everything, albeit with shaky accuracy.
So do Z-Moves do this? Do they all OHKO the opposing Pokémon no matter what uses it and what defends against it, barring SturdySash or an immunity? No! As I can testify, Ludicolo does not always even OHKO Charizard X with Icium Z-boosted Ice Beam (yes, I've been in that matchup. Don't ask.) As an added detriment vs. those other moves, Z-Moves use up your item slot! No more UltraSweeper(tm) Charmander with dragon rage running Scarfed through the meta. No more Choice Scarf to let your Kartana beat Tapu Koko or Choice Band to let it beat Charizard. Instead, you get a one-off item that only boosts one move, maybe not even your STAB.
Z-Moves, therefore, do not fit the precedent of move bans.
And Swagger did not OHKO pokes so it did not fit the precedent either at the time it was banned.
ITEMS
Item bans are realllllly fucking rare, just gonna say that. After looking through like everything I could find, there's some mega stones, Soul Dew, and like... uh... Light Ball in Mediocremons?
oh yeah also Kommonium here and Eevium in LC
So what do these bans all have in common, kids? Well, gee, Mister TGC, it looks like they're all items that are mon-specific!
Correctamundo! As Z-Moves can be applied to all Pokémon, for the most part (obviously mimikium can't be), they do not create an imbalance in mon power like these Mega Stones and other items do.
Hence, they do not fit the precedent.
Except that Eviolite (Averagemons, Scalemons), and Focus Sash (1v1, 2v2 Doubles) can also be applied to all pokemon, so not even by your standards does this make sense.
MECHANICS
All of Smogon's clauses are really kinda metagame specific, and none of them are even applicable, bar Swagger and MRay, which I already brought up, so uhh... I DONE NOW
The move Perish Song is banned in both 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles due to circumstances caused by the format, same goes for the accuracy dropping moves in 1v1. Items get banned too if needed, most recent being Focus Sash in 2v2 Doubles (however questionable that quickban was) and in 1v1 since gen6. Different formats require different actions to achieve the goal, which is a competitive, balanced, and healthy metagame. A multitude of reasons for why Z moves as a whole don't belong in 2v2 Doubles has already been outlined and justified using Smogon guidelines and general logic for a balanced and healthy metagame.
directed at both this and the last point made in Osra's post.
I want to get this posted before replying to Wrath of Alakazam, and this post is becoming too long.
Meanwhile, directed at anyone intending to post regarding a balance subject: If you haven't already, read and understand these posts before posting: Characteristics of a Desirable Pokemon Metagame Tiering Policy Framework(Don't get hung up on the parts that only are relevant for 6v6 etc, use common sense)
For a progressive discussion and for not wasting people's effort and time.
Rumple: your post is incredibly awful. Not because of the content, but because you cannot seeem to resist spaghetti posting / quote splicing / insert community specific name for this style of bad posting etiquette, and its entirely to your point’s detriment. When you dice up an opponents post like this, arguments get tied down into a thousand tiny, irrelevant debates that usually have little or nothing to so with the origional point, and the entire post becomes a convoluted mess to read, much less engage with. Even if you manage to suffer through and win on a subtangent, its meaningless because it didnt actually solidify your argument to your opponent and basically noone who isnt already convinced is going to spend the time to read it. That’s not to say Osra’s post didnt have some of this as well, but hers was mildly managable because it only had one level, while yours has bolded arguments within quotes within quotes within asides of side arguments. I was only able to follow most of it because I already know your stance and have been following the entire conversation on other platforms as well.
You're not refuting the point that for instance "Buginium-Z does what it does any differently than the other Z crystals", by saying "no, that's exactly what it means". In any case you don't see certain Arceus formes like Arceus-Bug unbanned in OU for example, because it's still Arceus, and it still does what it does. And STABmons didn't only ban certain Silvally formes based on type.
And regarding the "agenda", where did I even hint at having such an agenda? And how is said agenda even relevant to banning all Z crystals over only some? If I have any "agenda" it's to have the metas I play be competitive, balanced, and healthy.
Just going to point one thing out that I managed to suffer through hating myself to get through: all arceus formes are tiered seperately; arceus bug could be ou without the rest of the arceus formes coming down, it just isnt allowed because its broken. There are a couple of policy reveiw threads on it if you want to read more, but if I’m being honest they arent exactly page turners. Regardless, that doesnt actually serve as the example for z-crystals you have it does. You still need to show that every crystal you want banned is broken on an individual basis since your precedent means actually the opposite of what you say it does.
Comparing to 6v6 because thats what the standard battles are, and to highlight that Z was made and balanced for standard battles. You're trying to discredit my argument just by stating that there is a difference in the things compared, without addressing the actual point. And bitesize? What? You coming up with a collective name for 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles, and describing how they currently play out doesn't demonstrate a lack of understanding of said metas on my part, let alone address any of my arguments regarding this case. What does battles going faster have anything to do with what I've been talking about? How does battles going faster justify reducing skill and allowing a broken and unhealthy element?
You do not draw comparisons for the purpose of shaping a metagame unless the samples you're using both come from the same source. Numerous metagames bypass rulings of the main tiers that they were based off of for this reason.
And regarding your previous post, you picked the pokes based on a subjective standard that doesnt reflect on reality in the 1st 2 steps. There's no reason to only pick 100 pokes when I've been arguing about how Z affects the entire meta. Even ignoring why the list is bad, a lot of pokes that used sash opt for Z now. And in the second step where the list is shortened, the standards used to make it are subjective and unjustified.
The 100 most used pokes- You know, the pokes that literally reflect what the vast majority of the metagame is and how it's played?
I will admit that the inclusion of sash skewed things a bit, but even then, almost every Pokemon of the 100 preferred some other item over sash, as well as even Z-Crystals over sash, so the weight difference between then and now likely isn't even as big as anticipated.
How are they unjustified-
"Optimal" is being used subjectively here, there might be some pokes which absolutely always have no reason to use Z over an established item, but there will always be uses for Z, or other items for that matter that results in them being able to deal with different things, or aid their partners in certain ways. And the difference of using Z over an established item is nowhere near as significant as the difference of "Thunderbolt>Thundershock".
The fact that Z users can setup was never the sole argument for ban.
Having Z is already doing something they otherwise couldn't, which is being able to deal extra damage without being choiced, losing HP with every attack, or ignoring the various negative effects of stronger attacks.
And the last step, where the list is shortened based on OU usage is entirely irrelevant when the meta only had a ladder for 1 month, and I hope I shouldn't have to explain why, just look up how Smogon tiers work.
How does that justify Z being banworthy, then- Because I agree with you in that Z-Crystals are just another item that can be used to make Pokemon, that previously weren't viable, viable.
Yeah, I was somewhat hesitant with including setup, since it technically uses the Z-Move for the same purpose as the other generic offensive Z-users, so the number of problematic Z-abusers is realistically even less than what I concluded with.
That's literally what optimal was supposed to mean- Z-Attacks are the best choice most Pokemon have for attacks, and while that same kind of offensive power can be emulated without using Z-Crystals, it simply just wouldn't be as efficient. Whether that makes Z good enough to be "too" good is up to the suspect voters and/or leadership.
2v2 isn't a proper smogon tier, you gotta take whatever samples you can get, and thus far, you haven't used any kind of data that pertained to the actual 2v2 meta.
In any case, as I pointed out before,
banning a bunch of Z users wouldn't solve anything as there would still be Z users, aka problems due to Z would still be there as outlined by the analysis, and new users would still rise to the subjective standard set in that post.
So, no, there is nothing proven wrong.
The distinct difference is that the remaining Z users would be vastly inferior to the ones banned, and thus, not be problematic enough to be considered for a ban, similar to the Serene Grace hierachy of Skymin>Jirachi>Togekiss.
The argument against Z rather than offense as a whole is literally in the quote. The differences are explained and there's no implification of or even a hint at offense as a whole being unfair. Not sure what you're trying to do here apart from trying to discredit my argument to make me seem biased by just making an absolutely baseless statement.
The entire quote was literally directed at strong attacks-
There's no need to be "speaking of which", strong moves were already detailed right below the passage you're replying to, where it showed that no, not "near every pokemon".
/ds giga impact, /ds hyper beam, /ds earthquake, /ds superpower, etc. Even if they aren't all hyper-powered moves, the damage difference between them and said moves is near negligible.
And it's not subjective when Z is usable on all pokes, with the only cost being that it's usable once, and that it requires an item slot, while attacks with BP as low as 110 start having worse accuracy deficiencies / negative side effects / conditions, compared to Z's 200's, with most of them also having limited to extremely limited distribution. So no, there is no lack of clarity here.
>outlines costs
>proceeds to claim that there are no costs
M8, the only way that it could be clear is if Z-Moves were perfect and objectively better than any other possible item in ALL circumstances. And clearly, we're disagreeing, so it's anything but clear.
Are you sure you're replying to the right thing there? Optimal move selection has absoluetly nothing to do with the passage you're quoting and why Z moves are bad for the meta.
Pretty sure- The point is that every mon is always going to choose the most ideal moveset that they can in order to win as much as they can, regardless of archetype, and in the context of 2v2, where defensive plays are highly limited due to the lack of being able to switch, it is to be expected that some archetypes will naturally perform better. Simply put, it is not your job to determine how well each archetype performs, rather, your job is to handle any issues that become excessively unhealthy or unbalanced, to which again, we're experiencing a lacking clarity as to what defines such, which warrants this suspect test.
That's exactly the point. You're literally reiterating my argument. Non-offensive pokes are non-offensive and don't do the same damage as offensive pokes because they give that damage up for being whatever archetype they are, for being able to do whatever they're able to do that offensive pokes can't. Them getting access to that damage without any turns used scales down the entire system of pokemon archetypes. This by itself is already sufficient enough reason for quickban.
Calm down there, you make it sound like mons like Toxapex and Skarmory will be able to perform sweeper-level damage without even having to invest evs, but in reality, they can't. It takes about a base 105 Spa Z-Moonblast to equal a regular Adaptability-boosted Tri Attack from Porygon-Z, which that itself is already asking for quite a bit, since defensive pokes; A: often don't have that much Spa to begin with; and B: often don't have/use/want to use moves as powerful as or stronger than Moonblast, so in reality, the system isn't being scaled down as much as you otherwise would have us believe. And again, maintaining archetypes is not your job.
So you're admitting that Z-moves allow for unfair gameplay, but that it can be avoided by simply using the very thing in question brought up for ban. You realize that argument is in direct conflict with Smogon's Tiering Policy Framework?
This emphasizes your lack of understanding of what broken means, how Smogon does things, and balance logic in general.
Except that the framework is meant for individual elements, not entire mechanics. So while this portion would pertain to Z-moves in some way, it would technically only pertain to the miniscule number of problematic Z-abusers that I concluded with in my initial post.
You're referring to that 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles are inherently fast paced, and accusing me of preferring them to not be like that, while I didn't allude to such a preference. Of course 1v1 and 2v2 Doubles are going to be faster paced than 6v6, but my argument was about Z causing the meta being disproportionately so, it's an argument about having balanced meta. Preferring the meta to be balanced is valid, while preferring the meta to be unbalanced (proven to be the case in the discussion about Z) doesn't make sense to cater to. Again, this is not simply preference or opinion.
Balance isn't achieved through undergoing a mass purging of everything relating to something problematic, bans are meant to be as minimalistic and all-inclusive as possible so that only problematic elements are removed. And the way we define what is "problematic" does indeed come from opinion, which is how you can think Groundium Z Slaking is problematic, while many others do not.
You're not refuting the point that for instance "Buginium-Z does what it does any differently than the other Z crystals", by saying "no, that's exactly what it means". In any case you don't see certain Arceus formes like Arceus-Bug unbanned in OU for example, because it's still Arceus, and it still does what it does. And STABmons didn't only ban certain Silvally formes based on type.
STABmons originally only banned Ghost Silvally, but then expanded to all Silvally types iirc. And Arceus isn't being allowed into OU as any form because all forms are still literally a Pokemon with base 120 across the board, recovery, hazards and removal, setup, and more, A.K.A: broken. So again, each case comes individually, just like how the Rotom and Kyurem formes are all branched out across different tiers
So you're saying evasion can't be inherently uncompetitive, instead ban only the "evasion abusers" or ban only some evasion moves, OHKO moves can't be inherently uncompetitive, instead ban only the "OHKO abusers" or ban only some OHKO moves, Eviolite can't be broken in Averagemons, instead ban only the Eviolite abusers, Perish Song can't be broken, overcentralizing, and unhealthy, instead ban only the Perish Song abusers.
Evasion was a widespread issue that made near any Poke that used them uncompetitive
OHKO moves were a widespread issue with dozens of Pokes being rendered capable of invalidating any Poke that didn't have the ability Sturdy
Literally everything got base 100 across the board in Averagemons, you'd be dumb not to ban the boosting items
Perish Song as well was a widespread issue across just about every Perish Song user, in addition to the fact that each different Perish Song set effectively utilized the same strategies in order to cheese out wins
Z-Moves are NOT a widespread issue, every poke that uses Z-Moves has their own different ways of using them in relation to their sets, and most of them to begin with already rely on additional boosting factors to even become problematic; eg weather, terrains
Also, stop bringing up Focus Sash. Focus Sash is banned from 1v1 because its over centralizing, not "broken". The metagame was very different with and without Sash, and it'd probably still be a centralizing force this gen if it were freed. You're arguing Z-Moves are broken. This is not related to Focus Sash.
Dragon Ascent isn't banned in Ubers, it's just that Rayquaza cannot mega evolve with Dragon Ascent.
As for Swagger, that only applies in Generation 6. The only Generation 7 format where Swagger is banned is Doubles OU and Doubles UU.
Oh okay, thanks. I misunderstood the ban and thought it was a ban on Dragon Ascent in general. Thanks for clearing that up.
Also guys can we please have a post that's not the Smogon equivalent of a reaction video on YouTube? Rumplestiltskin's the worst about this, (and glyx) but please for the love of my eyes quote a post once, say everything you want to say about it then, and then proceed to make your own new arguments instead of rehashing old points when it's clear that neither side is ever going to give in on them.
