seeing this, and kinda agreeing with most of it, made me realise just how centralized the meta is at the moment.
you have at most, 10 threats that are extremely viable. And then the next 10 are below them in viability by quite a gap. And then the 10 below those are another big gap.
but the stuff in the top 2 are super above even the next 10. It’s ridiculous. This is what happens when you bottle neck hazard removal and gambit checks. Basically a Pokémon is as good as it’s sucker punch resistance.
but then if you didn’t have mr. broken in the position of best Pokémon in OU, you have dragapult running riot.
and you can’t just blame gambit, it’s just the most enabled Pokémon out of them all. The issue is 100% blind Tera. Nearly everything that’s a great threat is either due to pivot/checking ability or the pressure it exudes from “one free turn” or “one surprise turn”.
empirically: try this question: where do you put predictable threats like roaring moon or dragonite?
the only “predictable” “one free turn” threat at the top is garganacl, which is arguably S tier as well.
you can’t run fringe stuff and do it well.. they’re usually dead weight. Games are decided by 1 mistake, 1 crit, 1 miss, 1 flinch, or 1 read. It’s never been this intense.
this meta is whack
This is what I'm saying, the top mons are too optimized to no be used. Valiant with its godly coverage+booster makes it the perfect cleaner, Garg with Groudon's bulk+recovery+inmunity to status+a move that forces progress unless the rival wastes its item slot is too good, even if something like Gholdengo, Gambit or tera itself get banned the same mons will be still used because there are no reasons to no do it, the only way to solve this is with tutors moves making other mons as good as the top mons while they don't buff the already strong mons too much.
I think a lot of us would agree it’s worth testing “blind Tera”, and proposing the “disclosed Tera” meta as an alternative as a first step.
it keeps almost all the fun of Tera , and might actually make noticeable difference into how narrow margins of error are for games.
the alternative is basically to ban another 5+ Pokémon like a stack of dominoes lol.
it’s gonna be one or the other .. might as well preserve the diversity as long as possible
Quoting you threw together since its all the same convo and all have points,
If this meta is chock full of what could be perceived (possibly rightfully so) as broken shit, when is it a fault of the mons and not a fault of our logic?
This is in no words meant to mean that you all are unequivocally wronf af, because y'aren't. There are a very small group of relevant mons rn, being Tusk, Gambit, Valiant, Garg, Ghold, and like 6 others I can't name, that just fucking dominate., discussion and ladder alike, and they don't actively care what item they run when proper building lets all but 1 carry quick claw of all things. And yet, it is their numbers and role in making a quasi-stable, if generally wack for lack of a better term, meta, that makes me wonder if they aren't fully broken.
Its an uneasy concept for sure, but like how Landorus was the king, who kept things in line in prior gens, now it seems that mons like Kingambit and Tusk are keeping ghosts and hazards just at bay. They provide genuine good to the tier, even if they are scarily close to being oppressive, if not already over the line. They, not just the two I mentioned, are all solid mons who generally keep eachother in check, with garg and gambit needing to save and subsequently use their tera to avoid a fighting tusk disaster, or how gambit keeps dragapult from ghosting all over the meta.
Some of them are just genuinely good wallbreakers, like Valiant, while others are amazing utilitymons like Ghold and Tusk. Garg allows more defensive teams to bust past the bulky steels and waters that could wall them back, as well as just being an amazing physical wall / ghost resist when you need one.
All these mons, through their aspects and abilities, provide but one of the many, many things that this meta fucking needs to be slightly stable, even if that stability hinges around them and only them being used. And thats where we loop back to the beginning.
This centralization, not around one dominating force but around a round table of heinous knights, is a problem. You have the meta, and thats it. Off meta ideas are either quashed by raw force, or by being subverted with meta mons. The quick claw panic only worked because it utilized already amazing Pokemon.
So amazing, in fact, that I believe they are S+, and cannot be banned without great catastrophe. Imagine if Tusk was banned. Just tusk, gone. No more great spinner, no more gholdengo answer, no more insane role comp that lets it do what this meta needs done. Or how about no Kingambit? Gholdengo and Dragapult now have no large dark threat on the horizon every game. They only fear other ghosts now.
Ultimately, they are all keystones in a fucked up arch, and an arch that likely needs remodeling from the ground up. They make me question if they are broken, or if OU needs to change, amidst a million middle and extreme ground options. These times are unique, I think, and action must be taken for sure, but what that action is, I have no clue.
Perhaps ubers being a tier by usage, however silly and shitty that may be, is one such path, as is banning tera and going from there. Perhaps the answer was all along some plucky UU star waiting to be born.
Good night everybody, and don't let the Golisopod bite.