-
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.
Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion v2 [Update on Post #5186]
- Thread starter TPP
- Start date
- Status
Tough timing with DLC on the horizon, probably have to get DLC meta to a somewhat stable positions including quickbans/suspects before going after tera.
That's cute!
Did you factor in the meta were in as well as what Clef can do in return? What about Bax's other sets? It's not just about taking hits.
Clef can T-Wave and outspeed as a result of the paralysis, then Moonblast 2HKOs.
this perception that the DLC changes everything to begin with is absurd
there should be no unbans from this DLC unless there is actively a Tera change, and the meta is not going to be radically different
we are getting like 5ish OU mons from this dlc lol, and that's counting Mons we don't know about
the mons broken by tera are still broken by tera, the other mons are broken because they are broken broken, and will just not be fine in OU
slaking stats on a good pokemon with priority, 135/135 spa speed ghost type, permanent crit double stab with priority water type with SD that 2HKOs toxapex, trying down annihilape to 6-0 bulky teams?
looking at the ubers there is literally nothing that should be retested, and if gambit got banned it would be in that category
this DLC is not changing as much as we act like it is, HOME brought way more substantial Pokemon than DLC 1 ever will with legendaries + Hisuis + some other stragglers
we are at a point where any possible tiering roadmap is mostly fucked. Now? Why suspect Tera when the DLC is so soon! Then, when the DLC is out and inevitably the meta needs to settle, we gotta wait for the tier to settle! Then? Oh, the DLC is not far out, we might as well wait! DLC 2, oh we must wait for it to settle...
Tera retest in 2024 wooo let's go
we could test gholdengo but oh wait the DLC is next month so I guess we can't do anything nevermiiind! Despite the fact that Gholdengo literally 1v1s every Pokemon we know about from the DLC (including Mandibuzz), apparently it destroying the hazard game is not enough
the majority of people want action on Tera, scores are low, but we can't do anything because no one can agree on the issue. People are saying "Ghold and Bax are the problem", and then when we put them up? Well, Ghold checks x, y and z; Y'know, it's really good at checking annoying pokemon like Hatterene. It can be a team's really good Garganacl check, we need all that we can get!
Baxcalibur? You mean the mon destroyed by so many offensive Pokemon? C'mon, get a grip. Sure everyone has been swept by it despite being prepared 15 times in the last week, but it's really not that bad, what else is gonna check Cresselia? We need mons that can stallbreak and Baxcalibur is a really good check to a lot of Pokemon! Do you want them to get better?
this isn't to say the council is unable to do anything, it's that they just don't want to commit to anything, especially after the Volcarona quickban
what we need at this point is a total meta reset where almost 50% of the top tiers are arguably broken, half of teams right now are Ubers worthy Pokemon, and we are in more of a broken check broken metagame than Gen 5 or 7 ever will be
what we need is quickbans at this point and a new vision for the tier, but those things mean backlash, and the current direction means backlash. That is to say, the Council is also fucked no matter what they do, and I don't envy their position. But uhhh can't really envy the playerbase's position either! Some people enjoy the meta (mostly Hard Offense players) but a lot of people don't, and the survey results should not be ignored.
Something has to give and we are going to keep going in a row of the top tiers and continue getting 50-55%ish ban votes as x checks y, y checks z, z checks x
there should be no unbans from this DLC unless there is actively a Tera change, and the meta is not going to be radically different
we are getting like 5ish OU mons from this dlc lol, and that's counting Mons we don't know about
the mons broken by tera are still broken by tera, the other mons are broken because they are broken broken, and will just not be fine in OU
slaking stats on a good pokemon with priority, 135/135 spa speed ghost type, permanent crit double stab with priority water type with SD that 2HKOs toxapex, trying down annihilape to 6-0 bulky teams?
looking at the ubers there is literally nothing that should be retested, and if gambit got banned it would be in that category
this DLC is not changing as much as we act like it is, HOME brought way more substantial Pokemon than DLC 1 ever will with legendaries + Hisuis + some other stragglers
we are at a point where any possible tiering roadmap is mostly fucked. Now? Why suspect Tera when the DLC is so soon! Then, when the DLC is out and inevitably the meta needs to settle, we gotta wait for the tier to settle! Then? Oh, the DLC is not far out, we might as well wait! DLC 2, oh we must wait for it to settle...
Tera retest in 2024 wooo let's go
we could test gholdengo but oh wait the DLC is next month so I guess we can't do anything nevermiiind! Despite the fact that Gholdengo literally 1v1s every Pokemon we know about from the DLC (including Mandibuzz), apparently it destroying the hazard game is not enough
the majority of people want action on Tera, scores are low, but we can't do anything because no one can agree on the issue. People are saying "Ghold and Bax are the problem", and then when we put them up? Well, Ghold checks x, y and z; Y'know, it's really good at checking annoying pokemon like Hatterene. It can be a team's really good Garganacl check, we need all that we can get!
Baxcalibur? You mean the mon destroyed by so many offensive Pokemon? C'mon, get a grip. Sure everyone has been swept by it despite being prepared 15 times in the last week, but it's really not that bad, what else is gonna check Cresselia? We need mons that can stallbreak and Baxcalibur is a really good check to a lot of Pokemon! Do you want them to get better?
this isn't to say the council is unable to do anything, it's that they just don't want to commit to anything, especially after the Volcarona quickban
what we need at this point is a total meta reset where almost 50% of the top tiers are arguably broken, half of teams right now are Ubers worthy Pokemon, and we are in more of a broken check broken metagame than Gen 5 or 7 ever will be
what we need is quickbans at this point and a new vision for the tier, but those things mean backlash, and the current direction means backlash. That is to say, the Council is also fucked no matter what they do, and I don't envy their position. But uhhh can't really envy the playerbase's position either! Some people enjoy the meta (mostly Hard Offense players) but a lot of people don't, and the survey results should not be ignored.
Something has to give and we are going to keep going in a row of the top tiers and continue getting 50-55%ish ban votes as x checks y, y checks z, z checks x
I really find this discussion interesting because it's been like this for literally 10+ years and there's been no problem with it until seemingly when the votes start going a different way than you would like. So I really wonder what the exact problem is with it when it's been decided a long time ago that a simple majority isn't enough.
I think the Gambit suspect is an illustration of what would happen with a Tera suspect.
The mon is obviously broken, or unhealthy af on its best day, but it's a confusing situation because it's only broken some of the time.
Same goes w the gimmick.
In base form, ole Gambo is unhealthy but also provides some much needed tools, so I wouldn't vote ban. Or I might because it really does gatekeep lower tiers like no other mon I've seen. A lot of those cool DLC mons are OHKO at fallen 5 +2 sucker.
So base form is still, like I said, unhealthy in a lot of ways even if you want to defend the mon.
Tera breaks it, and earned a ban vote from me, but tera is too tricky to actually nail down.
The pro-tera arguments leak over to why tera gambit is fine- defensive tera, tera management, etc. I won't bore anyone.
Basically, if Gambit couldn't hit 60% in the current state of the meta, then nothing will, including tera.
Val, Pult, Garg, Bax- whatever wouldn't even come close.
Any Tera suspect would be about the same.
I know this isn't news to most players, but it really does paint a picture about how engrained broken things are in this meta.
Moving on, praying for DLC to save the meta is cope.
90% of those mons are not OU material, aside from some memes or niche.
We're talking pre-evos, or poor BSTs, or just outclassed mons.
Of the remaining 10% that's still about 20 mons that may make it into OU.
That's 20 new teras. Assuming the average mon has about 3 viable teras, that's 60 new problems.
(Spoiler below contains DLC mons)
So we either get a ton of new BS you can't prep for, or the meta still is spamming Tusk, Gambit, Val, Garg, Bax, Pult, etc.
Not sure what's worse.
Thinking Home was going to save the meta was cope, and DLC is the same.
I can't be the only one forecasting the same issues, same low survey scores, same overall bad feel of ladder even after DLC 2, or even DLC 3.
New mons only make the tera situation worse, and the meta worse, which is insane.
Anyone who got reqs knows ladder is abysmal rn and you're smoking that good cope if you think adding new wall breakers, magic guard fat mons, and sweepers that can choose their checks via tera is going to do anything but make the meta more convoluted and a chore to play.
I am once again asking for a council vote on Tera. Not to concrete ban it but to take a quick survey on the gimmick.
The Gambit suspect was a misstep, with all due respect, a total waste of everyone's time.
It may be best for council to have a tera summit, take votes on restrictions, outright ban, etc. just to paint us a picture on what our leaders think is causing this meta to sink and some actual solutions instead of whatever this Gambit suspect was in the middle of OLT when Pao only got 69%.
We can play 2 more years with tera, but I think it will hit everyone eventually that the gimmick took more away from our experience than it added.
TL;DR:
DLC will only make this meta worse thanks to tera making things complicated- thinking it will improve the meta is an error in judgement.
Gambit suspect was silly.
I am asking for council to consider a tera summit where they discuss tera in a more serious light, instead of waiting until spring of next year to realize DLC just made things worse and the gimmick in its current form is not sustainable for a competitive and balanced meta.
The mon is obviously broken, or unhealthy af on its best day, but it's a confusing situation because it's only broken some of the time.
Same goes w the gimmick.
In base form, ole Gambo is unhealthy but also provides some much needed tools, so I wouldn't vote ban. Or I might because it really does gatekeep lower tiers like no other mon I've seen. A lot of those cool DLC mons are OHKO at fallen 5 +2 sucker.
So base form is still, like I said, unhealthy in a lot of ways even if you want to defend the mon.
Tera breaks it, and earned a ban vote from me, but tera is too tricky to actually nail down.
The pro-tera arguments leak over to why tera gambit is fine- defensive tera, tera management, etc. I won't bore anyone.
Basically, if Gambit couldn't hit 60% in the current state of the meta, then nothing will, including tera.
Val, Pult, Garg, Bax- whatever wouldn't even come close.
Any Tera suspect would be about the same.
I know this isn't news to most players, but it really does paint a picture about how engrained broken things are in this meta.
Moving on, praying for DLC to save the meta is cope.
90% of those mons are not OU material, aside from some memes or niche.
We're talking pre-evos, or poor BSTs, or just outclassed mons.
Of the remaining 10% that's still about 20 mons that may make it into OU.
That's 20 new teras. Assuming the average mon has about 3 viable teras, that's 60 new problems.
(Spoiler below contains DLC mons)
Mons like Kommo, Mamo, Gliscor, Pory Z, Chandelure, Metagross Exca, Craw, Clef are going to Tera in your face, break past checks, flip the game on its head like all other teras.
So we either get a ton of new BS you can't prep for, or the meta still is spamming Tusk, Gambit, Val, Garg, Bax, Pult, etc.
Not sure what's worse.
Thinking Home was going to save the meta was cope, and DLC is the same.
I can't be the only one forecasting the same issues, same low survey scores, same overall bad feel of ladder even after DLC 2, or even DLC 3.
New mons only make the tera situation worse, and the meta worse, which is insane.
Anyone who got reqs knows ladder is abysmal rn and you're smoking that good cope if you think adding new wall breakers, magic guard fat mons, and sweepers that can choose their checks via tera is going to do anything but make the meta more convoluted and a chore to play.
I am once again asking for a council vote on Tera. Not to concrete ban it but to take a quick survey on the gimmick.
The Gambit suspect was a misstep, with all due respect, a total waste of everyone's time.
It may be best for council to have a tera summit, take votes on restrictions, outright ban, etc. just to paint us a picture on what our leaders think is causing this meta to sink and some actual solutions instead of whatever this Gambit suspect was in the middle of OLT when Pao only got 69%.
We can play 2 more years with tera, but I think it will hit everyone eventually that the gimmick took more away from our experience than it added.
TL;DR:
DLC will only make this meta worse thanks to tera making things complicated- thinking it will improve the meta is an error in judgement.
Gambit suspect was silly.
I am asking for council to consider a tera summit where they discuss tera in a more serious light, instead of waiting until spring of next year to realize DLC just made things worse and the gimmick in its current form is not sustainable for a competitive and balanced meta.
Jokes aside, I'm happy with the result, though I imagine a lot will change when the DLC arrives and the council shifts focus.
I have not in the past held this ^^^ position.
I was pretty clear about the “exact problem” in my comment that was referenced. Supermajority = governing by the minority. You can find posts on my opinion of the US Senate filibuster in congregation of the masses.
Bottom line is, the majority of qualified voters found Kingambit too much for OU. Most voters also found Tera too much for OU and still to this day surveys confirm Tera is not viewed favorably by a majority of players. Yet they both remain in OU. No surprise the tiering surveys show poor ratings of the meta. This is what always happens to “democracy” when supermajority threshold exists.
Those who say “the community” wanted Kingambit to stay should be corrected because that is flat out not the case.
Maybe I'm getting ahead of things but...
Mons that should be up for consideration to unban after DLC even without a Tera ban on the horizon:
-Annihilape
-Chien-Pao
-Espathra
-Landorus-Incarnate
-Magearna
-Urshifu (both)
-Volcarona
Mons that should be up for consideration to unban after DLC even without a Tera ban on the horizon:
-Annihilape
-Chien-Pao
-Espathra
-Landorus-Incarnate
-Magearna
-Urshifu (both)
-Volcarona
The fact of the matter is that it has been discussed periodically since it was introduced as to why a simple majority is not enough when it comes to changing the metagame. This discussion would not be happening if the vote went the way you wanted but because it didn't, you suddenly have an issue with the voting process.
EDIT: To clarify, I also think Gambit should've been banned and thought it was a no-brainer but it's a simple "damn that sucks" and we move on.
Why in God's name would we unban those 5 mons??
“Annihilape” No
“Chien-Pao” No!
“Espathra” NO!
“Landorus-Incarnate” N O!
“Magearna” Hell no
“Urshifu (both)” Nope
“Volcarona” Ok maybe Volc. We’re desperate for a non-passive Enamorus check rn.
Of course the discussion is supposed to happen when public sentiment is discontent and the system is unable to respond to it. That was the whole point of the comment. I am just relaying the facts; the tiering survey results are poor and nothing is able to be changed.
Why are we even humoring unbans when we don't even the know the full scope of what is coming back? We still don't know Ogrepon's and the Three Stooges Stats, Typing, or Movepool. We also don't have a full confirmation on what old mons are coming back, and what changes have been made to them. Still don't know the status of Move Tutors. There are too many unknowns with the DLC1 to make any sort of calling for Unbans.
I've been very vocal about my prediction about a DNB verdict and a 40% ban vote. I was very off with my prediction on ban vote, but unfortunately I was correct on the verdict. If even kingambit could not get banned, I have my doubts that anything will get banned in this meta. Never had much faith that anything would happen to bax, gholdengo, hazards etc but now I have no faith. The only other thing that might have a shot is a Tera Blast suspect. That probably won't be entertained until after the DLC meta is given time to settle.
I know it might sound saboteurish of me to say this, but we need to wait until the meta is unbearably bad and stale before we can expect any real change next time. We keep seeing these suspect tests where the majority wants some change but barely loses (59% action on tera suspect, 55% on kingambit now). We're not gonna hit a supermajority for meaningful change until OU gets closer to being as bad as natdex. Obviously, the meta is already bad enough in my eyes that we need a ton of tiering action, but the meta needs to get much worse before more people agree with me. Council has done what they can, it's the playerbase that needs some extra convincing.
A lot of people who share my views are calling for suspect tests immediately, but I'd just say to wait. A third tera suspect test won't happen. We need to wait for the perfect time before we roll out the second one. Ideally dlc2 brings us tapus+UBs to really overwhelm us. Let's play the long game and wait for our best chance of success. In the meantime, just spam broken shit lol.
I know it might sound saboteurish of me to say this, but we need to wait until the meta is unbearably bad and stale before we can expect any real change next time. We keep seeing these suspect tests where the majority wants some change but barely loses (59% action on tera suspect, 55% on kingambit now). We're not gonna hit a supermajority for meaningful change until OU gets closer to being as bad as natdex. Obviously, the meta is already bad enough in my eyes that we need a ton of tiering action, but the meta needs to get much worse before more people agree with me. Council has done what they can, it's the playerbase that needs some extra convincing.
A lot of people who share my views are calling for suspect tests immediately, but I'd just say to wait. A third tera suspect test won't happen. We need to wait for the perfect time before we roll out the second one. Ideally dlc2 brings us tapus+UBs to really overwhelm us. Let's play the long game and wait for our best chance of success. In the meantime, just spam broken shit lol.
the big issue is that the main two lines of thoughts for meta changes are based on being anti or pro ban tera, which makes them want completely different things to happen. i joked about us going back and forth between gambit and tera suspects but it actually seems to be impacting the suspect results (its not the Only thing ofc, but its an influence). I think we need a final, definitive answer on tera with no takebacks before we can make progress, even if the result is "no ban cope" so we can stop this "my ban is decided on my tera suspect opinions" i feel
completely agree. People are looking at the addition of Clefable, Gliscor, and Mandibuzz like they're going to completely reshape the game and frankly that's ridiculous. The DLC is going to be about as impactful as the Walking Wake drop and people, perhaps as a form of cope for how unbalanced this tier is and how they don't want to address Tera, act like it's HOME bringing 50+ mons to change everything
it's also likely a discussion silencing tactic from the 30 percent as they are aware the tide is changing on their precious mechanic
"How can we test X when we know 5 new mons are on the way???" Very easily
Last edited:
I think they're being sarcastic, and mocking those who think DLC will do a single thing to make this dumpster fire playable.
no it's genuine, I saw someone say in the Tera thread we can't touch Tera now because of the DLC that was 6 weeks away, as if Tera water Clefable is going to fix this tier
also, unrelated, just want to say, I'm curious why "it's totally balanced, you just have to run 2 dedicated counters, and also it's necessary on almost every team" is ok logic for Kingambit but not for Magearna, who is a much more versatile Pokémon than one-set Gambit and contributed a lot more to the balance of the metagame than mr steal your win
Probably because gambit isn't broken and mag was this seems like a total reach, Encore Wisp Tera's to bait gambit are all reasonable additions to a team that also help in winning other games dunno why all of a sudden running dirge on every team is supposed to be healthier lmfao
this will take like 2 days tops
Annihilape and Chien-Pao will never belong in this tier
Last edited:
We're also getting 5+ high BST mons in the Loyal Three Trio, Raging Bolt, Iron Crown, and Ogrepon, in addition to several other potential meta staples like Kommo-o. This isn't including returning mythicals (which we don't have much info on) and other factors that might affect Gambit's placement, like Tutor moves, Urshifu-RS unban, etc. This shift will be notable, significantly more so than Walking Wake's introduction.
Since the Volc qb was controversial in the first place it only seems right to use this as an excuse to reintroduce it. Everything else seems busted still and pointless to try again.
While I don't think they will COMPLETELY shake-up the Meta I do think it is fair to expect those 3 (among others) to be more impactful on the tier because they bring variety/additions that the Meta is lacking on paper: Clefable adds a defensive Fairy (of which the closest thing we have is bulky Hatterene), Gliscor is a Bulky Ground/Flying Knock Off Absorber (Balance Breaker that shits on Great Tusk and doesn't fear standard Kingambit sets), Mandibuzz is a Bulky Defogger that can function in front of Gholdengo.
All 3 of these have relevant utility given what our top end looks like now, and more significantly, in a heavily offense-oriented Metagame, all 3 are defensive presences that don't give 2 shits about Spikes stacking, which goes a MASSIVE distance towards their ability to function defensively and alleviating cores' hazard weaknesses.
And this is only pertaining to the returning Pokemon, no clue on how Ogrepon and co. function or if Raging Bolt/Iron Crown will play like their counterparts (Paradoxes are all over the place there), and I've seen weirder potential outcomes than the idea of Archduraludon or Dipplin somehow finding their way into OU as not-shit (Clefable went from an underwhelming-at-best mon for several Gens to a monarch of Gen 6 and 7, plus retroactively 4, despite its vanilla statline).
My tl;dr is that a small handful of Mons can VERY MUCH shake up a game for better or worse (the latter typically being the prompt for a Suspect when you think about it). It's just as hasty to say "these mons will not change anything significant about the meta" as to say "these mons will DEFINITELY stabilize things so don't jump to action pre-DLC"
I can get behind this, we're getting a whole dump of mons, what's two more (larvesta>volc)
- Status