Gliscor Suspect -- Qualified Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
toxic + spikes + knock + pheal is decently overbearing to answer alone esp with ghold but isnt that insane thanks to the tier being more offensive rn. sd beats most offensive teams though alongside making almost all corvless balances near-unplayable (and corv in a ghold meta is ass), so youre commonly playing a game of "is it spikes so i need to play slow or is it sd and i need to play aggressive so i dont die". yes you can predict what it could be but much like kyurem its not clear cut on lead. as for answers, encore is not consistent enough, the bp bombs just dont work fast enough, taunt literally is useless etc. stall is the only archetype that is at all acceptable into gliscor and that really shouldnt be used as a base for whats legal.

its counterplay is really quite poor, none of its "counters" have recovery and so itll just win over time so you have to stack answers. it being a glue shouldnt be a factor when its not necessary as a glue and idrk why it being an engine is relevant (its also just not one)

sd lacking initial power doesnt really matter when every mon is scared of toxic + knock in the first place and it just outspeeds most things anyway while having good bulk and discerningly high atk thanks to facade. it may not instantly hit as hard as mons like darkrai or woger but it doesnt need to when it 1v1s basically the entire tier bar balloon ghold.

its not just annoying, its also unhealthy. having to stack answers that may just lose alongside the strain the builder already faces is not good for the meta, and comparing it to kingambit of all things just exasperates my point of the meta being bad and needing change. if being stronger than kingambit is the level of what is "broken", then there's an issue with the mentality of how people treat suspects.

Toxic/spikes/knock so easily walled and dealt with (since protect is a mandate) I'm really shocked you consider it overbearing. What decently made team is losing to this set or has trouble dealing with it? Stall doesn't care at all. HO will just set up on you, balance has the aforementioned corv, but also a lot of fringe picks like gweezing blank said set and also has flamethrower for ghol.

Its counterplay is completely fine. You have to stack answers for every A/S tier threat in this meta because tera exists. What team is playable that does not have several answers to Gambit, Zama, Ghol, Bolt...I can keep going.

SD lacking power does matter. 95 speed doesn't outspeed "most" things lol. 1v1s the entire tier is a crazy statement and just blatantly untrue lol. I guess if you want to blow tera it can present a more immediate threat but then you are normal which means Zama will beat you and you also lose your resistance to spikes.

I use gambit because for better or worse (I consider it an abysmal inclusion in the tier but w/e) its apparently here to stay. If you aren't even close to as threatening as gambit I'm not getting behind you being ban worthy. Every gliscor set has tons of counterplay and answers. Also guessing the wrong set against it is not as game warping as guessing the wrong set on something like Kyurem. If you thought it was spikes and its SD big deal. switch in your zama and roar it out, bring in corv, lando to taunt or uturn to a nuke.

maybe my views are just warped because I literally have never had an issue with it on any team.
 
Just finished up reqs after throwing a bajillion games in the 1700s, I don't really think gliscor is as unmanageable as it was during the ladder phase of OLT or while kyurem was banned, which saw a huge rise of slow grass mons, birds and grounds that gliscor feasted on, let alone it's dominance during dlc1 where fat sets and sd sets alike ran the tier thanks to far less reliable ways to threaten out the scorpion.

Starting with what it does well, it's uniquely flexible toolkit let's it run both insanely bulky sets that function as the ultimate glue thanks to 2 huge immunities, massive passive healing, spikes immunity along with knock off, toxic, spikes and u-turn in its movepool to customize it to what the team needs while offensive SD sets can, once again tweak it's moveset between facade + eq or knock off + 1 depending on what your team needs and, more importantly, offer amazing ev flexibility between bulky sets, fast sets, attack invested sets and whatever you want in-between to boost certain match-ups. To make things tougher defensive counterplay is only loosely overlapping, being certain skarm and corv sets along with balloon steels sometimes, and these options hate being knocked off since it cripples their defensive utility by a large margin. Despite that being the case, offensive counterplay plentiful.

Like others have mentioned, splashable super-effective attacks do exist with special ice moves (darkrai, deoxys-s, slowking-g, kyurem, clefable), physical ice moves (great tusk, kyurem, dragonite, iron valiant, zamazenta, weavile, meowscarada), special water moves (samurott-h, walking wake, primarina, greninja, keldeo) and physical water moves (samurott-h, ogerpon-w). Pre-gliscor tera all of these attacks threaten OHKOs, which any team running gliscor can't risk thanks to how important it is on these structures to break the opponent's team, or 2HKOs, which it can recover from but severely limits entry opportunities later on which you can exploit. Disruption options in encore and taunt also heavily restrict gliscor making progress and leaves it heavily exploitable.

Each gliscor set is also uniquely exploitable since it's customizability is its achilles heel. Non-eq bulky sets get sat on by steels, clef and other gliscors. Bulky eq sets run eq/proc + 2 of knock/toxic/u-turn/spikes and share some checks with non-eq fatscor but is also exploited by offensive presences in the tier like ogerpon-w, darkrai and roaring moon to name a few. SD sets are customizable and you never really know which ev spread it is but the checks largely exist on a spectrum where bulkier pokemon like garganacl and great tusk and disruption annoy slower, fatter sets while faster sets lack a lot of special bulk making common attacks like dragapult hex, iron valiant moonblast and raging bolt draco meteor/dragon pulse far more dangerous to stay in vs or switch in to. Iron defense pokemon also completely blank SD variants regardless of spread which is huge as well.

Moving on to the tera question, the various types help boost longevity in the short term while giving a much needed offensive boost for certain SD sets.

Defensive options are: Water, patches ice + water weakness but gains weakness to grass attackers, raging bolt, spikes; Dragon, blanks waterpon and is 2x weak to ice instead of 4x but is now threatened by dragon attack, moonblast, spikes; Grass, same benefits of dragon + keeps ability to freely switch into electric and ground moves but gains fire, flying, spikes weakness; Fairy, solid neutral type & new weaknesses are not easy to hit but doesn't gain big defensive perks beyond that along with the ubiquitous spikes weakness.

Offensive options are: Dark, makes boosted knock off able to brute force through teams + hex resistance but fairy, dark, spikes weakness; Normal, makes facade a glorified z-move, ghost immunity, neutrality into most types but fighting, spikes weakness; Ghost, 1v1s facade gliscor + ironpress mons along with neutrality to most types but ghost, dark, spikes weakness.

To summarize the general idea of what tera means for gliscor, it'll get a free turn or two like most tera flips but loses huge defensive benefits it's inate typing brings thanks to a mix of immunities and its weaknesses, ice and water attacks, as common as they are, being less splashable and weaker than the attacks you would use against a gliscor post-tera along with spikes really stifling switch-ins now. Also, gliscor burning tera is almost never the immediate win it was with certain banned pokemon which means if you can force that before your own tera that will put you at a huge advantage.

As far as gliscor being problematic vs stall and balance, it's natural longevity paired with its customizability is tailored specifically to aid accelerating progress against these archetypes while using said archetypes. Banning gliscor wouldn't help the archetypal mirrors but rather force them to be more rng reliant with the contact birds being more free to switch-in to other knock off users and also lose the best user of arguably the most fair status in the game since its never inflicted in a cheesy way in toxic. Stall would also be be doa if gliscor were to be banned because, despite all the cool innovations this gen for the archetype, it's never been weaker and losing one of two pokemon that are effectively required is disastrous.

I'm glad that gliscor is being tested since it does feel very borderline at times plus I'm sure this is also meant to be a beta test for the new testing system but, I think there's just too many tools available to slow it down long enough to overcome it's strengths and the fact that it is hugely important glue that makes fat team vs fat team games more resource management vs relying on x move to hit or y condition to activate makes me feel like do not ban is the best option for the tier.
 
Just got reqs with a Cyclizar stall and wow this new system really fucking sucks to play in. Many hours of already having the required GXE but I didn't reach 1750 so I have to play 20 more games.

As for Gliscor; I won't deny that counterplay exists. Skarmory / Corv can sit on both main sets forever. Gweezing and Unaware Dozo give stall an out vs SD sets. It's not exactly a Calyrex Ghost Rider kinda mon but I think it has too many auto-win MU's vs traditional balances. Sure those teams could adapt but at what point to we draw the line of having to deviate from standard just to beat something? I'm probably voting ban on Gliscor
 
Just got reqs with a Cyclizar stall and wow this new system really fucking sucks to play in. Many hours of already having the required GXE but I didn't reach 1750 so I have to play 20 more games.

As for Gliscor; I won't deny that counterplay exists. Skarmory / Corv can sit on both main sets forever. Gweezing and Unaware Dozo give stall an out vs SD sets. It's not exactly a Calyrex Ghost Rider kinda mon but I think it has too many auto-win MU's vs traditional balances. Sure those teams could adapt but at what point to we draw the line of having to deviate from standard just to beat something? I'm probably voting ban on Gliscor

Yeah I'm not getting reqs for this mon. The new system is fine in theory but that's just too many games for me atm. I'm not sure if it's the lack of buzz and/or ambivalence players have towards Gliscor, or if the ladder is such a chore to grind due to the meta being a solid 6 on its best day for comp and fun, but the engagement is way down. As of time of writing there are less than half the amount of qualified voters as there were for the Kyurem suspect. Not sure if this is what the council wanted with this new system but I assume there will be far less voters going forward.
 
Yeah I'm not getting reqs for this mon. The new system is fine in theory but that's just too many games for me atm. I'm not sure if it's the lack of buzz and/or ambivalence players have towards Gliscor, or if the ladder is such a chore to grind due to the meta being a solid 6 on its best day for comp and fun, but the engagement is way down. As of time of writing there are less than half the amount of qualified voters as there were for the Kyurem suspect. Not sure if this is what the council wanted with this new system but I assume there will be far less voters going forward.
You definitely can finish pretty easily with <50 games, or even <40, which was the min GXE/max Game threshold for the old requirements if you don't start playing like someone who picked up the game yesterday like I did extending it to 54 games for myself. I do agree it does feel a little bit like a slog after hitting old reqs quite a few games before new reqs which may filter people out but I think the biggest benefit is having to play competent players to actually hit 1750 + 80+ GXE. I think I ended up playing 3 games against people with OU medals and imo having to beat these players is a far better indicator of general competency than speed running to the mid 1600s where players just start to pick up on how tera interactions can be planned around or accounted for.
 
I have not ignored that SD Gliscor is paired with a spike setter. However to be quite honest if a team autoloses to hazard stack+setup knocker, I cannot call such a team viable in the current meta. Hazard stack is probably the most prominent playstyle right now and you SHOULD have an answer to it regardless of Gliscor.

If the traditional balance team or stall teams don't have a dedicated knock or status absorber, they are gonna have a lot of problems regardless. Those fat teams need to rethink their team structures as they will lose to a lot more things, not just Gliscor. Let's take a look at a sample team for simplicity sake. If your balance team gets ducked over by knock, you are gonna have a hard time with this Dark Spam hazard stack offense a very meta team with many variations that you will have to account for. Furthermore, I do not think Gliscor is league better of a hazard setter then other options. Samurott spikes cannot be blocked by taunt or Hatt and has a more threatning offensive profile which makes him not a huge momentum sink in case you get a turn wrong as you will make progress regardless. Lando fits better on offensive teams by offering intimidate, raw power, utility in taunt or rock tomb. Ting-Lu can tank any attack and serve as an emergency check to setup mons or sub users, something Glis cannot boast about. Glis is bulky and hard to chip in the traditional sense but still has a lot of weaknesses to consider it overwhelming(I have gone over it's weaknesses in my initial post). The key to beating Gliscor is playing both fast paced AND patient. If the mon that beats Gliscor is also your wincondition, don't just hard swap it in unless you go for a read. Nobody likes getting knocked. The name of the game in the current gen is scouting and bulky pivoting. And honestly, even if you mispredict and Gliscor gets up a spike, it is not the end of the world. I have won games where the opponent got everything up since I took the opportunity to kill the mons while they setup. The ability to outlast can only get you so far if you make some huge progress with offensive pressure and some of Gliscors checks are extremely powerful breakers.
 
Last edited:
I have not ignored that SD Gliscor is paired with a spike setter. However to be quite honest if a team autoloses to hazard stack+setup knocker, I cannot call such a team viable in the current meta. Hazard stack is probably the most prominent playstyle right now and you SHOULD have an answer to it regardless of Gliscor.

If the traditional balance team or stall teams don't have a dedicated knock or status absorber, they are gonna have a lot of problems regardless. Those fat teams need to rethink their team structures as they will lose to a lot more things, not just Gliscor. Let's take a look at a sample team for simplicity sake. If your balance team gets ducked over by knock, you are gonna have a hard time with this Dark Spam hazard stack offense a very meta team with many variations that you will have to account for. Furthermore, I do not think Gliscor is league better of a hazard setter then other options. Samurott spikes cannot be blocked by taunt or Hatt and has a more threatning offensive profile which makes him not a huge momentum sink in case you get a turn wrong as you will make progress regardless. Lando fits better on offensive teams by offering intimidate, raw power, utility in taunt or rock tomb. Ting-Lu can tank any attack and serve as an emergency check to setup mons or sub users, something Glis cannot boast about. Glis is bulky and hard to chip in the traditional sense but still has a lot of weaknesses to consider it overwhelming(I have gone over it's weaknesses in my initial post). The key to beating Gliscor is playing both fast paced AND patient. If the mon that beats Gliscor is also your wincondition, don't just hard swap it in unless you go for a read. Nobody likes getting knocked. The name of the game in the current gen is scouting and bulky pivoting. And honestly, even if you mispredict and Gliscor gets up a spike, it is not the end of the world. I have won games where the opponent got everything up since I took the opportunity to kill the mons while they setup. The ability to outlast can only get you so far if you make some huge progress with offensive pressure and some of Gliscors checks are extremely powerful breakers.
For the most part I'm still split down the middle and don't really mind if gliscor leaves the tier or not. And as a matter of fact I strongly agree with the latter parts of this post.

However, there are some things that I disagree with. For example, I whole heartedly disagree with this argument of sd gliscor not beating stall/ bulky balance because of a knock off "absorber". (except with G-Weezing stall, that's probably the most solid you're going to get against a gliscor spikes team) because even if you do have a knock off "absorber" those mons simply do not beat gliscor in the in the long run. and that's because the same knock off absorbers will exploited by a patient SD set with knock. For example, if corv gets knocked off it's incredibly easy to PP stall it out of roosts with rocks up(assuming no defog with ghold or corv not running fog). clef's only shot at beating SD gliscor is by giving it sticky barb. therefore it's hard to actually switch into knock off without loosing. also +2 facade has a chance to just 2hko without lefties. support gliscor? no need to explain on that one. alomamola? gets dangerously close to losing with max hazards. So frankly, the best way to deal with gliscor is as you've stated to play at a fast enough pace that your balance team can take down the said gliscor team before it inevitably softens up to the extent that facades will cleanly pick apart the remainder of said teams.

but yeah stall teams will just about always lose against a patient SD gliscor.
 
Quick thoughts:

I'm currently on the fence on Gliscor. In my Kyurem post I mentioned that I felt like Kingambit and Gliscor were the most banworthy mons in the metagame, due to these two mons having the highest capacity for hard punishing builds that may otherwise be viable. Despite the fact that I still pretty much agree with this stance, recent experience with the metagame at large has led me to think that the DLC 2 metagame, while it does have a lower skill ceiling than the first year of SV imo, is at least relatively stable and well-balanced between playstyles. Now that we've gotten rid of the insane setup + recovery sweepers (Goug and Volc) it seems we have a lot of competing archetypes all functioning off of incredibly powerful mons and team concepts. The main difficulty I'm having when it comes to evaluating Gliscor, is that I genuinely struggle to tell whether games involving Gliscor are noticeably less skillful or interactive than any other matchup in this metagame.

Obviously the biggest reason by far for this suspect happening is the range of teams that are being spammed with the structure of SD Gliscor + Rocks + Spikes, which is a near auto-win into fat teams unless they are both very carefully built and also well played. However, I've always avoided using this structure when playing competitively because I think that fitting the level of support needed to get both Rocks and Spikes on the same team as SD Gliscor inevitably leads to issues playing around certain offensive threats, so from a metagame perspective you kind of end up either dice rolling on not facing whichever offensive threats you didn't cover, or facing a similar structure on the other side that ultimately comes down to small building details (who has the greedier team) and then a tiny amount of playing skill. For this reason, I always tended towards other threats like CM + Knock Off Clef whenever I wanted to use a long-term wincon alongside Rocks and Spikes, which gives a more balanced defensive profile (no need for double ground) while being able to counteract Gliscor teams with certain picks like Whirl Skarm to keep it at low health throughout the game. You can also observe that Gliscor is sitting at just under 44 percent winrate in SCL right now, which is not a metric I'd normally care about, but in the case of a mon that can get some incredibly good matchups but only with a lot of support, it seems relevant to know how the Gliscor teams are doing.

From a personal perspective I do think that SD Gliscor teams are more brainless than other top archetypes in the metagame (brainless = requires less understanding to play optimally, uninteractive = less things that the opponent can do from a playing perspective), but I don't have much to base that off of right now since it's mostly just the feeling that I get in-game. I know most people probably expect more depth from my posts by now, but truthfully I just won a tournament and am busy playing a different tier (RU) in SCL, which means that these last few weeks are probably the most casual I've ever been while playing this tier. If I have more thoughts on the suspect I'll update you guys later.
 
My thoughts on Gliscor and the new suspect model.

I know this isn't the best place to post this, but I also know that I and others will hardly bother to go to the future Police Review thread to read or interact.

The new method fails to provide the aforementioned extra experience that 5-15 additional battles would bring to make the vote judgment more coherent. During the final battles (1600+) I often faced the same opponent with the same team 3 or 4 times and this added nothing to me, except for time invested for the suspect. Maybe this will invite players to rethink their hard work and not exercise a troll vote with their invested time, but other than that, it's nothing more than a punishment for players who would get the requirements anyway, still running the risk of having to redo a longer journey if they suffer hax or terrible MU before opening a 15-0 or 20-0 sequence.

I am also against reformulating the concept of requirements during an ongoing generation, after so much that a discussion of a 60% > 55% or 50+1 majority was avoided by the leadership and left for, eventually, the beginning of Generation X.
However, I know that the council acted in good faith trying to improve the electoral process.

As for the supposed lower engagement compared to previous suspects, the suspect supposedly consuming more time may have discouraged or even prevented players from posting their thoughts while trying to meet the requirements. The target, Gliscor, is not the usual threat type and this may be leaving some users just in doubt and preferring not to post.

Oh yes, Gliscor, now about him himself, I will go to what really matters for the topic: my thoughts.

-Gliscor performs a huge range of functions in a single slot, and despite even more options that I will comment on at the end, what it boils down to is the predominance of 2 sets: Defensive Spikes and Offensive Swords Dance. Both share the ability to ignore and absorb Status, Knock Off, and ignore Spikes (pre-Tera). Using Knock Off mitigates the opponent's passive damage and recovers with its ability Poison Heal every turn. You switch into a Pokémon that can't do much against Gliscor, forces a switch, and uses Protect on the Pokémon that pressures you, recovering 3/8 HP.
-Using Protect is also another crucial factor in assessing Gliscor's situation. In addition to making it easier to recover its HP, Protect helps in discovering and gathering information about your opponent's team, making it harder to execute Lures, such as Trick, Ice Beam GalarKing, Tera Blast Ice, or even Chilly Reception + Weather Ball.
-In addition to the formidable original Ground/Flying type, a range of at least 5 legitimate Tera-types helps to reverse bad MUs.
Dark and Normal improve MU vs Dragapult and give STAB to Facade and Knock Off.
Ghost turns Gliscor into a spin-block on Stall teams. Dragon turns the tables against Waterpon and Water is good as a neutral type and rare weather teams in general.

-Defensive Spikes; One of the pillars of Stall, it provides almost brainless progress with Spikes, Toxic and Knock Off. It can easily recover HP against Landorus-T and Steel Birds.
-Offensive SD; Finds exploits in Landorus-T, Cinderace, Defensive Gliscor and other defensive Pokémon. It can flip the MU with Tera (mainly in scenarios where the opponent does not have Spikes) and perform sufficient coverage with few variants. Facade + Knock Off, Facade + EQ, EQ + KOff, EQ + Ice Fang.

-Gliscor is bulky enough to survive super effective STABless/TERAless moves like Ice Spinner Great Tusk and Ivy Cudgel base Waterpon without crit.
Neutralizing Gas and Skill Swap are insufficient answers, since the switch alone will return Poison Heal to normal. (Unless you perform the super telegraphed and limited Trevenant Skill Swap + Natural Cure after removing Toxic Orb.)

-Steel Birds are absolute counters: I want to counter this argument: In a 1v1 endgame scenario this may be true, but in a long game, especially combined with Stealth Rock, Gliscor makes progress in the long run, considering that Roost's PP is limited to only 8, while Gliscor can stay for a few turns using Spikes or SD to recover its HP, then Gliscor deals its chip damage, switches to an ally resistant to Body Press like GalarKing or Toxapex, and then it all repeats again.

-As a typical stall player, I feel obliged to give my POV on mirror match stall in the current metagame.
The match starts with a double Protect from Gliscor, double Knock Off, and triple Spikes. From turn 6 onwards, there is an attempt to make the opponent's Gliscor contact Clefable to absorb Sticky Barb to neutralize Poison Heal's recovery. And needless to say, experienced players avoid this. It becomes an anti-game, discouraging progress and creating unnecessarily long battles.
Of course Stall will be weakened without Gliscor, but Stall adapted in the last generation with the addition of Boots, and adapted in generation 9 with the cut of recovery PP, in addition to the limitation of Aromateraphy. And it will be no different if Gliscor is banned now.

-As other uncommon and perhaps underoptimized options when compared to its 2 main sets, we still have Taunt and U-Turn, which can change Gliscor's role to a fat blocker and/or pivot.

-That said, I still want to add how oppressive the teambuild is looking for an answer that doesn't suffer from Knock Off or Toxic on a switch.

With that, I conclude that (IMO) Gliscor is UNHEALTHY for the SV OU metagame and I will be voting BAN.
 
Last edited:
It has been made explicitly clear on numerous occasions discussions about the process would re-open after the suspect, and not to post them here as this is intended for actual discussion of Gliscor. I am responding to a few points that are misleading/only partially representative, but please have future discussion in the appropriate place and time.

Expect a substantive Gliscor post from me in a few days.
The new method fails to provide the aforementioned extra experience that 5-15 additional battles would bring to make the vote judgment more coherent. During the final battles (1600+) I often faced the same opponent with the same team 3 or 4 times and this added nothing to me, except for time invested for the suspect.
This may be your experience, but it wasn’t mine. I played 10-15 additional games and faced a nice variety of opponents and teams that actually were coherent in the metagame as opposed to nonsense from low ladder. It all depends if you laddered during peaks days/peak time, and the same can be said for prior suspects.
I am also against reformulating the concept of requirements during an ongoing generation, after so much that a discussion of a 60% > 55% or 50+1 majority was avoided by the leadership and left for, eventually, the beginning of Generation X.
However, I know that the council acted in good faith trying to improve the electoral process.
Apples and oranges. The whole site outside of OU just changed their reqs, adopting COIL, but kept their thresholds the same. You cannot draw the line where you personally want it when the community as a whole already drew a clear line as to what’s on the table.

And obviously harder reqs will have less turnout, but we already have 71 voters halfway in, so I don’t even know why this is a complaint as we will be within normal margins.
Just got reqs with a Cyclizar stall and wow this new system really fucking sucks to play in. Many hours of already having the required GXE but I didn't reach 1750 so I have to play 20 more games
The point is making you play more games against legitimate opponents and teams. It took me another hour to play an extra 15 games and those 15 games were pretty much the only ones I faced actual opponents during. This is done by design and was covered at length as a request people explicitly made in the thread on changes.

It should take more time and more than the bare minimum to get reqs.
 
This is my first time getting suspect requirements ever. I attempted in the past but gave up on them early on. I actually got a 20-0 lead this time though and decided to see it through. 50-16 at the end, but I'll take it any day.

Suspect Test Team:
https://pokepast.es/a27d39a40d76266e

I don't know about Gliscor. I've been inactive on the ladder for 2 months and just binged it for 2 days getting reqs. The team I used above I would think struggles with Gliscor, but Tera Steel Latios helped me a lot against it, and it's just a good Tera in general. I've haven't used any other teams at a high level, so I lack perspective. I'll abstain for now, but I figure that I should read everyone's posts here and keep an open mind.
 
I lean do not ban right now, but I am not fully decided and, above all, view this suspect as a case study in how to evaluate different kinds of teambuilding restrictions and weighing how good “too good” something could be in certain situations. You cannot treat Gliscor like some of the powercrept breakers we have previously suspected and trying to do that is just doing yourself a disservice.

To start, this Gliscor suspect now is totally different than the initial suspect. Previously, the SD set was good, but the combination of Spikes and utility proved overwhelming. Currently, the SD set is the centerpiece in any arguments to ban it while utility sets are taking a (slight) backseat.

The aforementioned Spikes variants of Gliscor are by no means bad — they are just exploitable. If you run Spikes, then you always have a (large) handful of passive match-ups.
  • Most of the time you drop U-Turn, making you a sitting duck against opposing SD Gliscor as well as Corviknight, Skarmory, etc. — letting up free turns to SD Gliscor mandates very specific team compositions for any balance/stall, restricting you a ton. Many other Pokemon can withstand hits and grab multiple turns to set-up or attack as well
  • If you cannot fit Toxic, then Great Tusk can Rapid Spin a lot longer while Dragonite, ID Zamazenta, Ogerpon-Wellspring, Enamorus, and Hydrapple have much better entry and overall match-up. You also cannot really kill things you would normally check like Zapdos and Moltres, complicating long-term ripples against them
  • If you cannot fit Knock Off, you get greatly diminished returns on your own Spikes, mandate another (ideally durable) Knock Off user on your team, and bulky teams have a much easier time switching in, which defeats a large pressure point Gliscor normally provides
  • And if you drop EQ, then you’re suddenly set-up fodder for Gholdengo, Kingambit, Raging Bolt, Iron Crown, and others
Realistically, Spikes Gliscor’s biggest nemesis is itself: opposing SD Gliscor has a field day when facing it, but every variant of it has quite a few things it gives free entry that aren’t ideal. We also see a fair deal of Cinderace, which can flip the field — its usage is more for the uptick in Webs and Veil honestly, but helps here. Finally, Spin Tusk is as common as ever and even Corviknight and Weezing-Galar have slightly elevated ladder usage to Defog.

I actually really like utility Gliscor without Spikes — using EQ / Toxic / Protect / U-turn while keeping it slow, allowing me to cycle in threats while keeping Gliscor healthy with normal pivots and Protect, but this variant is not broken either so much as just practical and generally good. I used it twice in SCL and loved my teams with it, but I wouldn’t put it in the bucket of broken or discuss it much more in the suspect thread.

Pivoting to the focus: SD Gliscor is the bread-and-butter of this discussion. We see a ton of now-standard SD / Facade / Knock / Protect, but classic sets that still opt for STAB EQ work as well. EQ + Facade sucks into Balloon Gholdengo and loses the ability to force a Knock Off into bulky teams, EQ + Knock struggles to do enough quickly into anything that isn’t grounded, and EQ + Ice Fang doesn’t see enough usage (but is supremely underrated IMO — would recommend trying it out to aspiring Gliscor users).

I think offense is ok enough into SD Gliscor. You have many means of pressuring it, a handful of common Ice moves, plenty of circumstantial Tera options, some ways to disrupt it like Trick or timely Encore, and even a lot of Pokemon that outright beat it and can switch in once or twice.

Stuff like Ogerpon-Wellspring, Ice Spinner Dragonite, Ice Spinner Tusk, Ice Fang AoA Zama, Ice Beam Darkrai, SD Ice Punch/Liquidation Valiant, Kyurem, Ice Beam Deoxys-Speed, Samurott-H, Weavile, Walking Wake, Manaphy, and Ninetales-Alola all can comfortably 1v1 Gliscor, most can switch in at least once, and only lose if Gliscor uses Tera. If Gliscor uses Tera, then you almost certainly have something faster to take it out — suddenly Zama and Valiant have STAB Fighting to neutralize Normal Gliscor, for example. Dragon and Water Scor have multiple weaknesses, too. Is it always easy or linear? No, but I also do not think SD Gliscor is disproportionately problematic for offense or even close to the top of the teambuilding check list for these aggressive builds. It’s really the balance and bulkier team match-ups we are looking at here.

SD Gliscor into balance can be hell. You have a Pokemon immune to Spikes that soaks up any status, can switch into Knock Off after Toxic Orb is activated, and negates SR damage with Poison Heal while recovering twice as much as Leftovers. This is all done while having superb physical bulk and multiple common immunities — it should go without saying that SD Gliscor is the nightmare of a balance or bulky team.

There are ways around it, however. We have seen more slower pivots that aim to tank a bit and pivot in something that can RK Gliscor. Stuff like slowturn Corviknight, your own U-turn Gliscor, and Alomomola do a nice job here and can at least cycle through a handful of times. Other Pokemon like Moltres, slow Landorus-T, and even Slither Wing can do the dance as well, but in a much more restricted fashion due to inability to tank a Knock Off or lack of longevity in the match up. Pair these with Pokemon that can take out Gliscor — Kyurem, Weavile, Spinner Tusk, Spinner Nite, Beam Boots Rai, Beam Deoxys-S, Wellspring, etc. — all of these can be used as faster weapons on balance or BO. These type of cores are at least safe into Gliscor a few times over. Truthfully, you also need to limit free entry of Gliscor and if you don’t run a pivot, then your offensive Pokemon like Kyurem or Great Tusk can easily be outlasted by Gliscor over time. It’s a lot and I definitely think SD Gliscor is the most restrictive Pokemon to these teams aside from maybe Ogerpon-Wellspring.

I am not sure if what’s present in the metagame is enough for Gliscor to be contained on balance without seeing the same structures spammed repeatedly, but it’d a lot more nuanced than simple lists of checks/counters given the longevity of counterplay relative to that of Gliscor. For now, I am leaning against banning it as there are tools, but as writing out this post it did strike me how flimsy some of the tools into it can be while Gliscor has a field day over longer games, so perhaps deeper reflection is needed to be sure. More later from me perhaps.
 
I was pretty firmly DNB before, but now I'm not so sure. I think that Gliscor is fine overall, but I suspect that it would create a healthier and more balanced metagame if it was banned. The issue that's keeping me from making up my mind (based on what I've seen in past suspects) is that one shouldn't vote based off excessive speculation, and I don't truly know what the meta would look like without Gliscor.

Edit: I should clarify that I think the metagame is in a good spot even with Gliscor in it.
 
Last edited:
We don't need to speculate about the future when looking at how gliscor functions in the present is a good enough indicator. Cape Canaveral here is a summary I found outlining smogon tiering philosophy and the different aspects of broken, uncompetitive, and unhealthy. Gliscor can at times be broken with a SD knock set vs balance, uncompetitive with a toxtect set into offensive mons with no recovery, and unhealthy with the amount of constraint it puts on teambuilding. Gliscor isn't outright unbearable in any one of these aspects, though when you consider them together I find it to be banworthy.

A few things I want to emphasize:
- The main drawback of utility gliscor now is SD gliscor taking advantage of it. This is incredibly unhealthy.

- The slow pivots either immune to toxic or least bothered by it (corv, gliscor, mola) all allow gliscor to rack up health (maybe flip turn vs spdef is noticeable but toxic on mola is also noticable) which makes checking the offensive threats it wants to easier. Gliscor could also opt to cripple one of the no recovery mons that beats it in the 1v1 by toxicing it then rinse repeating the situation. Only special ice attackers will ohko it. Depending on plays you could get 48% in poison heal minus however much the pivot move does (pivot comes in, gliscor protects vs the pivot using its pivot move, gliscor uses a utility move vs the pivot as it uses its pivot move, gliscor protects against the designated mon). This is pretty stupid in the sense that what is supposed to stop gliscor ends up benefitting it so much.

- You can make plays like hard switching as gliscor protects the first time and going for a set up move if it tries to the second time, though this is a bit risky and gliscor can always elect to switch out on the setup, go for a crippling move vs the pivot or on the set up turn anticipating protect. I don't find these mindgames healthy, "just predict bro" goes both ways. Turn 3 is a funny example where I call out my opponent anticipating my "obvious" protect. Gliscor players can make reads too.

- Listed below are a couple of replays from OLT playoffs where SD gliscor absolutely demolishes balanced structures. The SD gliscor mirrors are really awkward and make for the most important speed tie/creep in the tier. HO lead speed ties like glim, lando-t, hrott, deo-s, etc can be avoided with an adequate antilead but gliscor v gliscor in balance is practically inevitable.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ou-795557
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ou-794621
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ou-792062
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ou-790521

- Gliscor pairs incredibly well with most of the tier. Seriously, look through OU and count how many mons don't pair well with gliscor. I count 4 definitive and 4 maybes. Glim, moth, treads for being exclusive ho mons and lando-t for sharing the same type. Other things like cind, rilla, zap, ival are either doable or niche but aren't as good as other options. Everything else fits well with gliscor. This matters tremendously because it means gliscor structures are far more versatile and thus harder to prepare for compared to say kyurem structures which are almost always either HO with dd/4 attack dice or a bulkier team for subtect/boots/specs with very similar support mons.

If you are unhappy with the metagame but have your sites set on something other than gliscor, I implore you to put that aside and consider how unhealthy it is for the tier. The sentiment that "(blank) is still here theres no way gliscor should be banned because I find (blank) > gliscor" is not going to be what leads to you having a more positive view of SV OU.
 
I'm honestly still split about what I plan to vote. If Kyurem had remained banned I probably would have voted ban immediately, but now I'm less sure and feel more accepting that the current metagame is fine as-is. However I also believe most people fall into the following categories:
  • Gliscor Haters - regardless of Gliscor's performance in OU, they despise playing against it and will vote ban no matter what.
  • Gliscor is broken - this group of people recognize how quickly and easily Gliscor can sweep through teams with SD + Tera + max speed and find it very broken. It's very hard to stop Gliscor where the only mons that can 1HKO it post-tera are Zamazenta, Close Combat Great Tusk (if it can afford to tank a hit while being outsped) and then Skarmory/Corviknight with Iron Defense + Body Press. I've been in this camp before and can definitely support Gliscor being banned for the SD sets being very difficult to answer.
  • Gliscor is fine - this group I would say take a look at Gliscor's usual performances and don't see it as dominant or obnoxious as people in the above groups make it out to be. This group is reasonable as well to me because I find it harder to auto-win with SD Gliscor these days as compared to a month ago, and maybe it's just people being louder about hating it, but I personally don't see Gliscor as obnoxious as it's supposed to be.
I'm in between the broken/fine groups and wouldn't mind too much if Gliscor is banned or if it stays. That being said, regardless of how you see Gliscor, I encourage everyone to bring up detailed and valid reasons to promote a ban/no ban.

In case it wasn't obvious and people are out of the loop, the current SD set that has turned Gliscor into a top tier sweeper is the following:

Gliscor @ Toxic Orb
Ability: Poison Heal
Tera Type: Normal
EVs: 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Swords Dance
- Facade / Earthquake
- Knock Off / Earthquake
- Protect

Historically SD Gliscor has always run a heavily defensive EV spread, usually on the Special Defense side, but people realized that with max speed, you can suddenly outspeed several mons that would normally threaten you, such as CB Rillaboom, Encore Samurott, Ice Spin Great Tusk, Taunt Lando, and pretty much everything between 240 - 316 speed. Gliscor being able to speed tie with Kyurem is equally important because ideally you want your Kyurem to consistently revenge and/or force out an SD Gliscor, but with a speed tie and especially Tera Normal, it's no longer as consistent of an option as it used to be.

One other notable thing is that for Tera Normal, it's easy to say "okay I'll go Zama and revenge it," but the issue with that is that Gliscor will Knock Off Zama's item, usually Leftovers, Boots, or Chesto Berry, and then it switches out and Zama's forced to take a lot of hazard damage if it wants to switch into Gliscor again, which is ultimately a situation where the Gliscor player is heavily advantaged. However, the 1 downside to Gliscor clicking Tera Normal is that it will take Spikes damage which it is normally immune to. For this reason, Gliscor players have to be careful about choosing when to Tera their Gliscor since a pre-mature Tera will just result in their Gliscor being too low to pull the sweep off.

The last part of the previous paragraph is what I'll focus on in because I think that's where Gliscor is suddenly "struggling" with these days compared to a month ago. I think Nasty Plot Darkrai is a fair comparison where back in the WCOP meta, people could aggressively Nasty Plot with Darkrai and stream roll fairly easily to where I think it was fair to call Darkrai broken at the time. However, Nasty Plot Darkrai is a lot harder to pull off nowadays because people are more prepared to punish or discourage the Nasty Plot turn, and have more options ready in case that Nasty Plot does happen. Gliscor is in the same boat where Tera Normal and max speed would catch people off guard and look absurdly broken, but people are used to that set being its most common set now and are more prepared to play around it as best they can.

Gliscor running max speed also means it has less bulk in general, and as mentioned earlier, committing to tera can backfire if Gliscor isn't fully ready to sweep since it'll take Spike damage and less health along with less bulk and resisting nothing makes it a lot harder to sweep. Even if Gliscor gets +2 and KO's something, it might be around 40% health and then will probably die or nearly die to the Ogerpon/Pult/Zama that's coming in to force it out. I will also mention the tera point again because with Kyurem back in the tier, saving your tera to deal with a DD Tera Blast Kyurem is more important than ever imo, so burning it on Gliscor carries a bigger risk than before.

-------

That being said, I wrote a lot of fluff above and I'm still unsure on what to vote. I actually think more people are mixed on Gliscor than ever before, and that's a good reason for more people on either side to speak up to try and help people go "I want to vote this option for sure." I think both sides have valid points with SD Gliscor being too strong sometimes due to the SD set utilizing tera to a consistent and overwhelming degree, while at the same time not having as many dominant performances as it should based on the outcry for wanting to ban it. If anything the only broken thing I've seen in action recently is multiple tour games ending in less than 10 turns to DD Tera Blast Kyurem, but that's something for another time.

I'll end with a "do I think people will find a way to adapt to SD Gliscor" and I feel like the answer is yes and no. By yes, I would point to what I mentioned earlier where I think people knowing what set Gliscor is and how to play around it pre-tera and post-tera is an improvement compared to before, and by no, I would point to where I mentioned even Zamazenta can't reliably handle it due to Gliscor making use of Knock Off + a teammate running Spikes to keep Zama in an undesirable position for the remainder of the game. If I change my opinion or feel like adding more, then I'll post again.

I lied and I'll add 1 more thing as a personal vent. I'm upset that there was so much outcry during the last suspect test asking staff + council for the following:

- Have 2 threads for discussion
- Rework suspect requirements
- Ask for more council input during these threads
- Handling voter fraud and suspect cheating in general

All of these things have been fulfilled, yet this qualified discussion feels empty and all the people demanding the things above are nowhere to be seen. Chaos, Finch and everyone did not put all this effort for no reason and I'm hoping this thread gets more activity before it ends. They did their part, I'm doing my part right now as a council member by writing this post, and I think it'd be fair for the rest of the qualified voters to chip in and give their opinion on the current test.
 
Got reqs using zapkix team I stole from OLT, scor feels slightly overbearing but in a completely different way to kyu, like an opposite, it has godlike staying power, can recover 30% on a switch very easily, but its immediate power is very weak compared to kyu guessing game. After laddering for reqs I never lost to a scor due to team structure, only due to misplays on my end. IMO SD scor hard punishes fat hstack teams while being best in slot for them, kind of paradoxical but it encourages innovation in those teams which I enjoy. Personally I despise rott, ting, and stack balance/fat in general so I like how scor somewhat keeps those teams in check. I use Blim structures the most(ace king corv or the blim5) so my bals usually have no more problem than usual with scor so I am biased in that regard. I’ve been using beam on all my gkings as well altho the meta has adapted ppl will click tect on gking a lot more consistently. One thing I’d like to add on is how detrimental Tera can be to scor compared to other sweepers/breakers. Since scor is so reliant on its godlike typing to ignore hazards and for goated immunities/resistances, if you Tera early in the game your defensive mon loses most of its defensive utility, sacking it for stab facade in most cases or Tera water/fairy for problem dragons. Thus, you really can only tera scor when it 100% breaks a mon you need to progress or does enough damage to enable another sweeper. In that regard I don’t think tera scor is as much of a problem as other tera mons as you trade a majority of its defense for breaking potential, making it a very good mid/late game tradeoff similar to other def mons like corv or tres who have really optimized dual typings and usually only tera if your team has no way to deal with a mon. Tbh I find boldengho beats scor pretty consistently, but is probably the only mon reliable into the spikes and sd set, especially into knock/facade which is the most frequent set, which can really constrain team building. I feel util scor is kind of underused now since only on stall rlly will scor always be util at least in my experience. All in all I prolly will vote DNB as I feel scor contributes to more interesting teams overall, although I’m not too hardset on this compared to prev sus tests I’ve participated in
 
I'm not qualified for this suspect test. With the new method, it take time that i don't have unfortunately. My personnal case is not important, but starting from there, i would like to express my thoughts about the method and my concerns for the future of suspect process.

Looking at the comments, it's easy to see that this method takes longer than usual to obtain reqs. In many cases, players reach the requested GXE before the requested elo. Then, they have to play more games to reach 1750. In this case, every lose is a double penalty. You lose elo points and GXE, often resulting in ten or so extra games when it's not just a case of giving up and remake an account. This double penalty was not so intense with the old method. By combining GXE and a minimum games needed, it punished a losing streak and early lose while leaving a chance for people who lost once around 1600 due to hax or bad MU. It results in longer runs and more chance to starting from scratch.

We saw since gen8 that Pokemon has increased its rate of releases. Extension packs divided in 2 parts, HOME but also new Pokemon in raids bring new creatures in a stabilized metagame more often. In addition, power creep and special mechanics like Dynamax and Tera are forcing us to make controversial decisions that impact the way we play during the entire generation. I believe that suspect methods, both old and new, are not suitable for the evolution of release plan decided by GF and TPCi. Today, a suspect test, from announcement to results and Showdown's update, take between 11 and 20 days. Regarding the SV and SS early meta, we can make an average of 10 suspect tests/quickbans. Consequences : early bans ends just before the realease of Pokemon HOME. HOME and raids bring new mons in OU, and we're go again. When it's finally stabilized, extension pack part 1 is out, then part 2 etc.

With this suspect test method, designed at a time when new releases were at least 1 year apart, stabilizing OU and lower tiers take a year and a half minimum. The new method is longer than the old, which exacerbates the problem. This is why i believe we're going in the wrong direction with this method. Tt neglects context and does not take into account the evolution of Pokemon brand.

Like i said, go back to the old method is not a solution. We should improve this method to to integrate this requirement of responsiveness to rapid change and realese. So what's the solution?

I think the new reqs are good IF we modify the eligibility period. Let me explain. I'm in favor of defining cycles when you have the right to vote after getting reqs. If you get reqs one time, you could vote to all suspect tests in this cycle. For exemple, we can define 4 cycles (winter, spring, summer, fall). If you get reqs in january, you could vote to all suspect tests until march without recreating an account each time. What does it change? With this system, you can make more suspect tests in less time and synchronize tiering actions with game updates.

In my point of view, this concept is the one with the best compromise between the guarantee of a qualified vote, the accessibility and the adaptability to the rhythm of updates. To conclude, i think now is the best time to test different methods and debates with the aim of define a suspect process able to follow the evolution of Pokemon in gen10.
 
This is my second time getting reqs, and my first time speaking on the forums, but I’m personally leaning towards banning Gliscor. Over the past year, I’ve been playing a lot of Pokémon and watching the meta evolve, with bans of certain threats helping us move towards a more stabilized environment. I believe that banning Gliscor would be the final piece needed to solidify the meta.

Gliscor's combination of Toxic Orb and Poison Heal makes it incredibly difficult to deal with. It effectively eliminates Stealth Rock damage, allowing it to maintain its longevity. Additionally, it offers some of the best utility in the game, with moves like Knock Off, Toxic, U-turn, T-spikes, Stealth Rock, and Taunt. These utility sets are manageable with counters such as Ogre, Kyurem, Primarina, samurot, darkrai, Weavile, and any Mon with ice coverage which can all threaten Gliscor if played correctly. In a 1v1 scenario, these counters can often force Gliscor to use Tera to stay in the fight, hoping that one of these Pokémon can still beat it or that something on your team can revenge kill. Not to mention this mon is the best knock off absorber in the tier making it difficult to beat this mon with hazard stack. As a result, these utility sets are manageable when handled properly.

However, the main issue with Gliscor right now is its Swords Dance sets, particularly with Facade. When supported by hazard stacking, Gliscor can take full advantage of this playstyle and potentially sweep through teams if not checked properly. While it’s easy to suggest using one of the counters I mentioned earlier, Gliscor becomes significantly harder to handle with Tera. The numerous Tera types—such as Normal(best), Fairy, Dark, and Water—allow Gliscor to adapt and either Swords Dance on its counter to guarantee damage or even score KOs with Facade. Even if Gliscor is at half health at this point, many people overlook the fact that it has one of the best abilities in the game, paired with Protect to heal 13% every turn.

After analyzing the situation, it’s likely that your counters, like Ogre, Kyurem, Primarina, and Weavile, are already fainted, and your revenge killer will get stalled out by Gliscor’s Protect. In just two turns, Gliscor can regain significant health, potentially bringing it back to around 70% and gaining back much of the momentum that was lost. This makes it very difficult to come back from, and with its ability to break through checks and heal up with Protect shenanigan's , Gliscor is more than capable of steamrolling teams once it gains momentum.

I'm the type of player who builds around balance with Ogre, so I don’t lose to stall and can manage against Hyper Offense. However, with SD Gliscor running rampant, my balanced teams are completely invalidated. Without Gliscor, I don’t think the tier will collapse; in fact, it would likely be much healthier. Gliscor doesn’t hold the tier together like Great Tusk does; instead, it’s more like a small flu that isn’t being treated. While it might not seem like a major issue at first, it will be persist and continue to cause problems over time if left unchecked. Just as an untreated flu can linger and worsen, Gliscor’s presence in the meta will remain disruptive, especially with its ability to invalidate balanced teams and dominate with its Swords Dance sets. If not addressed now, its impact on the tier will only continue. I've heard complaints about Slowking becoming broken if gliscor is banned, but this cannot be true with the abundance of Dark- and Ground-types in the tier Slowking will not become broken to deal with. The only playstyle that will be affected negatively is stall, as it would lose a key member, but replacing Gliscor with Protect Leftovers Corviknight could become the new staple for stall. Major props to the stall innovators out there—despite this generation being one of the worst for stall, they always find a way to make it viable, even without Gliscor.

While Gliscor’s utility sets can be manageable, its ability to sweep teams with Swords Dance, Facade, and Tera adaptations makes it an overwhelming threat that's hard to stop once it gets going. Personally, seeing all these suspect tests where the majority have voiced complaints about Gliscor, now seems like the perfect time to address it. Banning Gliscor would resolve a major issue and help stabilize the meta of SV OU. This is the final piece of the puzzle to a more balanced and healthy tier. I believe that banning Gliscor would be a crucial step in achieving that goal.

also if anyone is interested here is my yt channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBTnp37t1hiAknwTntMW68g
 
Last edited:
I’ve qualified for the Kyurem suspect test but won’t be taking part in that one. However, I want to share my view: Gliscor should be banned.

Before discussing why I think Gliscor doesn’t belong in the tier, whether it's "broken" or not, I want to address something often overlooked: the competitive health and enjoyment of the tier. Many players seem undecided on banning Gliscor, focusing on whether it’s broken or balanced. But shouldn’t we also consider how it impacts the tier’s playability and enjoyment? A lot of players are unhappy with the current state, often blaming Tera or claiming the tier is filled with problematic Pokémon. Yet, Gliscor itself seems to remove enjoyment, and banning it would likely improve the tier.

Post-Gliscor ban in DLC1 meta, we saw fresh Pokémon rise, bringing more diversity to teambuilding. Although DLC2 is different, removing Gliscor could make the tier more competitive and enjoyable overall. Stall teams already have other ways to succeed without Gliscor, as I saw people say it would make stall unplayable (…), Gliscor isn’t essential for balance either and even beat most of them with its SD variant.

Another common "DNB" take is that there are counterplays to Gliscor, like mons forcing him to Tera that would expose it to other threats (e.g., Tera Normal -> weak to Zamazenta). While there are counters to Gliscor in isolated 1v1 scenarios, it pairs too effectively with other Pokémon to form nearly unbreakable defensive cores. For instance, Gliscor + hazard stacking become unbearable with the likes of Sinistcha, completely walling spinners, and Gholdengo preventing Defog and still a very good tool to prevent spin in general. On another note, take its most problematic set (from what I’ve read at least), SD Facade with max Speed Gliscor can overwhelm offensive threats like Wellspring Ogerpon or Kyurem by catching them off-guard, and it basically remove one of the best tools against bulky teams, so Tera is often worth it. Concerning the specific claim (I’m mainly replying to that fact in particular, not generalizing that situation) of Gliscor now being weak to Zamazenta and others (maybe Valiant), and spikes. Teams that rely solely on Gliscor SD (which is the only variant that uses Tera Normal by the way) to check Zamazenta are kind of weird since Gliscor SD doesn’t beat Zamazenta in itself (in a 1v1 case scenario, also) and often needs support anyway. Spikes may become problematic if you don’t have reliable spinners but getting rid of their main threat is once again worth it, and Gliscor isn’t as weak to spikes anyway as it still can recover with poison heal.
The situation where Gliscor get knocked/wow’d before getting poison shouldn’t even be a serious argument since it’s definitely just a misplay from your part.

Now, let’s address the classic Spikes + Toxic set. This is far from a "meme set" and absolutely needs to be considered when assessing Gliscor's brokenness. Some argue that Hyper Offense and offense in general can apply enough pressure against Gliscor-based teams. But Spikes + Toxic remains one of the most reliable tools against offense, disrupting momentum and gradually wearing down offensive threats. Sure, offense can win games and typically handles more defensive playstyles well, but Gliscor seems to disrupt that balance.

In the post-Gliscor ban meta, we saw an uptick in Balance teams, which weakens the idea that Gliscor is essential for Balance or Fat playstyles. I firmly believe that removing Gliscor would create a healthier balance between different playstyles overall. Stall, for instance, can still function without Gliscor—and, in fact, benefits by not needing to handle its SD variant, which has proven to be a significant threat.

While some rely on Sticky Barb Clefable as a counter, this isn’t reliable, as Gliscor can simply set up until it’s ready to OHKO Clefable. Even if it gets the barb afterward, it still performs effectively against Stall teams without needing frequent recovery (and basically forbid potent Gliscor from knocking or it’s just gg).

In my view, Gliscor’s impact on the tier, especially its ability to adapt and continuously strengthen defensive cores, often leaves teams with very limited counterplay and creates more harm than good. Given this, I believe banning Gliscor would make the tier both more competitive and enjoyable.
 
I’ve qualified for the Kyurem suspect test but won’t be taking part in that one. However, I want to share my view: Gliscor should be banned.

Before discussing why I think Gliscor doesn’t belong in the tier, whether it's "broken" or not, I want to address something often overlooked: the competitive health and enjoyment of the tier. Many players seem undecided on banning Gliscor, focusing on whether it’s broken or balanced. But shouldn’t we also consider how it impacts the tier’s playability and enjoyment? A lot of players are unhappy with the current state, often blaming Tera or claiming the tier is filled with problematic Pokémon. Yet, Gliscor itself seems to remove enjoyment, and banning it would likely improve the tier.

Post-Gliscor ban in DLC1 meta, we saw fresh Pokémon rise, bringing more diversity to teambuilding. Although DLC2 is different, removing Gliscor could make the tier more competitive and enjoyable overall. Stall teams already have other ways to succeed without Gliscor, as I saw people say it would make stall unplayable (…), Gliscor isn’t essential for balance either and even beat most of them with its SD variant.

Another common "DNB" take is that there are counterplays to Gliscor, like mons forcing him to Tera that would expose it to other threats (e.g., Tera Normal -> weak to Zamazenta). While there are counters to Gliscor in isolated 1v1 scenarios, it pairs too effectively with other Pokémon to form nearly unbreakable defensive cores. For instance, Gliscor + hazard stacking become unbearable with the likes of Sinistcha, completely walling spinners, and Gholdengo preventing Defog and still a very good tool to prevent spin in general. On another note, take its most problematic set (from what I’ve read at least), SD Facade with max Speed Gliscor can overwhelm offensive threats like Wellspring Ogerpon or Kyurem by catching them off-guard, and it basically remove one of the best tools against bulky teams, so Tera is often worth it. Concerning the specific claim (I’m mainly replying to that fact in particular, not generalizing that situation) of Gliscor now being weak to Zamazenta and others (maybe Valiant), and spikes. Teams that rely solely on Gliscor SD (which is the only variant that uses Tera Normal by the way) to check Zamazenta are kind of weird since Gliscor SD doesn’t beat Zamazenta in itself (in a 1v1 case scenario, also) and often needs support anyway. Spikes may become problematic if you don’t have reliable spinners but getting rid of their main threat is once again worth it, and Gliscor isn’t as weak to spikes anyway as it still can recover with poison heal.
The situation where Gliscor get knocked/wow’d before getting poison shouldn’t even be a serious argument since it’s definitely just a misplay from your part.

Now, let’s address the classic Spikes + Toxic set. This is far from a "meme set" and absolutely needs to be considered when assessing Gliscor's brokenness. Some argue that Hyper Offense and offense in general can apply enough pressure against Gliscor-based teams. But Spikes + Toxic remains one of the most reliable tools against offense, disrupting momentum and gradually wearing down offensive threats. Sure, offense can win games and typically handles more defensive playstyles well, but Gliscor seems to disrupt that balance.

In the post-Gliscor ban meta, we saw an uptick in Balance teams, which weakens the idea that Gliscor is essential for Balance or Fat playstyles. I firmly believe that removing Gliscor would create a healthier balance between different playstyles overall. Stall, for instance, can still function without Gliscor—and, in fact, benefits by not needing to handle its SD variant, which has proven to be a significant threat.

While some rely on Sticky Barb Clefable as a counter, this isn’t reliable, as Gliscor can simply set up until it’s ready to OHKO Clefable. Even if it gets the barb afterward, it still performs effectively against Stall teams without needing frequent recovery (and basically forbid potent Gliscor from knocking or it’s just gg).

In my view, Gliscor’s impact on the tier, especially its ability to adapt and continuously strengthen defensive cores, often leaves teams with very limited counterplay and creates more harm than good. Given this, I believe banning Gliscor would make the tier both more competitive and enjoyable.

I dont think Gliscor creates a unbearable core with Sinistra/Ghol when

Darkrai
Dragapult
Kyurem
Meowscarda
Ogrepon
Samurott

All put immediate pressure on that core with their common sets. This list becomes even bigger when you begin to create specialized sets like Ice Tera Tusk to blow through specific things like sinistra.
 
I dont think Gliscor creates a unbearable core with Sinistra/Ghol when

Darkrai
Dragapult
Kyurem
Meowscarda
Ogrepon
Samurott

All put immediate pressure on that core with their common sets. This list becomes even bigger when you begin to create specialized sets like Ice Tera Tusk to blow through specific things like sinistra.
I was accessing the hazard stack part in particular with these 2 exemples, and we can find a lot of pair that can cover up these threats on the long term. Yeah an absolutely unbreakable core doesn't really exist just with 2/3 mons but this change when you have tera factor. and besides ogerpon (well you can even toxic it since it doesn't even kill the defensive set) and some kyurem sets you will always be able to cover (or deal with) the other threats you mentionned anyway or then it's a team issue.

I also addressed other aspects that the cores it can pair with though
 
:Gliscor:

I will primarily focus on the SD set, as this is the only set that the ban side unanimously agrees is “broken.” The utility sets, while solid, are passive and can be exploited with the plethora of strong ice, water and psychic noise coverage in the game. Protect turns can also be exploited with setup and double switching. Overall, these sets are not problematic and many agree.

Gliscor reached peak usage in the two weeks (weeks 4 and 5) that Kyurem was banned, with around a 20% usage rate in SCL. Since then, that usage rate has been cut in half with the exception of one outlier week in 8, with 11% usage in Week 9 and 7% usage in weeks 6 and 7. Its winrate has also consistently been in the low 40% each week, sometimes dropping to 30% with the exception of week 8. Across the entire tournament, Gliscor doesn’t even crack the top 15 in usage for all OU. It is hardly on the level of premier threats like Zamazenta, Gholdengo, and Kingambit which have seen consistent top 5 usage for months across several tournaments with winrates above 50% the entire time. Like xavgb pointed out, while winrate is not a perfect metric, it does beg the question as to why Gliscor’s overall usage is so low and why the winrate is only 44%, with the recent win rates and usage being even lower, despite ban supporters propping it up as some overwhelming menace.

These stats help paint the bigger picture – the reality is that Gliscor is not overbearing in the slightest. Firstly, the overall usage is low because players have realized that SD Gliscor teams are frankly not that good in this meta due to the inherent weaknesses that SD Gliscor forces on team structures designed to support it. Xavgb alluded to this in his post and I will explain it more here.

As many have pointed out, SD Gliscor requires hazard support to beat bulkier teams. This usually means that you will need two of Ting-Lu, Landorus, Tinkaton, Skarmory, Samurott, or Clefable. Immediately we can see that SD Gliscor is a best fit on balance because these required teammates are all either slow or serve relatively defensive roles. This idea is supported by the actual SD Gliscor teams that are being brought to tournaments with some examples below:

1731572382797.png

1731572386920.png


The most successful SD Gliscor team was CTC’s famous Keldeo team:

1731572390206.png


Although other SD Gliscor teams are different, they follow a similar defensive orientation, perhaps using Pokemon like Moltres, Clefable, and Skarmory instead of Ting-Lu, Dragonite, and Sinistcha etc as shown. These teams have fallen off significantly post-Kyurem unban because even the best SD Gliscor teams compound several critical weaknesses. They struggle mightily with Knock-Off Ogerpon, which has seen a rise in popularity. Kyurem alone can hit the entire Keldeo team for 2x+ damage. Darkrai, Dragapult, late game Tera Kingambit, Roaring Moon, Offensive Great Tusk, Mixed/SD Iron Valiant, Hydrapple, CM Primarina, weather teams as a whole, and many others pose serious threats for these builds as well. More niche picks like Tera Steel Latios and Hydreigon also devastate these teams.

As a result, it is no surprise that xavgb, the best balance player in all of SV OU, has stayed far away from SD Gliscor teams. Not only did he not bring it once in all of OLT, he handled it easily when used against him in the finals matchup while using a balance team of his own. So when I see people argue that SD Gliscor invalidates balance, a simple analysis of the metagame shows this to be completely false. Not only are SD Gliscor teams not winning in tournaments, but top-level players have found numerous ways to beat Gliscor both in the builder and in practice with all kinds of playstyles including balance. Some players have attempted to mitigate bad matchups by trading in hazards for mons with better matchups into offense recently as shown below:

1731572402787.png

1731572408051.png

1731572410920.png

1731572405218.png


These new SD gliscor teams are still balance teams for the most part. By giving up hazards, these teams trade long-term breaking power for better offense matchups in an attempt to mitigate some of the weaknesses I described earlier. As a result, I find that SD Gliscor teams struggle with this catch-22. You can invest heavily in the fat matchup with hazard stack at the cost of all other matchups or try to balance out your matchup spread at the cost of being able to beat other fat teams consistently. SD gliscor teams rarely can have it both ways. This is again evidenced by the fact that the overall win rates remain low for all Gliscor teams. Going back to the win rate and usage statistics, Gliscor has severely underperformed every week except for one in SCL. What this tells us is that SD Gliscor is mostly a matchup fish – players bring it when facing a particular opponent that may have a weakness to SD gliscor based on previous scouts. When the desired matchup isn’t found, which is usually the case, Gliscor is often a negative to the team. This hardly constitutes a broken mon. Plenty of Pokémon have great matchups into one particular style or type of player, like Lokix, Taunt Roaring Moon, Garganacl, Sinistcha etc. while being significantly worse in many other matchups. Therefore, contrary to the ban argument, the actual gameplay and stats clearly show that SD Gliscor or even Gliscor as a whole is not some universal and unstoppable force that shreds every single team there is.

In fact, the ban argument doesn’t even make sense when you actually take a step back – SD Gliscor, the mon that is being used at record low rates, with record low win rates, that is found only on balance yet somehow destroys balance at the same time, despite the stats and gameplay showing that it can’t even consistently beat balance, is somehow broken? Something isn’t adding up here and I am not the only one who has pointed this out.

But what about Tera? Gliscor can just Tera to overcome all these issues right? Sure, in a 1v1 vacuum, any mon can win vs any other mon in theory. But in practice, this isn’t true. Firstly, the default SD Gliscor set now is max speed. There is some variation with other EVs, but max speed is true for 90% of top-level teams running SD Gliscor. This is because it is critical to speed tie with mons like Kyurem and other SD Gliscors and outspeed mons like Landorus and Great Tusk. As a result, SD Gliscor has significantly reduced longevity compared to defensive variants. It can no longer tank hits like Gking Ice beams and Ogerpon-Wellspring Ivy Cudgels, and neutral attacks from mons like Darkrai, Roaring Moon, and Iron Moth become clean 2HKOs with minimal chip. Furthermore, most SD Gliscor run Knock Off + Façade. This lack of STAB means that Gliscor’s immediate power is practically nonexistent. Therefore, Gliscor needs several free turns to setup prior to a sweep, which is difficult to get versus any competent team or player. This also results in an over reliance on Tera to gain STAB on Façade to eliminate key weaknesses and muscle through threats. Sure, Gliscor can use Tera to get a KO on that turn. But once it Teras, it gives up the spike immunity and amazing defensive profile it had before. Now it is easily revenged by common mons like Zamazenta, Iron Valiant, CC Tusk etc. and can no longer setup freely on mons it used to be able to abuse like Landorus and Ting-Lu. Its switchins are now limited by hazards as well. If you give it multiple turns to setup/heal afterwards, that is a symptom of a passive team or misplaying. Additionally, Knock Off + Façade cannot beat Kingambit or Skarmory / Corviknight. A common tactic, and one that I have used, is to stack hazards and use a slow pivot like Gliscor or Corviknight to bring in a Pokemon like Darkrai or Kyurem to force tera on SD Gliscor early. Something like Zamazenta or Corviknight can force it out immediately after, and then spikes limit how many times it can swap in after. New teambuilding developments have also seen innovative cores like Hex Pecharunt + Zamazenta being able to force tera and deny SD Gliscor any opportunity to sweep. The opportunity cost of using tera on a mon like Gliscor is very high, and now that the opponent has exhausted their most valuable resource, Tera, they are ill-equipped to handle even scarier threats like late game Kingambit or Zamazenta which often sweep with ease afterwards. In short, you can see why SD Gliscor has fallen to the bottom of the pack post-Kyurem unban.

The only teams that struggle with SD Gliscor, are do-nothing teams, AKA passive balance and stall. As someone who is familiar with stall (link), I can attest that this is true. Stall can fit in options like Corviknight and Galarian Weezing to help this matchup at the cost of other matchups. This is a healthy compromise and balances stall as well. As for passive balance teams like those I discussed in my Kyurem DNB post here, https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/np-sv-ou-suspect-process-round-14-hazy-shade-of-winter.3751394/post-10279537, these teams should not exist in the first place. They are greedy, uninteractive, and are rightfully punished by Gliscor. We have already seen what happens to the metagame when Gliscor is banned. Mons like Ting-Lu and Zapdos become significantly better. Ting-Lu is already a behemoth into most offense, and with Gliscor gone, mons that destroy offense but are weak into Gliscor, like Zapdos, are simply free. As a result, we end up with a stale and centralized balance-heavy meta like in DLC1, which I described in my Kyurem post. Some may brush this warning aside, saying that one cannot predict the future. These are the same people who were surprised at how quickly SD Gliscor balance usage skyrocketed after the Kyurem ban and subsequently fell to record lows once Kyurem was unbanned. Once again, I am not making baseless predictions, but rather educated guesses based on precedent tiering decisions and simple cause and effect. Everything that happened post-Kyurem ban was consistent with what I had argued in my Kyurem post. We are once again faced with a similar situation as back in DLC1. Many players have expressed how unenjoyable that meta was post-Gliscor ban, and I can guarantee you we will find ourselves with something similar should Gliscor be banned again.

As a result, keeping Gliscor is critical to ensuring diversity and a healthy meta. No, having to slot ice coverage to deal with Gliscor is not overbearing. Many top usage mons like Dragapult, Raging Bolt, Landorus, Great Tusk, Dragonite, Ting-Lu etc. are all hit hard by ice coverage. Pokemon like Slowking-Galar and Darkrai being forced to run Ice Beam and not Thunder Wave/other coverage or Zamazenta being forced to choose between things like Substitute or Rest + Chesto instead of lefties to avoid status, or Ice Fang on AOA sets instead is a good thing. It prevents any one set or any one Pokemon/archetype from becoming the de facto best option and discourages greedy building and polarizing team/move choices. As I pointed out earlier and as evidenced by xavgb’s OLT win, balance is doing just fine with Gliscor in the meta. A stale meta occurs when you remove mons like Gliscor because actual top usage / centralizing mons like Ting Lu, Slowking-Galar, and Zamazenta become so much better as DLC1 showed. In fact, the meta is as balanced as it has ever been post-Kyurem reintroduction. All styles of teams are viable. Players are able to win with everything from HO to Stall and everything in between at the highest levels of the game, and that is the way it should be.

Vote DNB. Thank you.

:Yveltal:
 
Last edited:
There’s been a lot of discussions about the strengths and weaknesses of gliscor already so I’ll keep it brief.

What ends up being the decisive factor for me is that there is no other mon that has such a death grip on lower usage mons greatly reducing the diversity in the tier. Just to name a few examples among the plethora of mons it suppresses, there is Sandy Shocks, Fezandipiti, Bellibolt, Muk Alola, Chesnaught, Tauros-F and tbh mostly anything that utilizes strengths other than simply bulldozing through by the virtue of massive stats.

I have yet to hear anyone complain that the meta is to slow or defensive and I am hopeful that teams feel less pressured to go so offensive and can start utilizing more mons without fearsome offensive capabilities
 
Just got reqs with a 36-2 run using my beloved blimax core + hydrapple and val team. A glorious conquest of the ladder and unlike previous suspect runs I didn't have a massive tilt fueled mental breakdown. The tier is pretty fun at the moment, even though I'm still salty about kyurem, so it looks like things are improving with time. Of course the question is can it be made better. I haven't had much time to read the discussion so I'll probably repeat what others have said, so I apologise for that. When I have a moment before the vote I'll read everything. Just putting my initial thoughts out to get some usage out of this new qualified discussion.
I'm not 100% sure on gliscor yet, but I am definitely leaning towards ban. Just generally speaking, regardless of set it is a menace to take down. In previous gens the surprise hidden power ice was the solution, but of course this is no longer an option. Still, I find lures to be my favourite way to remove it, whether that be Blimax's shuca berry ice beam glowking or ice punch techs on mons like garganacl or val. This is much easier said than done though, and requires more planning in the builder than any other mon, not to mention perfect play in battle. You need to conceal your ice move on protect, then catch the gliscor unaware. This isn't guaranteed as the gliscor player may not protect on the turn you don't use the ice move and make progress, possibly hurting your lure enough that it isn't as effective anymore. This leads to some nasty mindgames upon which games can hinge and I don't think too many of these is great for consistent balance in a tier. There are already a lot of mindgames with tera, and the prevalence of sucker and thunderclap and I think the game should reward long term planning rather than predictions. Of course, many mons regularly run ice coverage, such as darkrai, but gliscor will chip heal and switch out on mons like this. When I use gliscor, it never gets hit by an obvious ice beam until it has got all the value it can and I'm happy to sack. Mons like this stop a sweep, but not the long term value.
Predictions and lures aren't entirely necessary to beat gliscor, but taking it on in an 'honest' way is very difficult too. It can be chipped over the course of a game, but it is an exceptionally punishing mon if a turn goes wrong or if the gliscor player makes a good play. Of course, mistakes should be punished and good plays rewarded, but the speed with which gliscor heals as well as the progress it can make in a turn or two means it is more punishing or rewarding than most other mons. By the time is goes down, it may not have swept or even got many kills, but the overall value it will have put out in terms of chip, information, PP stalling and perhaps hazards tends to be much higher than other mons are capable of and it does this with consistency. Of course it can sweep or trade positively too, and often does.
On sets I don't really have much to add to what I presume has already been said. Fast SD is a menace, and I think bulkier SD sets are still really great. They provide even more to a teams defensive structure. The options with tera as usual make the stronger mons get even stronger by adding unpredictability. SD is the set du jour but spikes and toxic sets are just as potent and difficult to deal with as they always have been. I honestly dread seeing these more than I do the SD sets just because I'm less prepped for them and they are still around the same power level. Plus protect and toxic deals significant mental damage and increased the chances I obliterate my laptop or throw my phone out the window which tends to lead to a defeat in my experience.
All of this has been about why Gliscor is broken, but as I said I am unsure. It's a phenomenal mon, but not as obviously oppressive as previous suspect tested mons. There is always counterplay. Rocks help a lot, bulky mons that don't mind getting knocked, like corv or your own gliscor can help a lot. Furthermore, most of the time it is spdef or fast, and so isn't overwhelmingly bulky on either side of the spectrum and can be overwhelmed with sufficient power. Even hurricanes from mons like zapdos can keep the pressure on, as can future sight support or just overwhelming power from mons like ogerpon or raging bolt. I'm not sure how a potential ban would effect bulkier playstyles. Gliscor is of course great and breaking bulkier builds down, but is also a great part of bulkier builds. It is S rank in the stallcord for good reason, and I don't know if it exists but the balancecord would surely have it in a similar spot. It fits on basically any teamstyle as well. Regardless of all this, I am a follower of the BKC school of thinking and think we should ban broken things whether or not they are helping out playstyles or keeping other broken things in check.
Overall, I think my long winded thoughts boil down to prepared teams piloted well will not get swept, but the effort it takes to remove as well as the value it gets over time is higher than pretty much anything else. It is as difficult to handle in game as it is in the builder. OU has a huge amount of threats, and gliscor being such a demanding mon to take out makes everything else harder to handle, not to mention how all the threats appreciate knock off spam, chip and spikes support. For these reasons, I'll probably vote ban.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top