OU ADV OU Bans (ruleset change) discussion

OMNIWEEB · Sunday at 8:56 PM

I really just wanna say at least one thing regarding accuracy-lowering moves... no more, no less:

Can we please consider implementing Accuracy Moves Clause (like in 1v1) by any chance instead of making/proposing a complex ban regarding such 'dishonest' moves?

Would perhaps love to hear y'alls thoughts btw, can't really talk much about accuracy-lowering moves in the SpeedPass thread in spite of having at least a total of 25 posts within the forums...

EDIT: I'm quite surprised that Starf Berry wasn't brought up so far (although it does fall into the category of items that could raise speed), even though it's not always guaranteed to get the +2 Speed boost in a pinch.

Celdanami · Monday at 12:08 AM

OMNIWEEB said:
I really just wanna say at least one thing regarding accuracy-lowering moves... no more, no less:

Can we please consider implementing Accuracy Moves Clause (like in 1v1) by any chance instead of making/proposing a complex ban regarding such 'dishonest' moves?

Would perhaps love to hear y'alls thoughts btw, can't really talk much about accuracy-lowering moves in the SpeedPass thread in spite of having at least a total of 25 posts within the forums...

SpamOn · Monday at 9:35 AM

I wanted to write a short post here echoing some of the thoughts already expressed about Speed-Pass and the Ladder given I cannot post in the main forum. In particular Padeli's post.

My Background/experience:
I pretty much only ladder ADV and have probably played 5000-10000 games in the last year or so. I mostly just team-build and test teams, sometimes trying for strict optimality, sometimes trying to just try something fun/more "out-there" and see if it holds water. In any case, I would say I have a decent amount of experience to give my "ladder main" opinion on the matter.

Main Take:
I think that speed pass strategies, as allowed by the current rules/bans are essentially impossible to cover in the builder with 1 team that also has a good MU spread into the rest of the general metagame. I think this is fairly uncontroversial given the plethora of different full Pass, Jask and DD-Pass Smeargle teams that seem to get spammed a lot on the ladder at the moment (maybe people have a 6 in mind that does so but, in any case, I think we should all be able to agree that covering these teams plus the more standard metagame is unrealistically restrictive).

Is this a problem?

I think this is where I find myself agreeing/disagreeing with a lot of the prior posts. Ultimately, fishy strategies will always exist in the game. Things like triple-trap have been mentioned, but I think there are a lot of teams that do achieve the huge MU swings/upsides that these Speed-Pass teams often get. The example I think of here is something like special/mixed offence team without any counterplay to Blissey - I am sure one could produce a team that, ignoring Bliss as restriction in the builder, could get extremely strong MUs into the a large portion of the remaining metagame.
The same goes with teams which just ignore Skarmory. I am sure that many people who play ladder regularly will have been frustrated by getting rolled by a 1400 player using a fishy team like the examples above.

Is there any difference between these fishes and the Speed-Pass strategies?

Perhaps the Speed-Pass strategies are slightly stronger. However, as I think has been pointed out, many cases in which someone loses to Full-Pass, were as a result of some misplay (trying to Roar into opposing Roar/Taunt, not breaking subs when needed etc...). I know this has certainly been the case for me. I think part of these teams relative success on the ladder is the unfamiliarity that players have playing against them, combined with their ability to create a winning situation from a free turns created by misplays, favourable RNG or favourable matchups.
However, I think the difference really lies in terms of how uninteractive, uncompetative and just generally "non-fun" these strategies are to play against. To me, a team shouldn't be able to win off of 1 misplay, or from winning a Taunt vs BP mind game with DD-Smeargle. More subjectively, as frustrating as being beaten by something like triple trap or Water-spam can be, I find it no where near as frustrating as losing to a speed-pass team in a game where I had literally no agency at all in the battle. The last month or so has definitely been one of the worst times to play ladder I can remember with these teams being spammed everywhere.

What to do?

I am sympathetic to many of the arguments around needing Speed-Pass, and there are "honest" uses of it. However, I cannot emphasise enough how little we see these honest uses on the ladder compared to people just fishing for free wins. Even people who are using Agil-Pass Zapdos on non Full-Pass teams are often just trying to get a free win with Marowak in most situations, as opposed to specifically using Agil-Pass to give flexible counterplay revenge killers (Aero/Dug) against fat teams.
I think, all things considered, I would be in favour banning Speed-Pass. My feeling is that this might be the only viable option given the nature of tiering policy surrounding complex bans (as far as I understand it) but also as I think it will be very difficult to make a complex ban that won't allow this rubbish to keep cropping up again and again with different intermediate receivers on Full Pass teams.

In Summary
Whilst there are lots of fishy/uncompetative strategies, Speed-Pass feels unique in its ability to be abused in a way that is uninteractive and leaves one devoid of all agency in the game. It has legitimate uses but, at least on ladder, is predominantly used to just try to either get wins via MU fishing, Taunt vs Roar mind games or just punishing the opponent excessively for one misplay over the course of many turns. It is not good for the health or enjoyment of the game. I think banning Speed Pass would be best for the game as a whole, and is worth the loss of certain legitimate use cases.

This is just one persons opinion, particularly that of a ladder player - see SpeedPass in ADV OU if you want opinions of more tour plays.

Thanks for reading.

Shitrock enjoyer · Wednesday at 5:06 PM

SpamOn said:
I wanted to write a short post here echoing some of the thoughts already expressed about Speed-Pass and the Ladder given I cannot post in the main forum. In particular Padeli's post.

My Background/experience:
I pretty much only ladder ADV and have probably played 5000-10000 games in the last year or so. I mostly just team-build and test teams, sometimes trying for strict optimality, sometimes trying to just try something fun/more "out-there" and see if it holds water. In any case, I would say I have a decent amount of experience to give my "ladder main" opinion on the matter.

Main Take:
I think that speed pass strategies, as allowed by the current rules/bans are essentially impossible to cover in the builder with 1 team that also has a good MU spread into the rest of the general metagame. I think this is fairly uncontroversial given the plethora of different full Pass, Jask and DD-Pass Smeargle teams that seem to get spammed a lot on the ladder at the moment (maybe people have a 6 in mind that does so but, in any case, I think we should all be able to agree that covering these teams plus the more standard metagame is unrealistically restrictive).

Is this a problem?

I think this is where I find myself agreeing/disagreeing with a lot of the prior posts. Ultimately, fishy strategies will always exist in the game. Things like triple-trap have been mentioned, but I think there are a lot of teams that do achieve the huge MU swings/upsides that these Speed-Pass teams often get. The example I think of here is something like special/mixed offence team without any counterplay to Blissey - I am sure one could produce a team that, ignoring Bliss as restriction in the builder, could get extremely strong MUs into the a large portion of the remaining metagame.
The same goes with teams which just ignore Skarmory. I am sure that many people who play ladder regularly will have been frustrated by getting rolled by a 1400 player using a fishy team like the examples above.

Is there any difference between these fishes and the Speed-Pass strategies?

Perhaps the Speed-Pass strategies are slightly stronger. However, as I think has been pointed out, many cases in which someone loses to Full-Pass, were as a result of some misplay (trying to Roar into opposing Roar/Taunt, not breaking subs when needed etc...). I know this has certainly been the case for me. I think part of these teams relative success on the ladder is the unfamiliarity that players have playing against them, combined with their ability to create a winning situation from a free turns created by misplays, favourable RNG or favourable matchups.
However, I think the difference really lies in terms of how uninteractive, uncompetative and just generally "non-fun" these strategies are to play against. To me, a team shouldn't be able to win off of 1 misplay, or from winning a Taunt vs BP mind game with DD-Smeargle. More subjectively, as frustrating as being beaten by something like triple trap or Water-spam can be, I find it no where near as frustrating as losing to a speed-pass team in a game where I had literally no agency at all in the battle. The last month or so has definitely been one of the worst times to play ladder I can remember with these teams being spammed everywhere.

What to do?

I am sympathetic to many of the arguments around needing Speed-Pass, and there are "honest" uses of it. However, I cannot emphasise enough how little we see these honest uses on the ladder compared to people just fishing for free wins. Even people who are using Agil-Pass Zapdos on non Full-Pass teams are often just trying to get a free win with Marowak in most situations, as opposed to specifically using Agil-Pass to give flexible counterplay revenge killers (Aero/Dug) against fat teams.
I think, all things considered, I would be in favour banning Speed-Pass. My feeling is that this might be the only viable option given the nature of tiering policy surrounding complex bans (as far as I understand it) but also as I think it will be very difficult to make a complex ban that won't allow this rubbish to keep cropping up again and again with different intermediate receivers on Full Pass teams.

In Summary
Whilst there are lots of fishy/uncompetative strategies, Speed-Pass feels unique in its ability to be abused in a way that is uninteractive and leaves one devoid of all agency in the game. It has legitimate uses but, at least on ladder, is predominantly used to just try to either get wins via MU fishing, Taunt vs Roar mind games or just punishing the opponent excessively for one misplay over the course of many turns. It is not good for the health or enjoyment of the game. I think banning Speed Pass would be best for the game as a whole, and is worth the loss of certain legitimate use cases.

This is just one persons opinion, particularly that of a ladder player - see SpeedPass in ADV OU if you want opinions of more tour plays.

Thanks for reading.

The lack of honest uses is merely out of lack of creativity. AgiZap has a lot of diversity and can slot into multiple archetypes, it also has finally becoming more explored and its more of a recent development. Thats why it hasnt seen much usage. It feels dumb that we arent getting much time to actually feel it out and make the most optimal honest speedpass strats when the meta has finally aligned with it being a great option for Spikeless teams. Not only that but I have gone time and time again about how the diversity is key for a lot of Spikeless teams.

In fact, this could have been the way to revitalize dead styles such as Special Spam and CM Spam, while keeping both trade-based Sand Offenses and CuneDol styles versatile and not overly reliant on DDMence as a method to deal w Dug or Aero. It also would probably help Mag Off a lot and could potentially create more new stuff too. Genuinely dont believe these naked Zap->Wak stuff is difficult to handle. Jask is somewhat of a problem, more because its annoying and frankly no one enjoys it, so in that front I guess I agree. Just saying that the reason "honest uses" havent been done oftej is because only now the meta has come in such a way that makes Spikeless Zap at its most optimal state being AgiPass due to the hyperoptimization of Dug Fat and Aero Spikes and the fact Offense naturally struggles w those (meaning DDMence is oftentimes necessary). I would say if you gave it time, more ppl would be using said "honest uses" on ladder.

Also something completely unrelated, I was making a post on JG2's post and while I was working on it midpost, the thread was unfortunately locked and I didnt finish in time. Sad. I also dont really like the fact that this suspect doesnt support Smeargle+BP ban when literally everyone is on the same page abt this, matter of fact its probably just a quickban. Those are my thoughts on the matter, please enjoy.

Shitrock enjoyer · Wednesday at 5:21 PM

Double post, but just wanna say, the reqs are bullshit

Celdanami · Wednesday at 6:13 PM

Shitrock enjoyer said:
Double post, but just wanna say, the reqs are bullshit

Just go 7-1, it's not that hard! Council wants to hear from you!

Shitrock enjoyer · Wednesday at 6:22 PM

Celdanami said:
Just go 7-1, it's not that hard! Council wants to hear from you!

Oh I think you misunderstand. I think they are too easy personally

secondmoto381 · Wednesday at 6:53 PM

Why is speed pass being considered and not the cheesy elements used WITH speed pass which make it problematic being considered? Namely accuracy lowering moves and multiple bp users on a team? Haven't seen any example of a complaint regarding speed pass that does not include either of these two items.

meteor64 · Thursday at 10:27 AM

Just going to add my largely useless 2 cents as a washed up has-been who's recently come back from a decade long hiatus.

I do not like playing against BP. BP is easily the most fundamentally broken move in the game. When I played last, there were very few restrictions on BP compared to now. I didn't like it then and I still don't like it now even with like 5 extra clauses added on top. It's better,

I'm also a prolific user of BP and some form of it ends up on almost all of my teams. I try and keep it "honest" with CM pass or Sub pass etc, but at the end of the day it's still BP.

It strikes me that, in the decade since I've gone, the multiple rule changes that have occurred have done nothing to change the fact that people are still unhappy with BP's role in the tier. The fundamentals of the argument are entirely the same, it's only the presentation of the problem that's different. And it would probably be foolish to assume that after this test, the problem will be put to bed and everyone will be happy this time and no other powerful BP strat will ever be found.

We can ban Speed Pass and that might be a good thing for a while. But we're sitting on a whole stack of restrictions just to keep the idea of an "honest" BP alive, that almost certainly are going to come into question again in a few years time when someone finds another reasonably powerful way to abuse it and take the game out of players hands. And people will be upset again.

Many people have pointed out no other tier has had this treatment when it comes to complex bans. I personally don't see complex bans as a huge issue unless a) there's a large amount of them or b) you're applying a complex ban to the same thing repeatedly in order to constrain it. ADV BP is currently both of those things. In a hypothetical world where Wobbuffet was historically legal in OU, had been since the start, and we then got sick of Wobbuffet cheesing half the games, would it be reasonable if after 5 or 6 different restrictions (what if he had no lefties, ok what if he had no encore, ok what if he could only carry one of counter/MC, ok what if he can only use dbond, and so on) and people still kept making ladder topping teams with him, to add yet another restriction, in the hope that it would keep the meta in some pristine, honourable image of what old grognards (like myself) imagined it to be? When do you admit that Wobb is just an obviously silly mon and doesn't belong in the tier unless you make a rule that says Wobb can have no moves and must use struggle only?

Idk that seems like a reasonable analogy to me. I think complex bans are fine and honestly smogon could probably afford to be a bit more liberal about them. But at this point, I don't really see the sense of continuing down this path with BP. Maybe this time it'll truly be nixed and everyone will be happy and it'll never be touched again. But if I'm still around next time this comes up, I'll just be plainly advocating for a ban on all BP bar dry passing.

Croconaw Guy · Thursday at 11:24 AM

My thoughts are the same as they were four years ago. The fundamentals of this issue are never going to change.

So I support a SpeedPass ban, because while there will absolutely be collateral that will banish some "legitimate" or healthy uses of BP, that is inevitable with any action against it. There's no silver bullet with tiering BP that perfectly preserves acceptable uses of the move while banishing cheese, so any action is going to be a compromise on some level. And frankly, I think the folks trying to preserve the move have long since lost the benefit of the doubt that they're capable of tiering BP in a way that adequately restricts cheese -- otherwise I wouldn't be able to cut and paste a four-year-old post into this thread. To me, removing SpeedPass represents a more serious attempt at finally slaying the hydra of BP cheese than the countless impotent actions against individual abusers have been, and as a result is the most serious attempt to preserve BP in ADV OU in some form.

Willard Wyler · 2025-08-22T12:20:18-0400

Curious what others think about limiting one BP user per team drypass or not? The Broken BP teams (current one, meads, ...) rely on multiple BP users. Having to choose between e.g. Vape's 101HP sub and Smeargle's nonsense is a big blow to the BP statmax/BP wackoff teams. Granted Smeargle by itself might still be a big enough problem with BP, yet this restriction of one BP user per team does cripple the broken BP teams we have been seeing.

Banning Taunt + BP being run on any single pokemon is also intriguing; I haven't thought about it enough to properly speak on it. Seems like the taunt+BP could be a good ban as now smeargle spore counterplay is to get 1 mon spore'd and switch to a roar user which most teams will have (skarm, swampert, zapdos, ... other roar user).

Svejk7 · 2025-08-23T11:30:08-0400

Hi!
I’d like to share my opinion on the ongoing suspect test from the perspective of a more casual ADV player like me.

I’m personally not a big fan of Baton Pass + boosting moves in ADV, and I only rarely use them when building teams. So on one hand, I support banning BP + Speed.

However, I also think one of the reasons ADV is such a popular tier is because it does allow BP + stat boosts compared to other gens and It would be a real shame to lose strategies like Salac BP Vaporeon or Medicham.

And honestly, I wouldn’t even say that Agility + BP is the main issue.

The real problem appears when teams run multiple BP users and start chaining.

From my perspective, the best approach would be:

Allow only two Pokémon with BP per team, and only one of them can pass a stat boost.
Ban Smeargle + BP.
Ban Ninjask + BP.

I believe it’s important to limit the number of Baton Pass users per team, because if not, it’s only a matter of time before someone creates a team with SD pass supported by Taunt/Roar/Sub passers — and suddenly you’re passing SD + Sub to something like Metagross, who then sets up Agility behind the Sub and sweeps.

Smeargle wouldn’t really be hurt by losing BP — he’s still a fantastic lead with Spore and Spikes.

As for Ninjask, I honestly don’t understand why this garbage is still allowed on the ladder when it’s banned from pretty much every ADV tournament.. And why is he banned on tournaments? Because he's cheap, so why we tolerate him in ladder ‍

so I don't support Speed pass ban as such, but some change definitely needs to be made.