Discussion SV OU Tiering Discussion

[Finchinator]

This is my individual thread posted as Tier Leader, not reflective of the SV OU tiering council and not with anyone else's approval

This OP will be used to provide full transparency on SV OU and discuss the following topics:

• Updates on SV OU council personnel
• Discussion on the current state of SV OU tiering and the community being divided
• Discussion on the best ways to proceed

I would like responses from active SV OU players (and not Policy Review mains please) on the following topics:

• Do you think SV OU needs tiering action?
• If yes, what and why? If not, why do you disagree with points raised by people who say yes?
• Do you think anything needs to change about our tiering process and cadence? This is not asking about Tiering Guidelines, which are universal, but rather specific SV OU practices such as surveys and council decisions.

RE: Updates on SV OU council personnel,

The SV OU tiering council will have turnover. As I declared here, it is the duty of councilmen to be active in the tier. To put this sentiment into practice, I held an activity sweep, messaging three users who I identified as less involved.

As of Tuesday, oldspicemike stepped down and two other members provided a plan to be more involved promptly. While this is never a fun conversation, it is even less fun when the community suffers from having unfit councilmen. We owe our playerbase an active, effective, and committed council if they are going to invest time on our metagame! While numerous top players have retired from council throughout this generation, plenty of other options exist.

Moreover, I nominated some users to be potential future councilmen. I cannot expand on this yet as each nomination needs to be vetted by staff first. Then, I need to approach the users firsthand to see if they are interested or not as council is not for everyone. The nomination-to-councilmen pipeline's conversion rate is not always good, but I am committed to finding the best possibilities for SV OU.

RE: Discussion on the current state of SV OU tiering and the community being divided,

SV is the generation that has prompted the least uniform response from players. While I like the metagame, surveys of SPL players indicate a positive view, and numerous other councilmen enjoy OU, it would be unfair to ignore other circumstances. We have an extra year of SV now, we have not had tiering action recently, and some players have expressed dissatisfaction.

We can identify the action that some players want, but we lack community consensus while the council itself has not sufficiently supported any particular action either. This has become a standstill. To list the general camps players fall into:

• Some players do not want action
• Some players want to suspect Pokemon (Dragonite predominantly, but Kyurem, Ogerpon-Wellspring, and others get mentioned)
• Some players want to suspect non-Pokemon elements (Tera Blast predominantly, but Light Clay and others gets mentioned)
• Some players do not want to remove anything from the tier, but instead want to retest Ubers (Roaring Moon predominantly, but others get mentioned)

My thoughts

My personal opinion -- not the collective council -- is that I would not rush to ban anything now. I understand support for a Dragonite suspect test though.

I would not ban Tera Blast and we have exhausted so much discussion on it without getting close to enough support. Light Clay has never struck me as actionable either. I understand that Screens has been solid, but I do not find it disproportionately good or problematic. I prefer focusing on Pokemon.

I would not suspect anything other Pokemon either. To get into the normal topics:

• Containing Kyurem feels easier than when it got suspected due to some counterplay overlap with others prominent Pokemon, fringe suspect worthy to me
• Ogerpon-Wellspring has mostly struck me as a fringe suspect option as well. It feels more like an "elite, but not broken" enforcer in the metagame
• Zamazenta has not registered as suspect worthy to me for multiple years
• Kingambit just feels like something we are living with for the remainder of the generation and it is accounted for in how we play more than ever
• Gliscor/Pecharunt/others do not strike me as serious suspect options right now unless something changes

As for retests, I would be willing to hear people out, but I do think Roaring Moon and Volcarona were quite broken when banned, receiving substantial support. Perceptions change and metagames shift, so anything can happen, but those two being freed is not my cup of tea. There are some other options that I have yet to form strong opinions on, so no comment yet.

I will not speak for the rest of the council, but previously we have had some support for Dragonite and a little, but not close to enough, support for Tera Blast. Nothing else registered too much from discussions over the last couple phases of the metagame.

One last note is I find the community perception of surveys in some circles to be hilarious and incorrect. This is random for here, but I would love to clear the air. We are not married to the result of surveys -- we have suspected things or banned things without surveys at all, we have acted in slight contradiction of the most supported survey responses, and council consensus is always the final call on tiering matters, not survey numbers. Data is a good thing, but not the only thing. Many people claim qualified results are watered down by misinformed ladder players, but >70% of every qualified has been SPL/SCL caliber players besides for WCoP season, where it is still well above half. Last time we even specifically showed SPL players responses as a portion of the qualified responses and it was quite similar in overall sentiment. The fact of the matter is that surveys do have value and the qualifies results (or subsets of them based on whatever criteria you think constitutes a "good player") do reflect opinions, but the council has the final say. This is why I am prioritizing updating the council and this is part of why I am making this thread as between the surveys and our discussion no action has been deemed necessary for a long while. The sad fact of the matter is that our community is quite split and no decision is obvious, no matter how strong whatever individual reading this may feel.

RE: Discussion on the best ways to proceed,

Given all of this, I want to hear from current high-level players of SV OU. We rarely get great discussion of SV OU and tiering in general, especially not on the forum or in any organized space. I personally am fine rolling into WCoP with things as they are or suspecting Dragonite, but I know a lot of other great players feel differently and I am not going to put myself above the community ever.

Not only could this discussion help build a consensus or inform other players of opinions they may not have previously considered, but it could also lead to action. I laid all of my cards out there about where we have been at and what the future roughly will hold -- transparency is important after all, but the destiny of the metagame should be in the hands of the playerbase, too. If you do not have permission to post here and want it, go here.

I would like responses from active SV OU players (and not Policy Review mains please) on the following topics:

• Do you think SV OU needs tiering action?
• If yes, what and why? If not, why do you disagree with points raised by people who say yes?
• Do you think anything needs to change about our tiering process and cadence? This is not asking about Tiering Guidelines***, which are universal, or Pokemon Champions*****, but rather specific SV OU practices such as surveys and council decisions.

***To be clear, we are not rehashing discussions on topics like Terapagos, Complex Bans, Sleep moves/clause, or other topics that are tackled by the Smogon Tiering Framework. This is specific to the tiering of SV OU within the confines of that framework.

*****I do not have any insight on Champions on Smogon or the tiering of it. More will be known when it is released and we have official things we are working with as opposed to hypotheticals. This goes above my head and to Smogon's higher-ups ultimately, not necessarily involving SV OU itself. I will do my best to help Smogon when possible of course, but this topic is not for this thread.

I am excited for active, civil, and quality discussion of our flagship metagame. This generation has been special and I am hoping we can have a strong finish to it over the next year. Please do not make me regret opening this thread. Please do not make me wish I posted it on April Fool's day either.

 

[lax]

SV OU is in an unprecedented position in which the metagame is expected to last 5 total years of competitive play and being the main focus of tournaments.

To be completely honest, if SV OU ended in 2026 at any point, I’d say the meta needs no changes at all. Being able to outbuild and prep your opponents is still completely possible and the vast majority of games still come down to skill and the correct lines. Something I said when Tera was first suspected is that every game is winnable in that there is ALWAYS something either player can do better to pull ahead and get the win. Every single loss I’ve had in this tier, hell most of my wins too, there is something to learn and do better. I can never blame a game solely on hax or getting Tera’d or anything else, and I think that shows the beauty of SV OU and its potential. No matter what, SV is a top tier metagame to me along with SM.

However, I’ve seen a lot of sentiment about how SV OU is lately. That it favors “cheesy” players that spam certain playstyles because the meta simply benefits it. I can kind of agree, but I also disagree. I think most of the problems with the tier are a result of burnout and people feeling they have exhausted their creativity and options. This meta being this damn long is absolutely going to hinder the legacy of this generation, and it’s sad to see that we’re simply a product of Gamefreak’s new release schedule.

What can we actually do about it? The core issue won’t go away, unfortunately. But, I think something worth pointing out is that many of the bans that have happened occurred in vastly different metagames. Things were banned super fast and super reactively.

For example, Archaludon was gone almost Instantly. It really was only Broken on one very specific and niche style and only existed for a few weeks in that SPL in which it really wasn’t that insane. Would rain really have taken over the whole tier? What meta adjustments would have been made if given the time to develop? You can still think Arch is OP and it very well may be, but my point is there wasn’t time to figure it out, truly. I think this applies to a lot of other OUBL’s as well.

I’m personally open to trying out and testing many Pokemon. Roaring Moon and Volcarona I think make sense. Archaludon and Landorus-Incarnate even? So many Pokemon exist in this realm that probably Are just legit broken, but it’s very important in my opinion to see how they function in a fully developed meta while already surrounded by other crazy guys like Zama, Wellspring spam, Ghold-Lu, etc so we can have a definitive answer on what’s too insane and what’s not rather than simply theorycrafting.

Do people care more about meta stability (I’d argue the meta is fine) than venturing out and breathing more life into Gen 9 OU potentially? I’m in the camp of “yeah, let’s give stuff a shot and see what happens” cuz my favorite part about the gen is making meta-adjustments and finding new mons and sets to try and Solve the meta, but people do defend SS OU like their lives depend on it, so I respect that too. That’s what it comes down to

 

[leng loi]

I'll take a slightly different stance than lax.

I agree that SV OU is in a mostly good place but is suffering from the unique situation of a ridiculously long lifespan as current gen OU.

While I concede that it's important to cater to staleness-related burnout among players (I've certainly felt bored by this tier at times during the last year, or brought suboptimal things in tournament because they felt fresh and exciting), I don't think we need to be broadly retesting things. I'd maybe advocate for at most one retest (Volcarona) and maybe one suspect (Dragonite/Tera Blast). The primary mission for tiering should always be to create a balanced metagame with the fewest possible casualties. Even though I respect the desire to explore all our options in terms of creating something more interesting or less stale, that shouldn't come at the expense of metagame health.

- - - Council Changes - - -

I'd like to caveat this by acknowledging that I'm no longer on council for good reason. (If you're unfamiliar, some regrettable irl circumstances led to a now-infamous post-OLT-loss crashout). I also do not want to make any enemies with this statement. However, as Stories said in the other thread, you can't have this discussion without it feeling like you're pointing fingers, and I feel that there are some who are currently on council who perhaps should not be. I know that the primary focus of these council changes is activity, and that should be dealt with as well, but it has always struck me as unfortunate and even discrediting of the council as a whole that, while we prioritize top player opinions on things like surveys, that same standard/emphasis isn't applied on council. There are 3 current councilmembers who do not engage with the tier at a level to even be consistently considered 'qualified' on surveys. I have brought up my issues with this before, mainly to Finch himself, but have been shut down mainly on the grounds of them bringing other things to the table. This is absolutely true. Having been in the council chat most of these 3 have great levels of activity and I've had pleasant interactions with all of them and even friendships with some. Lovely people truly. Nonetheless, I think it's a bad look for the council and the community if we supposedly can't do better. If the supposed reason is because strong players don't want to put in the (frankly negligible) amount of work to offer their opinion and communicate effectively with the broader community, then that's a problem with them and they need to do better. However, if it's because they're nice and you don't want to cull them for either falling off in engagement or not meeting a standard that you yourselves set, that's a problem with leadership.

I'm encouraged by Finch mentioning that he is reaching out to or seeking approval for council additions. I hope that any additions come with a serious examination of those currently on the council as well.

 

[Finchinator]

Regarding your point leng loi, my efforts to improve upon the council didn’t just start overnight. It just isn’t always steps forward as we experience a lot of steps backwards along the way.

Keep in mind that across this generation we have lost you, xavgb, Vert, mind gaming, Ox the Fox, NJNP, and plenty of others from council. And as I alluded in the OP, the majority of people we do want to add end up not panning out. Not everyone wants to be on council or fits the mold, and that is perfectly understandable. Most waves when I end up adding 1 or 2 people, we initially start with 3 or 4 (sometimes more) prospects.

I am hopeful to have 2-3 very active and universally well regarded additions in the near future.

However, if it's because they're nice and you don't want to cull them for either falling off in engagement or not meeting a standard that you yourselves set, that's a problem with leadership.

In short, I just want to say that it’s not this. A prerequisite of being tier leader is holding yourself and your council members accountable. Everyone needs to be active and at least decent presences. There are no exceptions to that. When we hit exceptional territory, it becomes time to have confrontation.

I would not have posted a public thread about having this confrontations, essentially calling three members of council inactive, if there was some friendly cover up. I am not in this for friendship. I am in this to ensure everyone has a competitive hobby and the metagame appeals to the playerbase. I care about the players of the metagame more than any rapport with individual councilmen. That’s the job.

In having one of them step down and the other two provide me with a plan to be more active, I feel that this is enacting the process towards achieving the best council. It inactivity continues, I can demote people like I have multiple members earlier this generation.

 

[658Greninja]

SV OU is in a fine state right now and I applaud the council for getting us there. There’s definitely some innovation happening in the tier like Sun diversifying its team structures with mons such as Torn, Cress, Zarude, etc.

However activity within the tier is shrinking. I recently returned back to laddering and games took unexpectedly longer to queue up than usual. Compared to last year, there’s less posts on the SPL thread. Its a result of burn out along with a wider stretch from Gen 9 to Gen 10 than we’re used to. This is nothing we can really solve, its just the natural cycle of generations.

I would also encourage more high level players to talk on the discussion forums and talk about trends they’ve noticed from ladder/tours. It boosts traction in the tier more than the 20th bad post. Patatexv and Storm Zone recently dumped their SPL teams on the discussion thread, helping less experienced players keep up with the trends. Pais made a post last month about Dnite being a problem and I agree with him on this.

Dnite is a pain in the ass to prep for and form a game plan against. There is little to no good midgrounds to go into without risking Dnite getting up 2 DDs, but banning Dnite would be chaotic for the tier. Instead suspecting Tera Blast is the play. I don’t think there’s anyone who’d say Dragonite without Tera Blast would be broken. Tblast was also what broke Volc and Eleki. Heck you could argue Roaring Moon wouldn’t have been banned if it didn’t have Tblast Fairy. I feel like we banned the symptoms instead of the cause.

 

[Karxrida]

Instead suspecting Tera Blast is the play. I don’t think there’s anyone who’d say Dragonite without Tera Blast would be broken. Tblast was also what broke Volc and Eleki. Heck you could argue Roaring Moon wouldn’t have been banned if it didn’t have Tblast Fairy. I feel like we banned the symptoms instead of the cause.

As has been stated multiple times over the months (years?), there is not enough support to justify a suspect if Tera Blast and it would ultimately be a waste of time and resources for what would almost assuredly be a DNB outcome. The idea of getting ridding of it is too unpopular of a position, and even if it is banned the tier might just start bleeding out way more people who see it's allowed in Champions and jump ship.

I would still rather attempt implementing Tera Preview. There is obviously no guarantee that it would help, but I feel like trying it would be better than doing nothing and moping about we don't have any options.

 

[Nat]

Hi, this thread is already not off to a great start. I will attempt to weigh in, though am not going to fight very hard for change beyond this post.

I think you guys should probably be taking a more radical approach to tiering at this point. This is an unprecedented situation on multiple fronts. Champions is coming out very soon and nobody knows what will happen. SV is for 5 years, which is an absurdly long strain to put on interest & fatigue, both from the playerbase but also in a tiering sense. VGC events have tripled in size since the generation has began (first-hand account, no i'm not making this up) with champions also on the horizon, while our section of smogon will not see colossal sustained growth again, despite retaining overall good interest for a 20 year old forum. All of these are relevant, and overall guide me to the correct idea that we need to be adaptable. It's insane to me that given this unprecedented frontier, we're trying to find solution for change within our normal, long-standard walls of tiering. I think we should have change enacted asap without the clunky due process we normally provide, such as suspect tests & community polling actionable metrics. Here is what I would do:

Ban Tera Blast. In doing so, you'd need to throw a pretty big bone to the playerbase. When this has happened I'd free regieleki, moon, volc and then put a few other guys on a low-timer survey that council would quickly act on given the results. Nintendo bulldozes & airdrops new tiers in to vgc regularly, regardless of how stable or any other subjective metric the prior metagame was. I see no reason we can't also do this given the unprecedented circumstance. Want to know what this would do? it'd breathe life into the tier, the ladder & overall tiering discussions, complete with GOOD players weighing in on things. It'd create interest. It'd result in an extremely playable tier in no time. It's already undergone massive change several times, where extremely good metagames were bulldozed given they were forced to be. We need to let go of the mindset that this metagame is sacred 4 years into the tiering cycle, that our tiering methods are sacred in unforeseen circumstances.

I don't like this metagame, but I think arguing about this would take away what my post is aiming to accomplish. There's often a sentiment of 'change should occur, but we can't agree on what given our normal communally-involved philosophy.' Bring the change to the scene, not the scene to the change. I think this of course should happen, though I foresee the same walls we've created acting as barriers of hesitancy on this. Wishing the tier the best tho

 

[BigFatMantis]

I always hear that there isn’t enough support for a Tera blast test, and yet I always hear people wanting a Tera blast test, and yet we’ve never done a Tera blast test in OU. If people truly believe it doesn’t have the support to ban it, why not just do it then and put a lid on it for the rest of the gen? Many of the bans in OU are exacerbated by Tera Blast, it definitely opens up a lot of things if it’s banned but I think at the very least open it up for testing so the people can finally decide on it, especially given there’s no other Tera-modifying issues in the table. I’ve been thinking for years that Tera Blast restricts not just OU but many other SV tiers and it’s very possible there’s a more healthy and enjoyable metagame without it. Maybe it’s not - but we’re running out of time to try

 

[ausma]

Hi all, given that there is some discussion in this thread about the current state of the council itself, I'd like to say a few things as someone presently on it.

First, I'd like to be transparent about where my head has laid and what I will be doing going forward. It's not really a mystery to anybody at this point that I am no longer in any moderation position, and with it my activity site-wide has dwindled significantly. The reasons around why this is the case are not of relevance nor are they any kind of excuse. However, my present situation and overall relationship with the site right now have absolutely staggered my ability to be an active council member no matter how we slice it.

That being said, I have never once stopped paying close attention to the metagame and participating in it on my own terms. I've recently pursued some personal mental health treatment that has been helping me build more confidence in being active in the community again, and that includes tiering work rather directly. As I've mentioned to Finchinator already, I have plans to be intimately involved with WCoP this year with US Midwest, and will be doing my best to help with tryouts, game-prep (building, scouts, mocks) and assist with managerial work where it is applicable. I also plan to be posting more often on my YouTube channel and share more of my thoughts on the metagame in general, and potentially join individual tournaments where my tight schedule allows.

However, given my recent disconnect, I am not at all upset with nor blame people for potentially wanting me removed from the council. I am fine leaving and making headway for more top-level players, if the community prefers, but I am extremely passionate about this tier and wish to do what I can to help make it the best it can be on my terms. However, if that means stepping aside, so be it; I care more about the well-being of the tier/its council than my presence on it.

Not speaking for the council here, but my personal line of preference wrt tiering action is and has been Tera Blast. A reason I have recently been appreciating more has been those outlined in Nat's post, as action upon Tera Blast does make it much easier to explore drops as a possible avenue to make the tier the best it could be. Of course, this should not be the reason Tera Blast actually is suspected, but it's undeniably a benefit. Tera Blast in its own right, to me, is a significant force that is truly suspect worthy even with its divisive nature.

 

[Magcargo]

NGL, I've also suffered from quite a bit of burnout, especially as of late + I was never TOO good to begin with. Top players like Storm Zone are pushing the meta in interesting directions and it does seem like there is diversity in the tier with a lot of random shit seemingly working in addition to the usual staples we accept. That said, the meta does feel like it shifts quite a bit, its difficult (for me) to keep up, and pinpointing any one threat as a major issue is difficult. I will also say that - as a more casual player - the insane variety we see on the ladder with so many Pokemon does feel like it is a bit much, between different Teras, move choices, etc. That said, the biggest issue in this tier by far is that this is the longest generation so far - so a lot of its dynamics have just gotten old for me.

Still, take these suggestions with a grain of salt.

Do you think SV OU needs tiering action? If yes, what and why? If not, why do you disagree with points raised by people who say yes?

Tiering action isn't needed, but I feel action would make the tier better. When building, I'd say have a handful of issues:

• Accounting for miscellaneous entry hazards largely due to offensive pressure + the ease at which they can be set up, forcing similarish structures.
• Consistently accounting for multiple threats such as Deo-S, Darkrai, Dragonite, Ceruledge, etc.
• RNG effects found on common Pokemon (Pecharunt confusion + poison, Zapdos Static, Moltres Flame Body, Ogerpon-W Ivy Cudgel Crits, Darkrai Dark Pulse Flinches, Kyurem Freeze)
• Pokemon that feel extremely difficult to contain based on match-up (Garganacl, Gliscor, Walking Wake Sun, Ursaluna at times)
• Certain offensive structures being difficult (imo) to contain such as Webs or Veil without running the same few key options.
• Very tight sequencing needed to contain certain setup sweepers (though on the flipside, this is also quite fun depending on the Pokemon)
• Alomomola

For me I probably would look to target Light Clay & Tera Blast bans - with subsequent unbans for Volcarona, MAYBE Roaring Moon via suspect test, Regieleki, and MAYBE Espathra / Gouging Fire (though tbh pls don't lol). MAYBE Garganacl could get a closer look at because I don't particularly find the dynamics it forces with bulky offense teams needing to run random Cloak shitmons to be particularly healthy, but I suppose its manageable + not exactly the easiest to slap onto a team. There are a few other things I think could be looked at like Webs, Ceruledge, Ting-Lu, Dragonite, etc. but I am more willing to chalk a lot of these to being a skill issues so I won't really push for anything there. I personally would also love a Terapagos-Terastal form unban as I believe this Pokemon would help with many of the tier's issues, but that depends on how willing we are to skirt the policy there.

Do you think anything needs to change about our tiering process and cadence? This is not asking about Tiering Guidelines, which are universal, but rather specific SV OU practices such as surveys and council decisions.

I'd say a slightly lower threshold for a suspect test would be fine - particularly at this stage. Having back-to-back suspect tests like we did in DLC1 was a bit much but - a suspect test every 2 - 3 months now that the metagame has stabilized a bit IMO would be nice to stir the pot a bit.

More frequent re-suspect tests would be nice but I also will admit this is more of a personal wish of mine and not based on anything concrete.

This one might be controversial, but I feel removing the 1-5 rating scale on Pokemon and instead having a simple "yes no" question on whether we should suspect something or not may be better to help us go in a specific direction, but that also has its downsides so I am unsure if this is the play.

 

[clean]

I'll try to keep this short - but the best course of action right now is to suspect tera blast. It has now been over a year since the last suspect test - so I would really challenge the notion that suspecting tera blast would be a "waste of time and resources". If we keep using this logic we will go the remainder of SV without suspecting anything - and while I do enjoy the tier in it's current state, I think we can improve upon it.

To justify my position: I think removing tera blast from the tier will significantly reduce the strain on building and help improve the health of the meta. Mons like dragonite won't even be in the conversation for a ban if you no longer have to consider 3 different tera blast sets in the builder. A tera blast ban also creates a very straightforward path to future tiering action - regieleki can immediately be unbanned, volcarona can be considered for an unban (still probably broken), and we can all stop pretending that roaring moon did something wrong and deserved to be nuked.

I really think it's time we start considering creative solutions to complex problems. Archaic tiering methods should not be a roadblock to potential tiering action on tera blast. I agree 100% with the post from BFM - we have been going back and forth for what feels like almost two years now and whether or not we should suspect tera blast. Let's just suspect the damn thing so we can at least do something and put this conversation to rest one way or another.

One final note: Kyurem, Ogerpon, Kingambit, Zama (lol), etc are not broken. Dragonite is the only borderline problem and it's not even close to broken if we remove tera blast. The meta is the most stable it has been since the inception of the tier.

 

[Finchinator]

I am happy to retract my sentiment in the OP about Tera Blast being a waste of time and resources. I was jaded on the topic as the last two threads on it went nowhere, survey results repeatedly flopped, etc. In the end, as I noted later in the OP, we should not be weighing the past or surveys too substantially in this moment. It is most important to just make the best decision in the moment.

I’ll be the first one to admit when I was wrong or spoke too soon (like this part of the OP). That’s entirely on me. I encourage more discussion of Tera Blast even.

The point of this thread was to take the temperature of the playerbase and do what is best for the metagame in a time of many conflicting opinions. So I’m happy to keep an open mind and appreciate the posts made so far on it.

I still want to see more people share their thoughts (both on Tera Blast and OU as a whole) if they have them while I am working on finalizing some council personnel changes over the next few days/week.

 

[ojr]

Hello all, I am pro-Tera Blast ban. I'd like to explain why.

In the first place, I dislike Tera as a whole mechanic in general, but I do understand the removal of a core mechanic is a very drastic choice to a lot of the community. As the gen has progressed, I think Tera has become more manageable since we have solidified a foundation of general respectable Tera Types, making it much less of a guessing game as some might have thought when SV was released. However, I think Tera Blast starts pushing it over the edge, to explain my stance on this, I will zoom out a bit of Tera and generally talk about the way we play competitive pokemon.

Pokemon in of itself is a game of educated guesses; a pokemon can learn dozens of moves, which you cannot always account for. But any decent competitive player seeing a landorus on preview will generally will be able to deduce the potential options towards sr, eq, uturn etc, you all get the gist. To me, this knowledge of knowing what a pokemon can do is integral to every decision we make on every turn, and so to be able to take the game seriously, I believe a pokemon should be able to make use of its actual moveset so we can make educated guesses, but Tera Blast changes this. Tera Blast is expanding the identity of some pokemon entirely; suddenly, every pokemon has access to STAB Drill Peck, Ice Spinner, Shadow Ball, Dazzling Gleam, etc. Tera Blast has challenged the way we have to consider "techs" in a way that we never had in this game before; the variance has skyrocketed. But even that, we as a community have managed to rationalize those options towards a pretty select group of abusers. This has made Tera Blast look somewhat playable to work around. But even with SV reaching more optimalized levels of play, Tera Blast still stays a topical point, especially for Dragonite.

Dragonite is the poster child of Tera Blast and is stretching the realms of possibilities that an offensive set-up sweeper can have. A lot of Dragonite variants have shared checks, which is a blessing, but even that pool is limited. I do not think this is a net-positive for both building and in-game play. Sure, we can suspect Dragonite and go from there, but I feel like that is creating a temporary band-aid for a bigger issue. If Dragonite goes, a new Tera Blast oppressor will rise alongside the already existing Tera Blast set-up threats that also exist in the current metagame, i.e., Kyurem, Iron Valiant, and Kingambit. Not to forget, we already banned Volcarona, Regieleki and Roaring Moon which were also Tera Blast beneficiaries.

So, to me, it's time we start questioning the circus that is Tera Blast; it's time to bite the bullet and start restricting Tera as a mechanic to improve SV with a Tera Blast suspect.

 

[lax]

I’d like to add direct support to a Tera Blast vote/suspect

Even if it does limit mons like Pult, Enam, Crown, etc. I do think it’s for the overall greater good bc it leads to discussions on unbanning more mons. And Dnite and Gambit discussion should dwindle, ofc. Happy to trade TB for more mons and the people above have explained it very well

I also like that it opens the gates for more discussion on tiering and “complex bans” in the future, something I think Smogon shoulda adopted a long time ago. We play a competitive but unofficial tier. We should be able to make changes that benefit these tiers in their entirety even if it goes again 20 year old philosophy

 

[MAVERICK SHOOTERS]

I didn't plan to make a post on this thread initially, but I feel I should seeing the posts in the thread so far. SV OU is currently in its best building in years, it is incredibly easy to build good teams with a myriad of sets and mons, even with lower tiered pokemons and have it put in work consistently, and there is so much variety and creativity in the tier at the moment, so I do not see the point of it being/getting stale at all. I have been playing SV very actively on top of the ladder for the entire duration of SPL and it has felt as much fun as it was couple years back.

I really don't think there is a need to ban tera blast at all, it has never even come close to getting enough support to be considered for suspect in any survey from qualified player base and outside of the vocal minority who want it banned, the results show that it has never been the common consensus, I would be happy to be proven wrong if it shows a really strong result from qualified player base in the next survey which I think finch had said would be soon, in case it ends up getting a strong response for it requiring suspect, then a suspect would be very much deserved, but without that I do not see why tera blast would be justified for a suspect with no recent data to back it up.

I do not think banning tera blast just for the sake of adding new pokemon is a valid reasoning, volcarona and roaring moon still would be pretty broken/unhealthy pokemon to the meta even if they get released post tera blast ban (and I wanted neither banned during their suspect initially, but in hindsight can definitely say getting rid of them made the meta far far better), regieleki getting freed would be nice, but that's not really something major for the tier.

Dragonite is a mon that I can potentially see for a suspect and wouldn't mind it, pretty on the fence about it, it's tera simulator gets pretty infuriating at times if its one of the non main ones, but on the other times it very much managable, it also holds the tier together so thats nice. Outside of the tera simulator of dragonite no other pokemon really abuse it to that insane a degree currently, most of the time they would probably be just running tera blast fairy, and having a tera hog pokemon has it's own costs, so it ends up being a tradeoff while favouring creative teambuilding. There are other neat not so common applications like ice blast zap, ground blast val/crown/cind, various fairyblast mons, fight/fire blast on some mons, etc. and none feel broken as you have to end up using tera to get the snipe on mons that you would of wanted them for. Can feel differently about this as the meta progresses further, but at the moment I do not see tera blast as a problem.

I think accepting the variance, fishiness and cheese fest comes with SV/tera as a mechanic and banning tera blast will not solve it, it gets pretty infuriating at times, but it has lot of benefits and fun elements to it while keeping the meta fresh at all times., I would easily take this over a boring/solved meta any day.

Points finch wrote for council seem to pretty much sum it up and he is already working on the concerns people have so that's good, council should actively ladder/play in sv tours and if they do not have the time for it which is completely understandable then they should be steeping down and letting other people fill the spot, they can join back once they are active in the tier again though not really sure if that's how it works, either way only people actively playing should be on the council, and what's already been said sums it up pretty well so not much to add.

TL;DR - SV OU is incredibly open at the moment and is not even close to stale, do not ban terablast (unless a survey from qualified responses clearly points it needs to be suspected then all good, either way I would dnb), 50/50 on dnite suspect whatever the council feels.

 

[LOOR]

Nothing really overly new to add but would like to voice my support for looking into Tera Blast.

I've beat this horse long past dead at this point but to summarize, while not exactly the reason things are problematic or broken, Tera Blast has a relationship historically in the tier with pushing things across that line. Things just borderline but not exactly broken like Kingambit and Kyurem are still annoying to deal with because of the move, even if these sets aren't the most common, they can change momentum of the game drastically.

The elephant in the room being Dragonite, I do not consider it anywhere near acceptable in its current state. Performance wise maybe the statistics do not necessarily reflect this, but it just has way too many sets with counterplay varying. Not to call anybody out in particular, but going through an entire SPL season helping in builder and hearing "well we lose to dragonite with this set and this move" every week is beyond annoying. While this can be a skill issue in builder at times, the frequency this comes up pushes past just a "build better" notion. It's retrusive in builder and single handedly the best option at flipping games in the tier without much intelligent position. My issue also stems from the fact I consider flat out banning Dragonite really terrible for the tier, it's defensive profile helps keep a lot of things in check and we are at a point where I think we can not deal with the domino effect.

Just to also mention this, Tera Blast ban also gives us some interesting avenues for retests that we otherwise shouldn't consider. Most of these target mons on my radar have already been talked about better than I can word things so I'll leave it at that.

Finally, I get a lot of people consider the current state of the tier fun. I think so to, at least to an extent. However, the tier really struggles to be considered competitive for me. It's incredibly fishy and being in a position where the better play isn't rewarded most of the time is frustrating in tournament setting. We have options to push the tier towards a more competitive environment, so I don't see why we should embrace "chaotic fun" at the expense of integrity. I believe a Tera Blast ban wouldn't even make anything less fun, we still have a lot of creative options, just limiting the extent particular things can snowball allows for more intuitive counterplay. A Tera Blast ban isn't about "adding new mons" or "keeping something in the tier", this are incredibly oversimplified. It's about trying to make the tier more rewarding while keeping variety in the metagame. Nobody wants to ban Tera Blast to bring Volcarona back "just because", Volcarona has a wide range of defensive utility that can be healthy to have in the current environment, however, it's without a doubt (at least imo) absolutely broken with Tera Blast. We shouldn't be sacrificing health and competitiveness because "well it's fun", especially when banning a particular element doesn't make the tier magically not fun at all.

Just some thoughts, maybe not coherent who knows.

 

[TPP]

Hey, I've been pretty quiet the last year but wanted to share an update since I agree with leng's post that council should be more active and transparent with the community. I decided to take an extended break for the first time since joining the site a decade ago, and it's due to a combination of getting busier with irl responsibilities and not being satisfied with my level of play. Rather than continuing to force myself to compete in suboptimal conditions, I decided I needed a reset and while I skipped SCL and SPL, I did keep up with replays across those and circuit playoffs. I got into tournaments by watching a bunch of replays and scouting as much as I can to learn whatever, and wanted to go back to basics during my break. I told Finch I'll be available around the end of this month for Smogon Tour and am hoping to be fully active from then on again. That being said, I apologize for the lack of communication and activity until this point.

Tiering wise, I am still on the ban Tera Blast train, but I actually like lax's post a lot and fully agree that we should take into consideration that the current metagame is different than when some of the banned mons were banned, and there's a chance some of them can fit into the tier again. I think most people agree we want something to happen rather than nothing, and while it's been frustrating that no one can agree on anything, the community should be able to turn to the council and hope we can give some direction.

This is slightly off topic, but I've spent the last year studying competitiveness across other games/communities and it's overall been enjoyable, and it gets me thinking about what we can do for our tier/community. We don't have that many high level players posting on forums, and I appreciate people like Storm Zone as well as players that cover the tier and tour games on YouTube like blunder and lax. But this issue also applies to council and I'm also at fault for that. Council should be posting more regularly during suspect tests and after/during big tours and believe that as well as a more active council chat is beneficial moving forward.

Apologies again for the lack of activity. I know this isn’t something that’s fixed with one post, and I plan to return at the standard I had when I first joined the council in the near future.

 

[LBN]

Tera blast is something I'd absolutely support action on and get reqs for. During ADPL I was very vocally a cosmic hater of Dragonite (I believe Finch and Mav remember this), and by extension tera blast. I still feel that way. I think it just enables too much stuff on a gameplay level and a builder level and strictly speaking the tier would be drastically better off without Tera blast making things more difficult. Even when it's on balanced users of the move, like Iron Crown or Fire/Fairy Rillaboom or Fairy Darkrai, it's just an additional nuisance that allows Pokemon to reach way farther than they can be accounted for much of the time and adds a degree of fishing that makes the tier feel so much worse to play. I don't have a whole ton of deeper input beyond what has already been said, Loor said pretty much everything I'd articulate as it is.

 

[Attribute]

Posting in support of Tera Blast tiering action. I'm not exactly a fan of the mentality of taking tiering action just so we can test/unban things as I think it takes away from the point of tiering itself (not saying it can't happen, it just shouldn't be one of the arguments for it), but to remove an unhealthy aspect from the metagame. In short, Tera Blast adds too much randomness to a tier that is already susceptible to being quite random, and is an enabler to things that currently exist that may fit in the broken category such as Dragonite, something a few number of people want to see action for already. Not only do I think Dragonite leaving the tier would do more harm than good, but a good portion of the reasoning as to why people think its broken is cause of Tera Blast, so why not get rid of the thing that is pushing these things over the edge? Not to mention, things in the past have had tiering action against them partly due to Tera Blast so yeah, I'm starting to see a pattern here.

I've seen statements such as "tera blast ban is ridiculous just ban tera" and I would like to address that real quickly. Whether you like it or not, that shit is not gonna happen anytime soon lol. A Tera Blast ban is the next best thing and has clearly been the case for nearly the past year, so stop trying to gatekeep a realistic outcome of this thread in favor of some fairytale. Moreover, policy politics shouldn't be something that gets in the way of tiering action. A rule that was made before this generation came out shouldn't overrule tiering action. Simple as that. If it doesn't align with policy then make an exception or rewrite it or something. SV is unique, tier it as such.

 

[Vert]

The only solution is to ban tera blast regardless of meme survey scores which are just an excuse for the incompetent council to continue sitting on their ass

Ban the move and free roaring moon, volcarona, and regieleki then re-test landorus-i's trash ass

You heard it here first from the SV GOAT

 

[sire clod]

I swear most of the tournament playerbase wants to see Tera Blast banned and somehow it never scores high on surveys, I don't know how the surveys or tiering policy really works because I never pay much attention to the rules of it all but it's been very apparent for years now that Tera Blast is the real broken enabler in this tier, and only 2-3 mons at a time max really abuse the move that would otherwise be healthy presences in the meta without it, it would absolutely be a blessing to see that shit gone.

 

[Heatranator]

I'm 100% not the most qualified SV OU player, but I am an OU mod and do keep up with meta trends while laddering once in a while (although this is typically with very memey teams) and I do have some points to make.

If we are asking does OU 'need' tiering action, then the answer is no. The tier is in a fine state and is good enough. But if the question is "should we do tiering action in OU" then I think the answer is yes. Honestly, so many posts above have done it better, but at the very least suspect Tera Blast. Idk how its getting low survey scores but then every single top player I speak to or see says to ban it. At the very least, it would stop this conversation from going around in circles constantly. (I do think the move is BS btw, its matchup fishing at best and completely annihilates specific mons usual counterplay at worst). I don't really see a negative to this and I do hope we go this route.
Would also like to add that while it isn't totally relevant to discussions, but lower tiers would also massively benefit from Tblast being banned. Mainly RU and PU, but it doesn't even hurt UU or NU too much. Again, not relevant but just something to state incase people are concerned about lower tiers.
Could easily unban eleki and volc immediately which both are benefits and maybe suspect moon (could also see arch which might be fine? But I'm leaning to it not being fine). Everything else keep locked up, don't need solg, lando-i and friends to fuck over shit even more.

Only other thing close is Dragonite but dnite also helps softcheck so much so I would be sad to see it go, and as much as I hate waterpon I will begrudingly accept it in the meta. Everything else is extremely fine.

 

[mcribs]

Ok so compared to majority of high level players im pretty buns. But as a serial ladder menace i do have to def say something, even if i still dont know how reqs work.

Tera blast should be banned atp. Its gotten volc eleki and moon kicked and is busy dragging dnite to suspect territory. Why is this permitted? Because lets be real, no one complained about dnite before it started using tb. Same with moon, same with a lot of other guys. Theres a clear trend that indicates tb is causing at least some issue. So why are we banning dragonite for tb's sins? For the arguments of how lower tiers are affected, shit like blastoise and gyarados got nuked because tera blast gave them juiced up coverage. Theres still signs in lower tiers so lets not kid ourselves. As much as i love cb pult and scarf lando, i would trade their usage to have a less fishy meta.

To get rid of tb is getting rid of multiple birds with one stone. Dnite is fine now, kyu is stuck using mixed or special sets, gambit doesnt magically beat zama with tb fairy. Volc and moon get to come back. And people get something different after a year of nothing.

Just get rid of tb

 

[Niko]

Don't want to repeat anything already brought up, so I will just say this: if moving forward we face a future where CGs happen to release at this frequency, we better start thinking at how to deal with it properly. 4-5 years is just too much for a new tier to stay interesting and funny as much as it is needed to encourage an active playerbase for how things work now.

It's time we start considering a different approach that better fits the modern needs for a game to evolve dynamically, even when this means to partially sacrifice the continuity we are used to when it comes to CG. What do I mean? I've been unsuccessfully supporting this course of action for years, but now more than ever I'm convinced that we need a tool that helps the community to fasten the evolution of the tiers.

A situation where the CG OU stays untouched for more than a year should, in my opinion, be forcibly avoided. Whether it is thanks to some sort of parallel testing ladder (my favourite solution), an official testing server or whatever else the community comes up with, this game needs more mobility.

I'm not saying we should implement different rulesets or seasons like in VGC, as it would be unappropriate for multiple reasons: more than anything, Smogon tiers are accessible when it comes to casual playing, but they require you to grind a lot and deepen your meta knowledge if you aim at being a top player. This is fine as it is, part of Smogon identity and part of what makes it so appealing to play its tiers.

On the other hand it's pretty obvious that tiering action is as of now a very slow process, requiring a tremendous amount of time, burocracy and efforts just for a suspect test to be considered. That's why we require something that both helps the players in testing what the metas would actually become and make a comparison with the current ones, and at the same time gives the council real time feedbacks. It would save a lot of time and prevent a lot of discussion, and I'm also convinced that the amount of players that would engage in testing would be much higher than one would expect.

I don't know who the decision about implementing such a system is up to but if anyone cares about something similar becoming a thing I'm available to help to make it work.

 

[Patatexv]

I heard some people talking about roaring moon, volcarona. You guys have to remember that those shit have been broken in SVOU way before tera blast started to be played on those mons. Its not only because tera blast fairy on roaring moon, or ground on volcarona. Those pokemon are unhealthy for this mets WITH or WITHOUT it.

While I'm a pro tera and I think tera blast isnt the real issue, I get people comments and I will support a tiering action just to see what could be done without and how the meta could be without. As I'm apparently one of the rare who doesn't have problem with terablast, I may be wrong, so I want to see if this is bullshit or not. Its been 4 years this tier is played with terablast, removing almost 1year before a new generation looks dumb, but as apparently no one has problems with broken items (light clay & heat rock, you just have to see winrate with those items recently) or mons that are bullshitting our tier, lets see ?

But well, I'm 100% against unbanning mons like Roaring Moon, Volcarona or whatever after this if this happens. It was broken before terablast has been played on those, it will be after it disappears. Don't make this metagame worse, focus on it to be better.