We will be testing Sand Veil in ADV OU. This post will explain the decision to test Sand Veil, outline the parameters of the test, and offer a place for participants to discuss and advocate for their desired outcome.
I. Why test Sand Veil?
Sand Veil strategies are a relatively recent development in the metagame, and prior to this year, it was very rare to see teams designed with the purpose of abusing Sand Veil effects. Over the past year, it has become increasingly clear that these strategies were both underexplored and underestimated. As it has been in other generations, Sand Veil and its perceived legitimacy in the meta has become a polarizing issue. This test is meant to resolve Sand Veil's future in ADV OU and hopefully lay the issue to rest.
In brief and basic form, this is how Sand Veil works in ADV OU. The two Sand Veil abusers are Cacturne and Gligar. Teams based upon Sand Veil strategies may use one or both these Pokemon. See below where we have included some examples of the most successful Sand Veil teams for test participants and the general Smogon community to review.
Cacturne typically uses Spikes, Leech Seed, Substitute and one of HP Dark or HP Grass. One prominent team (created by Vapicuno and featured in this video) used Cacturne with Focus Punch over Spikes, but Focus Punch is generally not expected. Cacturne has two play patterns to abuse Sand Veil misses. First, it can use Substitute and the Sand Veil miss chance to reliably set up Spikes against slower Pokemon. Second, it can use Substitute and miss chance to set up a Leech Seed loop. This latter play pattern is comparatively more problematic in the council's opinion. If, and when, Cacturne sets up a Substitute, it can be very difficult for its opponent to break the ensuing Leech Seed loop. Slower Pokemon cannot break the loop until Cacturne runs out of Substitute PP because Cacturne will repeatedly click Substitute as Leech Seed restores its HP. Faster Pokemon must successfully hit two moves in a row and have enough power to KO or bring Cacturne to very low health. However, Cacturne need not stay in against faster Pokemon; it can switch as Leech Seed whittles the opposing faster Pokemon’s health, which in turn, limits the ability counter Cacturne the next time.
Gligar typically uses Substitute, Swords Dance, Earthquake, and HP Flying. There has been no prominent team featuring a move set other than this. The play pattern for Gligar is one dimensional. Gligar will begin by clicking Substitute until a move misses. Once a move misses, Gligar will click Swords Dance behind the safety of its Substitute. Then, if Gligar has enough health, it may fish for another miss by clicking Substitute again, or it can try for a sweep with its +2 attack. Gligar at +2 is strong, capable of 2HKOing all common Pokemon besides Zapdos, Aerodactyl, Skarmory, and healthy and defensive Suicune and Swampert. For an in-depth statistical analysis and detailed explanation, please see this post from Vapicuno.
Common team support for Sand Veil teams includes Tyranitar, Magneton, and Paralysis. Tyranitar is necessary because it provides Sandstorm. As the most common and best Pokemon in the tier, there is no real drawback to including Tyranitar. Magneton is most helpful for countering Skarmory, but it provides some utility in other matchups, from trapping Forretress and Metagross to serving as a defensive pivot to enable Cacturne and Gligar. Paralysis is especially helpful for Sand Veil teams. It makes all opposing Pokemon slower, which allows Cacturne and Gligar to spam Substitute without worrying about being outsped. Furthermore, the paralysis chance compounds the odds that the opposing Pokemon will not be able to break the Substitute, either via a miss from Sand Veil or a full paralysis.
a. Council Member Positions
b. Sample Teams
https://pokepast.es/f7e22c6b59b6a851 - by ABR
https://pokepast.es/373509d6b65bd855 - by Vapicuno
https://pokepast.es/b7f6e61a8ef719fa - by McMeghan
c. Replays
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-495551 (BlazingDark v. ABR, Coronavirus Premier League III)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-500083 (ABR v. M Dragon, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-500581 (ABR v. Typhlito, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-500794 (ABR v. Kiichikos, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-501213 (ABR v. Pohjis, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-503413 (tamahome v. thelinearcurve, ADV Cup VI)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-507894 (ABV v. rozes, Smogon Classic Playoffs)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-508899 (ABR v. Shortage, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-509059 (Kratosmana v. Eden, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-509069 (Kratosmana v. Eden, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-509334 (gorgie v. elodin, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-511016 (Soulwind v. z0mog, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522177 (rozes v. conflict, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522065 (fakes v. M Dragon, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522400 (star v. tricking, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522651 (malekith v. tamahome, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522898 (excal v. zokuru, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-523051 (TDK v. Tony, Permasand Invitational)
(Vapicuno using Sand Veil to top the ADV Ladder)
II. Process Considerations
a. Suspect test is appropriate because there was no substantial opposition to council action and no substantial support for a council-ban.
Last week we made a post stating that we planned to take action regarding Sand Veil in ADV OU. In that post, we solicited feedback on two major discussion points. First, ADV Stakeholders had the opportunity to show substantial opposition to the council taking action, thereby avoiding the council taking any action at all. Perhaps predictably, there was no opposition to the council taking action regarding Sand Veil. Therefore, we will proceed with the test. Second, ADV Stakeholders had the opportunity to show substantial support for a council-ban, or else a suspect test would be the presumptive course of action. There was minimal support for a council-ban, but the response was nowhere near substantial. In fact, the feedback posts seem to suggest that players may have a genuine difference of opinion as to whether Sand Veil should be banned in some capacity. Therefore, we will proceed with a suspect test and not a council-ban.
b. We will not be pursuing a complex ban.
We (the Council) were surprised by the suggestion and moderate support for a complex ban. We posted the preliminary thread under the presumption that if any action were to be taken, it would be to test Sand Veil the ability. Mushi Musha suggested complex banning Sand Veil and the move Substitute. Watermess suggested complex banning Sand Veil and set up moves. Conceivably, we could complex ban Sand Stream and Sand Veil on the same team. We thought these were clever solutions and thank you for the suggestions. However, after discussion, we have decided not to pursue a complex ban for the issue of Sand Veil in ADV OU.
We have three reasons for declining to pursue a complex ban. First, complex bans are "always something we seek to avoid if possible, especially if there is another low impact solution." That means there is an innate presumption in favor of simple bans, and in this case, banning Sand Veil the Ability is the simple, direct option. Moreover, the Council is of the view that banning Sand Veil is a low impact solution. Banning Sand Veil still allows Gligar in the metagame because it has a second ability. And, although banning Sand Veil will ban Cacturne by extension, we are doubtful that Cacturne would have a worthwhile use case if we could somehow preserve it through a complex ban.
Second, we find the approach in other OU tiers persuasive. DPP and BW OU are the closest generations to ADV, and battles in all three generations have consistent Sandstorm. Both DPP and BW OU have elected to ban Sand Veil the ability rather than any specific abuser or a complex ban. Although another generation's approach is not binding, we do not see a compelling reason to distinguish ADV OU from DPP and BW OU. The approach there has proven effective, so we expect it to be effective here too. Additionally, banning Sand Veil promotes a consistency of ruleset across generations, which may make Old Gens marginally more accessible to new players.
Last, a complex ban like the ones described in the preliminary thread would be without tiering precedent. There has never been an Ability + Move complex ban like Sand Veil + Substitute. There was an instance of Ability + Ability in the form of Aldaron's Proposal (banning Drizzle and Swift Swim on the same team), but that approach has generally been criticized as a big mistake that would not be repeated if the issue surfaced today. Pursuing an unprecedented complex ban risks unintended future consequences like re-tests, increases the inherent complexity of the rules, and is likely to be politically unpopular in the community.
c. We will not be addressing Gligar separately.
Before we move on, we want to address the idea of banning Gligar instead, or in addition, to Sand Veil. We will not be pursuing this option. We believe Gligar and Cacturne feature the same fundamental playstyle that forms the basis of arguments for uncompetitive-ness (specifically, using Substitute to fish for a miss, and then setting up a Swords Dance or a Leech Seed loop). Even if Gligar is more potent, we believe that fishing for misses in this manner is either competitive or it isn't, irrespective of the Pokemon performing the strategy. Therefore, we do not believe that Gligar and Cacturne should be treated differently in this process. Additionally, there is no major official ADV tournament between now and Smogon Premier League, which lessens the imperative for a quick council-ban on Gligar, as suggested by ABR.
d. We decline to take up the issue of Bright Powder at this time.
Callous initiated some discussion of Bright Powder as it relates to taking action on Sand Veil. We will not be taking action on Bright Powder at this point in time. While we are sympathetic to the fundamental similarities, there are some differences (like Ability vs. Item, and magnitude of miss chance) that can justify separate treatment. If Bright Powder ever becomes a common strategy and there is a clear call for action from the ADV Community, then we will address it similarly to how we are addressing Sand Veil here. Until then, Bright Powder will remain a useable item choice.
III. Test Parameters
Regarding Sand Veil, voters will have the option to vote between:
1. Ban Sand Veil.
2. Do not ban Sand Veil.
Ban requirement: 60%+ in favor of banning Sand Veil.
The vote will open on November 10, 2020.
The tournament-based qualifications are as follows. For SPL, voters must have played at least six ADV games OR won at least three games. For ADV Cup, we will take the top eight. For Callous Invitational IV, the top 16 finishers qualify. For ADV Circuit Championship 2020, we will take the current top five. Under these requirements, the following players qualify.
SPL: Blightbringer [forum banned], Tamahome, pasy_g [forum banned], Glibert Arenas, CyberOdin, Alexander., z0mog, BKC
ADV Cup: Dizno, dice, thelinearcurve, Fakes, Mana, FMG, undisputed, Tamahome
Callous Invitation IV: thelinearcurve, undisputed, Mana, McMeghan, Hclat, Starmaster, Tamahome, UD, ABR, Astamatitos, M Dragon, PDC, Fear, Golden Sun, roystopror, Soulwind
ADV Circuit Championship 2020: thelinearcurve, undisputed, Djokra, Winterains, Tamahome
Unique voters (27): thelinearcurve, undisputed, Ban Manaphy, McMeghan, Hclat, Starmaster, Tamahome, UD, ABR, Astamatitos, M Dragon, PDC, Fear, Golden Sun, Shortage, Soulwind, BKC, Dizno, FMG, Djokra, Winterains, Gilbert Arenas, CyberOdin, Alexander. z0mog, dice, Fakes
We want to preemptively address the use of Callous Invitational IV as a qualification standard. Callous Invitational is (and has been for the past four years) the biggest and most prestigious ADV event of the year. And, as it pertains to Sand Veil, Callous Invitational is the most recent ADV event which makes the experience of players there uniquely relevant. We do not see a compelling reason not to include Callous Invitational simply because it is not literally hosted on Smogon.com. It is full of players who regularly compete on Smogon and played according to Smogon rules. The decision to use Callous Invitational as a tournament qualification for this vote does not necessarily mean we will use it again in the future, but as the biggest, most prestigious, and most recent ADV OU tournament, we believe using it for this test is merited.
The Council is satisfied with this sample of voters as is, but we still want to offer other players another way to qualify if they wish to participate. Given that there is no major ADV tournament between now and Smogon Premier League, we see no harm is taking a little extra time with this vote.
To qualify via the ladder, players must reach 1500+ ELO and 85% GXE simultaneously. No game cap. Please use the following prefix at the start of your alt: ADVSV. The ladder window will last for two weeks 10/26 - 11/9. Submit requirements to the identification thread any time you fulfill them.
IV. Conclusion
While the ladder qualification is under way, our hope is that participants will use this thread (and accompanying RoA thread) to discuss their position on Sand Veil. Thanks for reading.
I. Why test Sand Veil?
Sand Veil strategies are a relatively recent development in the metagame, and prior to this year, it was very rare to see teams designed with the purpose of abusing Sand Veil effects. Over the past year, it has become increasingly clear that these strategies were both underexplored and underestimated. As it has been in other generations, Sand Veil and its perceived legitimacy in the meta has become a polarizing issue. This test is meant to resolve Sand Veil's future in ADV OU and hopefully lay the issue to rest.
In brief and basic form, this is how Sand Veil works in ADV OU. The two Sand Veil abusers are Cacturne and Gligar. Teams based upon Sand Veil strategies may use one or both these Pokemon. See below where we have included some examples of the most successful Sand Veil teams for test participants and the general Smogon community to review.
Cacturne typically uses Spikes, Leech Seed, Substitute and one of HP Dark or HP Grass. One prominent team (created by Vapicuno and featured in this video) used Cacturne with Focus Punch over Spikes, but Focus Punch is generally not expected. Cacturne has two play patterns to abuse Sand Veil misses. First, it can use Substitute and the Sand Veil miss chance to reliably set up Spikes against slower Pokemon. Second, it can use Substitute and miss chance to set up a Leech Seed loop. This latter play pattern is comparatively more problematic in the council's opinion. If, and when, Cacturne sets up a Substitute, it can be very difficult for its opponent to break the ensuing Leech Seed loop. Slower Pokemon cannot break the loop until Cacturne runs out of Substitute PP because Cacturne will repeatedly click Substitute as Leech Seed restores its HP. Faster Pokemon must successfully hit two moves in a row and have enough power to KO or bring Cacturne to very low health. However, Cacturne need not stay in against faster Pokemon; it can switch as Leech Seed whittles the opposing faster Pokemon’s health, which in turn, limits the ability counter Cacturne the next time.
Gligar typically uses Substitute, Swords Dance, Earthquake, and HP Flying. There has been no prominent team featuring a move set other than this. The play pattern for Gligar is one dimensional. Gligar will begin by clicking Substitute until a move misses. Once a move misses, Gligar will click Swords Dance behind the safety of its Substitute. Then, if Gligar has enough health, it may fish for another miss by clicking Substitute again, or it can try for a sweep with its +2 attack. Gligar at +2 is strong, capable of 2HKOing all common Pokemon besides Zapdos, Aerodactyl, Skarmory, and healthy and defensive Suicune and Swampert. For an in-depth statistical analysis and detailed explanation, please see this post from Vapicuno.
Common team support for Sand Veil teams includes Tyranitar, Magneton, and Paralysis. Tyranitar is necessary because it provides Sandstorm. As the most common and best Pokemon in the tier, there is no real drawback to including Tyranitar. Magneton is most helpful for countering Skarmory, but it provides some utility in other matchups, from trapping Forretress and Metagross to serving as a defensive pivot to enable Cacturne and Gligar. Paralysis is especially helpful for Sand Veil teams. It makes all opposing Pokemon slower, which allows Cacturne and Gligar to spam Substitute without worrying about being outsped. Furthermore, the paralysis chance compounds the odds that the opposing Pokemon will not be able to break the Substitute, either via a miss from Sand Veil or a full paralysis.
a. Council Member Positions
I would vote ban as of this post, but I am open to being persuaded otherwise. Sand Veil is definitely an effective strategy to wins games. Not overpowered, but at least as effective as some other common ADV archetypes. For me, this test and vote ultimately comes down to two considerations. First, I believe Sand Veil is a strong strategy for the lesser player to win more often than they otherwise would. To illustrate with a hypothetical example, say a match would ordinarily be 75-25 odds; I feel like Sand Veil has real power to make that 60-40 odds. I don't have scientific evidence to back up that claim, but it's a feeling I've developed after watching many games and playing with/against Sand Veil. I see a lot of good players with minimal ADV experience pick the strategy for tournaments that incidentally include ADV. This suggests to me that the strategy is relatively easy to use and effective. Our metagames should reward experience and knowledge in the tier, and Sand Veil tends to undermine that principle.
Second, I don't enjoy the in-game experience of Sand Veil as either a player or a spectator. Playing against Sand Veil sucks because it simply comes down to hoping you won't miss while your opponent repeatedly clicks Substitute. At that point it really feels like you have so little control over the game. The loss of agency feels uncompetitive and unfun to me. I also hate watching Sand Veil games as a spectator. At first I thought it was intriguing (and possibly amusing), but now I immediately click to the end of the replay once I see Cacturne or Gligar just to see who won. I always perceive the Sand Veil user as pulling a fast one on their opponent. Whether that feeling is justified may be debated, of course.
I am sympathetic to the anti-ban arguments along the lines of "odds management." Pokemon is a game of odds management, from flinches to crits, and Sand Veil is simply another instance of odds management. Why do we tolerate Serene Grace Jirachi in DPP, yet Sand Veil is over the line? I'm not entirely sure. However, as somewhat of a tiering realist, I believe tiering ultimately may come down to allowing what we like and banning what we don't.
Second, I don't enjoy the in-game experience of Sand Veil as either a player or a spectator. Playing against Sand Veil sucks because it simply comes down to hoping you won't miss while your opponent repeatedly clicks Substitute. At that point it really feels like you have so little control over the game. The loss of agency feels uncompetitive and unfun to me. I also hate watching Sand Veil games as a spectator. At first I thought it was intriguing (and possibly amusing), but now I immediately click to the end of the replay once I see Cacturne or Gligar just to see who won. I always perceive the Sand Veil user as pulling a fast one on their opponent. Whether that feeling is justified may be debated, of course.
I am sympathetic to the anti-ban arguments along the lines of "odds management." Pokemon is a game of odds management, from flinches to crits, and Sand Veil is simply another instance of odds management. Why do we tolerate Serene Grace Jirachi in DPP, yet Sand Veil is over the line? I'm not entirely sure. However, as somewhat of a tiering realist, I believe tiering ultimately may come down to allowing what we like and banning what we don't.
I've been against Sand Veil for a while now. Firstly, it's been optimized enough to be a viable strategy and team archetype to the point where we see it regulary enough by now both on the ladder and in Tournaments. I try to find the right balance between allowing different strategies to exist and developping a stance on them if I believe they're unhealthy. I believe Sand Veil, more often than not, creates games of odds where the result is too reliant on RNG. Even if you try to play and build as optimatilly as possible by relying on fully accurate moves, Sand Veil will remove that option from you with very little opportunity cost (which is unlike items like Brightpowder or Quick Claw, a reason behind their unpopularity). I've seen this debate take place in every gen where Perma Sand exists, and everytime, the arguments have been the same, and I've always found the game to be better and more rewarding for the more skilled players once that option wasn't available anymore.
Ever since the resurgence of Sand Veil strategies I've been reluctant to consider Sand Veil for a possible ban. From my point of view, Gligar required a considerable setup to win games, as not only does it have to remove the opponent's bulky waters but also any opposing Zapdos, Skarmory or Aero before it can get going. To me that seemed like a very reasonable handicap as both offensive and defensive teams have natural placeholder roles that counteract its potency. Cacturne in turn is a Dugtrio prone, mid-range spiker that only ever gets going when considerable para spread has taken place, which again is fair play if you've managed to setup a poke that far into the game. I don't view either of them as broken in the traditional definition of the term, I'd expect both Gligar and Cacturne to score a modest, above average performance over a large number of games. However, when assessing whether to ban this Pokemon in terms of their performance, we should also consider outlier performance rather than simply the mean. I am talking about the ability of these pokes to drastically sway the game in their favor by means of RNG. Yes, I am talking about Sand Veil dodging that Explosion, spinblocking those 3 spikes. While similar game swaying events can happen with any poke (think Blissey freezing 2 pokes), they don't happen with the same frequency and they typically require some form of player interaction. Overall, my opinion is that the randomness factor introduced to the outcome of the game is significantly reinforced by bringing Sand Veil into the game.
Given that we play this tier competitively, these two feel to be at odds with eachother. After taking the input of the ADV community I've come to the conclusion that we should at least suspect test Sand Veil and decide for ourselves; To what degree do we want to subject ourselves to the random elements in order to promote diversity in a metagame? I think this is a perfectly good exercise to answer this.
Given that we play this tier competitively, these two feel to be at odds with eachother. After taking the input of the ADV community I've come to the conclusion that we should at least suspect test Sand Veil and decide for ourselves; To what degree do we want to subject ourselves to the random elements in order to promote diversity in a metagame? I think this is a perfectly good exercise to answer this.
As others have mentioned, Pokemon is a game filled with RNG based elements. The presence of Sand Veil, and by extension Cacturne and Gligar, certainly introduces aspects that might be considered unhealthy. They are not without their drawbacks, however.
Cacturne is not exactly a plug and play Mon, and it is almost certainly more "splashable" than Gligar. Cacturne would fit into the narrowest of niches on its own merit even if it had no Ability, but Sand Veil obviously makes it even better.
Gligar, on the other hand, would be abjectly terrible without Sand Veil making it even remotely viable in OU. It has poor coverage, a mostly bad defensive typing, and mediocre stats at best. Sand Veil affords it the opportunity to sweep in some endgame scenarios, when it otherwise almost definitely would not get those opportunities.
However, it would be unfair not to acknowledge that most standard, well-built ADV OU teams are to an extent, vulnerable to both Gligar's and Cacturne's "snowball effects."
My personal opinion is that neither of these Mons is worth the opportunity cost required to spend a team slot on them. I consider it reckless teambuilding to rely on luck factors in your gameplan. People will counter by arguing that Sand Veil has no opportunity cost by virtue of being an Ability and not an item or moveslot. Which is technically correct, but it is still no different to me than using inaccurate moves in lieu of accurate ones (Thunder vs. Thunderbolt for example). You are trading reliability (say, an Actual Good Mon) for volatility. Opportunity cost.
I also acknowledge my bias which tends towards inclusivity (I dislike restriction in the teambuilder) and creativity (hot button term). If the playerbase discovers a new strategy that was underexplored in the past, then there's no reason that shouldn't be pushed in the teambuilder. Innovation is a great thing. Heck, people were pining for Spore Breloom's banishment barely 6 months ago. However, I think that the odds will even out over time and people will come to realize that neither Cacturne nor Gligar is worth bringing on a consistent basis. I have used Cacturne enough myself to know that it just plain isn't that great. It's a decent off-kilter pick, but not something I would expect consistent greatness out of.
All that being said, given the general consensus among ADV regulars, it is clear that the community wants at least a suspect test for Sand Veil. I support this decision to give the playerbase what it wants. Wherever you lie on the Sand Veil debate, I think everyone can find common ground in the sentiment that it is nothing if not annoying to play against.
Just a final thought - the line for what we deem to be competitive keeps getting pushed back. If Sand Veil gets banned, then you can bet your bottom dollar that the next version of Sand Veil will have people clamoring for its ban. Just give it enough time.
Cacturne is not exactly a plug and play Mon, and it is almost certainly more "splashable" than Gligar. Cacturne would fit into the narrowest of niches on its own merit even if it had no Ability, but Sand Veil obviously makes it even better.
Gligar, on the other hand, would be abjectly terrible without Sand Veil making it even remotely viable in OU. It has poor coverage, a mostly bad defensive typing, and mediocre stats at best. Sand Veil affords it the opportunity to sweep in some endgame scenarios, when it otherwise almost definitely would not get those opportunities.
However, it would be unfair not to acknowledge that most standard, well-built ADV OU teams are to an extent, vulnerable to both Gligar's and Cacturne's "snowball effects."
My personal opinion is that neither of these Mons is worth the opportunity cost required to spend a team slot on them. I consider it reckless teambuilding to rely on luck factors in your gameplan. People will counter by arguing that Sand Veil has no opportunity cost by virtue of being an Ability and not an item or moveslot. Which is technically correct, but it is still no different to me than using inaccurate moves in lieu of accurate ones (Thunder vs. Thunderbolt for example). You are trading reliability (say, an Actual Good Mon) for volatility. Opportunity cost.
I also acknowledge my bias which tends towards inclusivity (I dislike restriction in the teambuilder) and creativity (hot button term). If the playerbase discovers a new strategy that was underexplored in the past, then there's no reason that shouldn't be pushed in the teambuilder. Innovation is a great thing. Heck, people were pining for Spore Breloom's banishment barely 6 months ago. However, I think that the odds will even out over time and people will come to realize that neither Cacturne nor Gligar is worth bringing on a consistent basis. I have used Cacturne enough myself to know that it just plain isn't that great. It's a decent off-kilter pick, but not something I would expect consistent greatness out of.
All that being said, given the general consensus among ADV regulars, it is clear that the community wants at least a suspect test for Sand Veil. I support this decision to give the playerbase what it wants. Wherever you lie on the Sand Veil debate, I think everyone can find common ground in the sentiment that it is nothing if not annoying to play against.
Just a final thought - the line for what we deem to be competitive keeps getting pushed back. If Sand Veil gets banned, then you can bet your bottom dollar that the next version of Sand Veil will have people clamoring for its ban. Just give it enough time.
In competitive pokemon luck will always be an important factor. You can get flinched by rock slide, you can get frozen by Ice Beam, or your pokemon can be CHd drastically changing a game. This is something we have to accept, because it is the nature of the game we play. However, at the end of the day, the better players will be the most consistent and will win the majority of the games, because in spite of RNG potentially being able to change the outcome of a game, and one of the reasons is that the better players are also good at maximizing their odds of winning.
However, there are also some RNG elements that make the luck factor too big, and we get to the point where the winner of a game is decided by who had the better RNG, reducing the strategic element of the game and making the game boring as a player and as a spectator. Historically we have seen many examples of this in many gens: double team, ohko moves, swag play in later plays, etc are strategies that take the game away from the players hands and makes luck decide the winner of a game.
Sand Veil is an ability that boosts the evasion of a pokemon in the sand. In ADV OU, there is only one pokemon that can automatically permanently change the weather, and that's Tyranitar, the most used pokemon in the metagame, which means that sand is very easy to set up permanently and the only way to remove it is using a weather attack, so pokemons with Sand Veil will nearly always have +1 evasion, being able to avoid any attack.
The Sand Veil abusers are objectively not good pokemon, but in spite of that, that evasion boosts have allowed those kind of teams to be succesful in ladder and in tours, but also very inconsistent since a lot of the times they depend on Sand Veil giving them a free turn.
Now the question is: is sand veil in this environment an element that while adding more luck the game adds a greater strategic depth to the game, or is it an element that makes games too reliant to RNG? In my opinion it is the later, because at a very little cost (you lose nothing by running Sand Veil), you give yourself a good chance every turn to avoid any attack.
While Sand Veil is not broken or overpowered, it makes the games much more luck based, something I dislike seeing as a player and as a spectator, especially in a very balanced metagame like ADV OU. Since I believe that Sand Veil doesn't add anything to the metagame and it only adds luck and therefore reduces the strategic element game of the game with little to no cost I support a Sand Veil test and I would support a Sand Veil ban.
However, there are also some RNG elements that make the luck factor too big, and we get to the point where the winner of a game is decided by who had the better RNG, reducing the strategic element of the game and making the game boring as a player and as a spectator. Historically we have seen many examples of this in many gens: double team, ohko moves, swag play in later plays, etc are strategies that take the game away from the players hands and makes luck decide the winner of a game.
Sand Veil is an ability that boosts the evasion of a pokemon in the sand. In ADV OU, there is only one pokemon that can automatically permanently change the weather, and that's Tyranitar, the most used pokemon in the metagame, which means that sand is very easy to set up permanently and the only way to remove it is using a weather attack, so pokemons with Sand Veil will nearly always have +1 evasion, being able to avoid any attack.
The Sand Veil abusers are objectively not good pokemon, but in spite of that, that evasion boosts have allowed those kind of teams to be succesful in ladder and in tours, but also very inconsistent since a lot of the times they depend on Sand Veil giving them a free turn.
Now the question is: is sand veil in this environment an element that while adding more luck the game adds a greater strategic depth to the game, or is it an element that makes games too reliant to RNG? In my opinion it is the later, because at a very little cost (you lose nothing by running Sand Veil), you give yourself a good chance every turn to avoid any attack.
While Sand Veil is not broken or overpowered, it makes the games much more luck based, something I dislike seeing as a player and as a spectator, especially in a very balanced metagame like ADV OU. Since I believe that Sand Veil doesn't add anything to the metagame and it only adds luck and therefore reduces the strategic element game of the game with little to no cost I support a Sand Veil test and I would support a Sand Veil ban.
b. Sample Teams
https://pokepast.es/f7e22c6b59b6a851 - by ABR
https://pokepast.es/373509d6b65bd855 - by Vapicuno
https://pokepast.es/b7f6e61a8ef719fa - by McMeghan
c. Replays
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-495551 (BlazingDark v. ABR, Coronavirus Premier League III)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-500083 (ABR v. M Dragon, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-500581 (ABR v. Typhlito, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-500794 (ABR v. Kiichikos, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-501213 (ABR v. Pohjis, Coronavirus Premier League IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-503413 (tamahome v. thelinearcurve, ADV Cup VI)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-507894 (ABV v. rozes, Smogon Classic Playoffs)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-508899 (ABR v. Shortage, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-509059 (Kratosmana v. Eden, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-509069 (Kratosmana v. Eden, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-509334 (gorgie v. elodin, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-511016 (Soulwind v. z0mog, Callous Invitational IV)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522177 (rozes v. conflict, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522065 (fakes v. M Dragon, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522400 (star v. tricking, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522651 (malekith v. tamahome, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-522898 (excal v. zokuru, Permasand Invitational)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen3ou-523051 (TDK v. Tony, Permasand Invitational)
II. Process Considerations
a. Suspect test is appropriate because there was no substantial opposition to council action and no substantial support for a council-ban.
Last week we made a post stating that we planned to take action regarding Sand Veil in ADV OU. In that post, we solicited feedback on two major discussion points. First, ADV Stakeholders had the opportunity to show substantial opposition to the council taking action, thereby avoiding the council taking any action at all. Perhaps predictably, there was no opposition to the council taking action regarding Sand Veil. Therefore, we will proceed with the test. Second, ADV Stakeholders had the opportunity to show substantial support for a council-ban, or else a suspect test would be the presumptive course of action. There was minimal support for a council-ban, but the response was nowhere near substantial. In fact, the feedback posts seem to suggest that players may have a genuine difference of opinion as to whether Sand Veil should be banned in some capacity. Therefore, we will proceed with a suspect test and not a council-ban.
b. We will not be pursuing a complex ban.
We (the Council) were surprised by the suggestion and moderate support for a complex ban. We posted the preliminary thread under the presumption that if any action were to be taken, it would be to test Sand Veil the ability. Mushi Musha suggested complex banning Sand Veil and the move Substitute. Watermess suggested complex banning Sand Veil and set up moves. Conceivably, we could complex ban Sand Stream and Sand Veil on the same team. We thought these were clever solutions and thank you for the suggestions. However, after discussion, we have decided not to pursue a complex ban for the issue of Sand Veil in ADV OU.
We have three reasons for declining to pursue a complex ban. First, complex bans are "always something we seek to avoid if possible, especially if there is another low impact solution." That means there is an innate presumption in favor of simple bans, and in this case, banning Sand Veil the Ability is the simple, direct option. Moreover, the Council is of the view that banning Sand Veil is a low impact solution. Banning Sand Veil still allows Gligar in the metagame because it has a second ability. And, although banning Sand Veil will ban Cacturne by extension, we are doubtful that Cacturne would have a worthwhile use case if we could somehow preserve it through a complex ban.
Second, we find the approach in other OU tiers persuasive. DPP and BW OU are the closest generations to ADV, and battles in all three generations have consistent Sandstorm. Both DPP and BW OU have elected to ban Sand Veil the ability rather than any specific abuser or a complex ban. Although another generation's approach is not binding, we do not see a compelling reason to distinguish ADV OU from DPP and BW OU. The approach there has proven effective, so we expect it to be effective here too. Additionally, banning Sand Veil promotes a consistency of ruleset across generations, which may make Old Gens marginally more accessible to new players.
Last, a complex ban like the ones described in the preliminary thread would be without tiering precedent. There has never been an Ability + Move complex ban like Sand Veil + Substitute. There was an instance of Ability + Ability in the form of Aldaron's Proposal (banning Drizzle and Swift Swim on the same team), but that approach has generally been criticized as a big mistake that would not be repeated if the issue surfaced today. Pursuing an unprecedented complex ban risks unintended future consequences like re-tests, increases the inherent complexity of the rules, and is likely to be politically unpopular in the community.
c. We will not be addressing Gligar separately.
Before we move on, we want to address the idea of banning Gligar instead, or in addition, to Sand Veil. We will not be pursuing this option. We believe Gligar and Cacturne feature the same fundamental playstyle that forms the basis of arguments for uncompetitive-ness (specifically, using Substitute to fish for a miss, and then setting up a Swords Dance or a Leech Seed loop). Even if Gligar is more potent, we believe that fishing for misses in this manner is either competitive or it isn't, irrespective of the Pokemon performing the strategy. Therefore, we do not believe that Gligar and Cacturne should be treated differently in this process. Additionally, there is no major official ADV tournament between now and Smogon Premier League, which lessens the imperative for a quick council-ban on Gligar, as suggested by ABR.
d. We decline to take up the issue of Bright Powder at this time.
Callous initiated some discussion of Bright Powder as it relates to taking action on Sand Veil. We will not be taking action on Bright Powder at this point in time. While we are sympathetic to the fundamental similarities, there are some differences (like Ability vs. Item, and magnitude of miss chance) that can justify separate treatment. If Bright Powder ever becomes a common strategy and there is a clear call for action from the ADV Community, then we will address it similarly to how we are addressing Sand Veil here. Until then, Bright Powder will remain a useable item choice.
III. Test Parameters
Regarding Sand Veil, voters will have the option to vote between:
1. Ban Sand Veil.
2. Do not ban Sand Veil.
Ban requirement: 60%+ in favor of banning Sand Veil.
The vote will open on November 10, 2020.
The tournament-based qualifications are as follows. For SPL, voters must have played at least six ADV games OR won at least three games. For ADV Cup, we will take the top eight. For Callous Invitational IV, the top 16 finishers qualify. For ADV Circuit Championship 2020, we will take the current top five. Under these requirements, the following players qualify.
SPL: Blightbringer [forum banned], Tamahome, pasy_g [forum banned], Glibert Arenas, CyberOdin, Alexander., z0mog, BKC
ADV Cup: Dizno, dice, thelinearcurve, Fakes, Mana, FMG, undisputed, Tamahome
Callous Invitation IV: thelinearcurve, undisputed, Mana, McMeghan, Hclat, Starmaster, Tamahome, UD, ABR, Astamatitos, M Dragon, PDC, Fear, Golden Sun, roystopror, Soulwind
ADV Circuit Championship 2020: thelinearcurve, undisputed, Djokra, Winterains, Tamahome
Unique voters (27): thelinearcurve, undisputed, Ban Manaphy, McMeghan, Hclat, Starmaster, Tamahome, UD, ABR, Astamatitos, M Dragon, PDC, Fear, Golden Sun, Shortage, Soulwind, BKC, Dizno, FMG, Djokra, Winterains, Gilbert Arenas, CyberOdin, Alexander. z0mog, dice, Fakes
We want to preemptively address the use of Callous Invitational IV as a qualification standard. Callous Invitational is (and has been for the past four years) the biggest and most prestigious ADV event of the year. And, as it pertains to Sand Veil, Callous Invitational is the most recent ADV event which makes the experience of players there uniquely relevant. We do not see a compelling reason not to include Callous Invitational simply because it is not literally hosted on Smogon.com. It is full of players who regularly compete on Smogon and played according to Smogon rules. The decision to use Callous Invitational as a tournament qualification for this vote does not necessarily mean we will use it again in the future, but as the biggest, most prestigious, and most recent ADV OU tournament, we believe using it for this test is merited.
The Council is satisfied with this sample of voters as is, but we still want to offer other players another way to qualify if they wish to participate. Given that there is no major ADV tournament between now and Smogon Premier League, we see no harm is taking a little extra time with this vote.
To qualify via the ladder, players must reach 1500+ ELO and 85% GXE simultaneously. No game cap. Please use the following prefix at the start of your alt: ADVSV. The ladder window will last for two weeks 10/26 - 11/9. Submit requirements to the identification thread any time you fulfill them.
IV. Conclusion
While the ladder qualification is under way, our hope is that participants will use this thread (and accompanying RoA thread) to discuss their position on Sand Veil. Thanks for reading.
Last edited: