Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]

[crippled_LateNightTV]

Banning tera

This is the best and least controversial solution, only casuals would get pissed about it but they're playing a different game anyways so who cares. The meta can develop and we can see what stands out better without factoring in X changing type to overcome X. I will say using the term 'counter' has been a fucking joke for years and everything just checks one another, but its too dangerous to check anything rn especially vs. snowbally HO comps where 1 hole in your team can be the entire game and if your defensive mon you've been preserving for an offensive threat gets cheesed by the boosted STABs now 2HKOing it or destroyed by a now STAB coverage move you're just too fucked.

I agree since the entire tera form seemed like no attempt was taken to balance it and was simply built to "spice up the formula" and provide an excuse for GameFreak to claim that they modified the main purpose of the game. Furthermore, it reduces a game involving strategy and forecasting your opponents' actions and team building to a fucking guessing game. The risk-reward ratio is also unfavourable, as it appears that putting on a defensive terra type on a 2x dragon dance garchomp is all you need to climb in OU. It also doesn't help that these new pokemon are just designed to disrupt the meta in an irritating way, such as glimmora with its toxic debris ,shed tail cyclizar or even greavard,and how each of them can sweep with little to none set up, making this gen's OU as the same as gen 8 and how you have to counters to these pokemons or your fucked.

Also the whole STAB inclusion is just plain stupid and it should be completety removed

 

[RaikouLover]

Outright ban. It is too complicated for my feeble brain. No, this isn’t sarcasm. I don’t want to plan for every different typing of borderline broken mons as it is.

 

[RoyalDispenser]

Please correct me if I am misinterpreting your reasoning, but by this logic isn't banning Terastillization also a failure of cartridge simulation? I don't see how agreeing to not use a generational mechanic is really different from agreeing to tell each other tera types beforehand. Both are a Showdown-forced implementation of an additional rule that two people could easily agree to follow in a cartridge battle.

Showdown automatically would show tera types.

Cartridge would only be replicatable by discord or social media users, and local groups.

If we did something like with BDSP (one 'smogon' link battle code everyone queues for to filter the little timmies) as a cartridge queue for competitive smogon players off-ladder, there's no way to replicate the share tera type part because you can't contact who you queued against even if you're both in the same discord community, neither of you know who each other are.

Basically we would either have to tell cart users to go fuck themselves that they don't matter unless they are in smogon's discord or playing in someone's twitch stream, or outright ban which seems to be the healthier decision anyway and prevents the controversy between the platforms.

 

[chimp]

That's fair but keep in mind smogon's policies are to create what can be replicated on cart. Randomness in queues are always going to be a factor, but unless you're in a cart tournament there's no way to handshake on tera types or mod in a solution to it.

Its the same thing as sleep clause; if you break it on cart, someone considers it as you forfeiting the game, showdown's only mod is making it so that automatically happens, you can either just leave the game on cart to replicate that or play it out and call it a win regardless for yourself. In random queue you can mentally choose your rules and what you can call a win for the opponent breaking them, in discord queue you both mutually agree on the format so its unlikely to be broken.

Tera types you can't do that, you can make it out as them forfeiting if they use tera, but you can't say they're forfeiting by not giving you the types because how can they? This only works through discord, local, or other social media queueing where you can handshake share tera type charts and write them down.

Smogon’s policies are to create what can be replicated on cart between two players who agree to follow smogon rulesets beforehand*

If I jump into a WiFi battle against some random player than I cant reasonably assume they are going to follow smogon rulesets. We shouldnt be deciding policy based on how random WiFi battles will be affected.

 

[Duckstroyer]

Smogon’s policies are to create what can be replicated on cart between two players who agree to follow smogon rulesets beforehand*

If I jump into a WiFi battle against some random player than I cant reasonably assume they are going to follow smogon rulesets. We shouldnt be deciding policy based on how random WiFi battles will be affected.

Slight correction. There is no way to play with Sleep Clause in game, as a brief example. (Sans just never clicking the sleep move in the first place). It is not on cartable even with agreement of smogon ruleset.

Edit: Just going to edit my post to respond as to not clog thread. But there is a situation where you click the sleep move again if you think the opponent will wake up on that turn. To "refresh" the sleep turns as they wake up. This is not "extremely uncommon" or even niche

 

[Jumbuff]

Showdown automatically would show tera types.

Cartridge would only be replicatable by discord or social media users, and local groups.

If we did something like with BDSP (one 'smogon' link battle code everyone queues for to filter the little timmies) as a cartridge queue for competitive smogon players off-ladder, there's no way to replicate the share tera type part because you can't contact who you queued against even if you're both in the same discord community, neither of you know who each other are.

Basically we would either have to tell cart users to go fuck themselves that they don't matter unless they are in smogon's discord or playing in someone's twitch stream, or outright ban which seems to be the healthier decision anyway and prevents the controversy between the platforms.

So this isn't a concern about Smogon maintaining fidelity to what cart players can achieve with a gentleman's agreement? It's a concern about the effect that this will have on cart players doing off-ladder tournaments that follow Smogon rulesets and don't have ways for players to exchange information? Just want to make sure I understand properly, since I frankly didn't even know tournaments like that even existed.

 

[Zentrius]

Please correct me if I am misinterpreting your reasoning, but by this logic isn't banning Terastillization also a failure of cartridge simulation? I don't see how agreeing to not use a generational mechanic is really different from agreeing to tell each other tera types beforehand. Both are a Showdown-forced implementation of an additional rule that two people could easily agree to follow in a cartridge battle.


It isn't really like changing game code to make Dynamax last only one turn. That would be more like if someone suggested we keep tera but remove the same-type adaptability boost, or modify the game so they lose STAB on their old typing. I would not suggest either of those things, but they aren't really comparable to a type reveal.

banning terastillization is NOT a failure of cartridge simulation...? if tera were ever to be banned, thats because the mechanic as a whole was it was intended to work in game is broken and just has too much bearing on the smogon metagame and we just straigt up ban it and don't use it in battles; were not modifying shit, we are just straight up removing it from ever being used in singles. something existing in-game and smogon banning it as a response due to brokeness/uncompetitiveness is NOT failing to respect the cartridge.

modifying the terastillization in simulator to show the tera types in team preview IS modifying the mechanic. one BIG thing about the mechanic itself is the unpredictability of what types your opponent could potentially be using on their team, removing this unpredictability factor kinda defeats the purpose of the mechanic itself and might as well be just banned. you CAN do this by implementing this as a gentleman agreement by not modifying the code at all, which is fine, but then you fall into the inpracticality of literally telling your opponent every single time you battle on showdown ur team's tera types and this sounds messy to me and very annoying to deal with.

i really dont think i have much else to add; mi takes is that you either ban the mechanic as a whole, or you don't do anything. restricting tera to same stab type, showing tera types in team preview, etc. is not how the mechanic was designed originally and turns into something different.

 

[RoyalDispenser]

Smogon’s policies are to create what can be replicated on cart between two players who agree to follow smogon rulesets beforehand*

If I jump into a WiFi battle against some random player than I cant reasonably assume they are going to follow smogon rulesets. We shouldnt be deciding policy based on how random WiFi battles will be affected.

And again, BDSP queues did that, that's why the link code existed to try and filter randoms who didn't agree with smogon's ruleset. There was still often mutual gentlemen's agreements not to bring X or do X in PSS 3DS days as well as SWSH IME, but there is the battle link code communities that do filter most cases of those rule breakers so that it does properly replicate smogon's rules.

If the player in that link code failed those rules, just like sleep clause, you just automatically assume it as them forfeiting. That is replicatable and fair and why the sleep clause mod auto ends the game for you (although IMO optioning to play it out would've been more faithful but meh).

This cannot be done with tera at all unless you *do* communicate before the match is even found, you can communicate during team preview on showdown, you cannot communicate in such queues even if queueing in them is in itself two players attempting to agree to follow smogon rulesets, its just not an option to have battle link codes and tera type clause working in unison.

So this isn't a concern about Smogon maintaining fidelity to what cart players can achieve with a gentleman's agreement? It's a concern about the effect that this will have on cart players doing off-ladder tournaments that follow Smogon rulesets and don't have ways for players to exchange information? Just want to make sure I understand properly, since I frankly didn't even know tournaments like that even existed.

Yeah that's a fair way to take it.

In BDSP there were link code communites (say, you want to do OU battles, everyone can put in link code: 1234 and it'll queue against other players that do 1234 as well, so smogon players would share the same code to essentially randomly queue up on cart, this would remove most of the in-game team/casual playerbase breaking said rules bar a few trolls using the code but never seen them personally.).

So modding the "show tera types" implies we'd have to figure a way to share said types, which as you said, isn't always possible to exchange which severely limits how cart users can play the game. Only way would be if you did it via the smogon discord, twitch chat with the streamer, twitter DMs, in-person community tournaments, etc etc.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

Slight correction. There is no way to play with Sleep Clause in game, as a brief example. (Sans just never clicking the sleep move in the first place). It is not on cartable even with agreement of smogon ruleset.

Or you just only click your sleep move if they don't have any sleeping mons. Sure, there's fringe cases that the Sleep Mod allows that can't be done on cart, but such situations are extremely rare.

 

[solstardragon]

I'd much prefer an outright ban (ideally with a different ladder for Tera), or it not being touched at all. I feel like adding new mechanics to 'balance' Tera moves the battle simulator away from being a simulator and into something different ala "Pokemon; Smogon Version". Clauses, up until this point, are all very reasonable bans on moves or playstyles that would inhibit the ladder from being enjoyable that could also easily translate into cartridge play, where as changing how team preview works would be like changing the % chance Scald has to burn something... it fundamentally alters the balance of what should be an accurate Pokemon simulator.

 

[gvon]

As someone who has been trying to get back into smogon ou since the end of gen vi where i was super active during gen v and vi, I think its an acceptable mechanic if each player has a setting for their user name where you check a box "show Tera types" and if they match up with a player who also has the same checkbox checked, then both players are able to each others Tera types for each mon. If one of the players does not have it checked, then neither side is able to see the other's Tera types. At least this would signify some sort of gentleman's agreement automatically and I don't think there would be an issue with coding it either. This would avoid any sort of communication during the match and would save time if selecting it at the start of the match. This is just my opinion but I hope my logic isn't super faulty.

 

[Duckstroyer]

As someone who has been trying to get back into smogon ou since the end of gen vi where i was super active during gen v and vi, I think its an acceptable mechanic if each player has a setting for their user name where you check a box "show Tera types" and if they match up with a player who also has the same checkbox checked, then both players are able to each others Tera types for each mon. If one of the players does not have it checked, then neither side is able to see the other's Tera types. At least this would signify some sort of gentleman's agreement automatically and I don't think there would be an issue with coding it either. This would avoid any sort of communication during the match and would save time if selecting it at the start of the match. This is just my opinion but I hope my logic isn't super faulty.

The issue with this is mismatch on ladder rankings, and a non deterministic way to play in tournament. Say I went through the entire ladder without that checked, and never had to reveal my Tera. That would be an entirely different gameplay experience than someone who checked the box and played with revealed Tera types.

Also, then would tournaments have that button? Or would we have to ban/unban tera for each tournament? It's just too complicated.

Better to have separate ladders if this is the conclusion imo

 

[chimp]

And again, BDSP queues did that, that's why the link code existed to try and filter randoms who didn't agree with smogon's ruleset. There was still often mutual gentlemen's agreements not to bring X or do X in PSS 3DS days as well as SWSH IME, but there is the battle link code communities that do filter most cases of those rule breakers so that it does properly replicate smogon's rules.

If the player in that link code failed those rules, just like sleep clause, you just automatically assume it as them forfeiting. That is replicatable and fair and why the sleep clause mod auto ends the game for you (although IMO optioning to play it out would've been more faithful but meh).

This cannot be done with tera at all unless you *do* communicate before the match is even found, you can communicate during team preview on showdown, you cannot communicate in such queues even if queueing in them is in itself two players attempting to agree to follow smogon rulesets, its just not an option to have battle link codes and tera type clause working in unison.



Yeah that's a fair way to take it.

In BDSP there were link code communites (say, you want to do OU battles, everyone can put in link code: 1234 and it'll queue against other players that do 1234 as well, so smogon players would share the same code to essentially randomly queue up on cart, this would remove most of the in-game team/casual playerbase breaking said rules bar a few trolls using the code but never seen them personally.).

So modding the "show tera types" implies we'd have to figure a way to share said types, which as you said, isn't always possible to exchange which severely limits how cart users can play the game. Only way would be if you did it via the smogon discord, twitch chat with the streamer, twitter DMs, in-person community tournaments, etc etc.

Ok, I see. But Im not convinced that matters. I can’t imagine that the playerbase using Link Codes is that large. Even if it was, its not an official Smogon related system…. So there is no onus on Smogon to particularly care about this. The priority of Smogon is on official Smogon tournaments hosted on its website and Pokemon Showdown ladders. We can’t establish something beyond that scope.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

Now that I'm home from work, I have time to collect my full thoughts.

I've been playing competitively since gen 6, and had the most fun with gen 7, even hitting top 300 on the ladder in gen 7 OU at one point. Gen 8 very nearly killed my love of competitive pokemon with Dynamax and how utterly broken it was. Terastalization has, if anything, reignited my absolute love for this game. I think that Terastalization is uniquely difficult to judge in an early meta, because the chaos of every mon being unknown, and now having such wide versatility, it leaves us with a metagame that's extremely hard to follow. I do not think this is Terastalization's fault though. Once the metagame settles and people start finding the optimal sets, reading and preparing for Terastalization will be much easier.

Limiting it to one pokemon leaves us with a mechanic so thoroughly neutered and limited that half the utility of the mechanic is gone. If you have to preselect your Tera mon, you need to choose between an offensive one, and a defensive one from the start. The offensive one is FAR superior in this scenario. There's no reason to use your only Tera slot for defense when you could use it to press your offensive. There's a reason Megas like Slowbro and Audino sucked. You're wasting your only slot on something that's only situationally useful. This option leaves the mechanic as basically worse Megas.

Limiting it only STAB types removes ALL defensive utility. It doesn't address any issue people have with it, and reduces it to worse Z-moves.

Revealing the types is the only restriction that makes sense, and even that has issues, like feinting sets. If it MUST be restricted, this is the only one I'd prefer to an outright ban, as it leaves Terastalization with its unique identity intact.

An outright ban is absolutely not warranted. At least, not yet. We are 8 days into the meta. Even doing it in December with a multiple week suspect test isn't long enough. With a mechanic as complex and game-changing as this, we won't be able to see whether or not it's actually broken for at least a few months, due to how much more the chaos of a new meta affects this mechanic as opposed to other ones. If we do go for an outright ban, ideally I'd like to see a separate tier for Terastalization to be allowed.

I haven't seen any point that's pro-ban that I agree with at all. I don't think it requires any action, but if an action gets taken, the only one worth considering is showing the Tera types.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

As someone who has been trying to get back into smogon ou since the end of gen vi where i was super active during gen v and vi, I think its an acceptable mechanic if each player has a setting for their user name where you check a box "show Tera types" and if they match up with a player who also has the same checkbox checked, then both players are able to each others Tera types for each mon. If one of the players does not have it checked, then neither side is able to see the other's Tera types. At least this would signify some sort of gentleman's agreement automatically and I don't think there would be an issue with coding it either. This would avoid any sort of communication during the match and would save time if selecting it at the start of the match. This is just my opinion but I hope my logic isn't super faulty.

This is shortsighted at best. People who want to see the Tera types would just get screwed in this idea, while having the idea that they're being appeased dangled in front of them. This halfsies action would just not work for anyone.

 

[ant4456]

To summarize my thoughts from the metagame discussion thread, I really like terastallization and think it is competitive as is. I don't think the variance it creates is any more than previous mechanics like Z moves, hidden power, random resist berries or sashes, or even any metagame pre team preview. I appreciate the team synergy opportunities the mechanic grants as well. I accept the criticisms of the mechanic, I just don't think they're as big a deal as people are saying. I also think that we will get better at scouting tera types as the metagame evolves. So a lot of the frustration I think people are having is temporary.

It seems a lot of the people who lean in my direction have already stated why they think so so I won't relitigate that here unless people ask.

Instead, I want to push back a bit on this idea that terastallization encourages short term thinking. In my experience I don't actually find this to be true.

On the ladder, I've found myself in situations like this all the time:

It's, say, my Gholdengo against an opposing Great Tusk. I've got tera flying on Gholdengo so I greedily click it, avoid headlong rush, and do a decent chunk to Great Tusk with Shadow Ball. Cool, yes, I've won this interaction. I've made the play that puts me ahead for this specific turn. But then, later on, I still lose, because another member of my team needed the extra damage boost from tera to actually break through the opposing team. Plus, since I used my tera first, my opponent can actually tera something more relevant and threatening, because they know I can't tera anything else again.

I feel like if tera was such a short-term mechanic, the best strategy would almost always be to tera at the first opportunity it's any good, but I really don't think this is the case. I find myself thinking of tera a lot more like a resource that needs strategy to learn when to spend than something greedy.

If we're talking about making a "competitive" metagame, where we define "competitive" as a game where the player with the better preparation, strategy, and decision-making almost always wins, I actually think that all the proposed decisions, from no action to modifying to outright banning will lead to a competitive metagame. I don't get the sense that I can play like shit, click tera when it's obviously beneficial, and then win. I also don't get the sense that removing tera will make the game uncompetitive.

The only action I would support are no action or tera on team preview. Banning tera blast is pointless I feel. Trying to restrict the number of Pokemon that can use it is artificial and hacky. Only allowing previous stab tera actually makes the mechanic way more one dimensional and offensive.

Basically if we're going to make substantial changes to the mechanic just to bend over backwards to keep it, we might as well just ban it. And if it does get banned I will probably just spend more time grinding battle spot singles and VGC than the Smogon ladders.

TL;DR banning tera is "competitive" but uninteresting. Keeping or lightly modifying tera makes the game more interesting and strategic, at the cost of a bit more variance than gen8.

Honestly, I feel like if Z-Moves was Pokemon's attempt at making a fighting game "ultimate move", it felt kinda generic.

To me, Tera feels like an ult-like resource that is only really able to be done in Pokemon.

 

[Bold School]

I have seen a lot of talk of unpredictability and metaphorical or literal 50/50s so far in this thread, but relatively little talk about the elephant in the room of the increased power with zero opportunity cost. This meta essentially requires you have to treat all of your opponent's pokemon as the unholy spawn between gen 6 Greninja and Porygon-Z, but with more like Ash-Greninja stats. I agree with people who say it's simply too punishing to get anything Tera related wrong because the game is so offensive that's generally just a loss. But what people aren't saying is the pokemon can often just brute force their way past with double STAB after not too much chip regardless. You can get the predictions right and still be overpowered.

This is what happened with the pokemon that were banned,. They were the most blatant, yet far from the only pokemon who can do this. The other thing a lot of people aren't talking about as much as they should be is priority moves. Aside from the rare exceptions like Dragonite, which has Extreme Speed at twice the BP and priority level to make up for it, nearly every abuser of priority have it as access to double STAB. Scizor, Breloom, Talonflame, multiple Aqua Jets mons who could be used in rain, etc. They all get double STAB x ability multiplier x item multiplier. These things hit hard and fast and it's just very difficult to deal with it.

I'm also a bit miffed at people who claim this generational gimmick of Terastallization is somehow more fair or less broken than any of the previous ones. Nope! No shot. Z moves and Mega Evolutions required an item slot and in general had much more strict regulations to the point where Smogon was actually able to handle a metagame with both of them at once. Dynamax was dumb, but even that had a 3 turn limit. If you could find a way to mitigate the 3 turns of monster mode and the incoming stat boost sweep, you could minimize it somewhat. It likely would have been a lot more manageable if it required an item like in previous gens.

On the other hand, there's no minimizing Terastallization. There are no turn limits or item requirements on Terastallization. You don't even lose the benefits if you switch out, unlike with Dynamax. We also didn't see the strongest priority moves in pokemon history from Dynamax.

I really hope this community will vote whether to ban this or not based on the actual merits of the mechanic instead of it being a de facto popularity contest. I've seen a lot of people who talk about how "fun" they think this mechanic is or how much they like it, but this is merely subjective opinion. As far as balance goes, this is obviously the most broken mechanic yet and it's not close. I get that it sucks when Smogon needs to ban a generational gimmick, but the precedent was set in gen 8. And for those of you who voted against Dynamax without trying harder to make it work because you didn't like it or whatever you thought, you don't get to come on here now and tell us to keep Tera or try harder to make it work because you do like it. No, no. The precedent has been set and broken mechanics get banned because this is what you wanted in gen 8.

Hypocrites aside, I DO want to try to make Terrastalizing work because it is fun and it always sucks to ban a generational gimmick. I even somewhat agree with those who have said it promotes more creative teambuilding. I'm not very optimistic about it, though, because the gimmick is objectively busted.

As for the suggested solutions, Tera Blast is mid so I don't see banning it helping much. Limiting Tera to one pokemon option is cute, but honestly will just lead to people using the most cracked offensive threats and defenses still not being good enough because the means you have to check the offensive Tera with defensive Tera options that just became -5. Limiting the Tera type to what matches the STAB is actually backwards, because it takes all the creativity out of the mechanic for the free Adaptability boost. The extra multiplier is the real problem anyway. These solutions are regressive and I'm against all of them.

I like the idea of showing tera type as a solution to help with the unpredictability, but this far from addresses all of that. Nor does it address the issue of raw power in all the bonus multipliers. I think you'd have to do some sort of multifaceted, overly complex ban in order to bring Terastallization down to acceptable levels and I don't know if that's what anyone should really want. However, I'm going to try anyway because I feel like we should at least give it a better shot to make it work than we gave to Dynamax. So my multifacted solution is as follows:

1. Do the team preview thing with Tera to make the prediction somewhat more manageable.

2. Take away double STAB multipliers with items to limit the brute force problem.

I don't know if you just make it so items deactivate when you Tera or you make all Tera STAB only single STAB, or you have some sort of a complex item clause where you cannot Tera if you have an item or whatever version of that which prevents in the most cartridge friendly way possible. But I don't think anything will change until you get rid of the free Adaptability boost x item multiplier nonsense. And honestly, that sucks because the legit creative parts of Tera are being overshadowed by brute force and poor game design.

 

[LilBenjii]

Terastallization in its current state is unbalanced and uncompetitive. I am confident that the discussion from this post will lead to that conclusion if it hasn't already. However, I am also confident in saying the majority of players here enjoy Terastallizing as a mechanic, even ones who recognize how broken it is. I think it is also necessary to keep in mind the subgroup of Pokemon Showdown players participating in this discussion. I wish I had a more elegant way of putting this, but think about what hearing only from this subgroup might mean.

With that being said, I think it is in the overwhelming majority's best interest to at least attempt a tier where Terastallizing is restricted before we jump to banning it.

What makes Terastallization an enjoyable mechanic?
The answer to this question should heavily influence how we go about creating restrictions for Terastallization. What is the point of restricting a mechanic if you kill the appeal of the mechanic itself? At that point, it would be more sensible and easier to outright ban it. We want to preserve the fun aspects of Terastallizing that are fun and push the metagame towards a more balanced and competitive environment. So what are the aspects of Terastallization should we aim to keep?

The surprise factor of Terastallization can be so exciting. It would be a mistake to ruin this aspect by showing what Tera type each pokemon is on preview. The ability to bait a check and remove it through Terastallizing feels amazing. The idea of holding your Terastallization adds a whole new layer to the mind games during a battle. The problem is that Terastallization is so unpredictable right now, even the best players cannot account for every possible situation that Terrastallization creates.

Therefore, we need to restrict the mechanic in a way that doesn't completely limit this surprise factor.

There are other aspects of Terastallization that make it a fun mechanic. For example, it has the potential to enable so many ideas in the teambuilder. You often have multiple viable options for your Tera-type on any given pokemon. It feels personal in a way. You can have your own unique playstyle. Tera Blast also enables pokemon with little coverage to become real viable threats.

My Thoughts on Current Proposed Restrictions
Showing Tera Types on Preview: Against
This proposed restriction sacrifices the fun aspects of Terastallization in exchange for balance. Boring. All this restriction will do is widen the gap between the strongest abusers and the rest. It would completely limit the creativity and skill expression possible. The whole layer of mind games added by holding your Terrastallization to bait your opponent into blowing needed checks for a late game sweep is removed. Baiting checks wouldn't even be possible.

Banning Tera Blast: Strongly Against
This is the worst proposal by far. It once again would widen the gap between pokemon who can abuse Terastallization and those who can't. This also heavily encourages the use of same type Terastallizing, which is, in my opinion, the most boring and arguably one of the less balanced aspects of Terastallization.

Limiting Tera Types to STAB Types: Strongly Against
Oh helll nah

Limiting Number of Pokemon Terastallization is Available To: Against
This proposed restriction would balance Terastallization and also keep the fun aspects to a degree. However, I feel like this restriction would force a meta where there are a handful of Terastallization abusers that every team will be built around. It would be a less viable decision to use Tera-Fire Hatterene because Scizor won't be on every team. You would rather just use an objectively strong abuser of Terastallization like Tera-Ghost Dragapult because of its consistency.

New Proposal
Remember, "we are working under the premise that if any restriction does get implemented and the mechanic still proves problematic afterwards, then at this point we would be far more likely to cut any losses and not try any further restrictions, but rather an outright ban". We need Terastallization to be balanced the first time around.

Limiting the pokemon able to Terastallize to one makes sense. It would reduce the brokenness of picking and choosing what Tera-type you need based on each game. While this proposal would do little to reduce the 50/50 mind games brought on by Terastallization, the amount of times these 50/50s can actually occur would be less. There are two issues this restriction brings though:

1. It overly encourages players to build around the top handful Terastallization abusers.
2. It still leads to impossible situations where you have no choice but to guess the opponents Tera-type. (Ex: You have a choice to revenge Chien-Pao with Scizor or Breloom. If it's Tera-Fire and you send out Scizor first, you lose Scizor. If it's Tera-Fairy and you send out Breloom first, you lose Breloom.)

I think that merging that merging this restriction and showing the Tera-type on team preview may be our best option. The catch is that you wouldn't be able to see which pokemon can Terastallize.

- It would preserve the aspect of unpredictability.
- Impossible situations wouldn't exist anymore either. No more 50/50s into Chien-Pao. If you have a Scizor and a Breloom, and their Tera-type is Fairy, you can be damn sure who you are sending out. And at the very least, you would have the ability to minimize risk.
- Seeing the chosen Tera-type but not which pokemon it's on means people need to get creative in the teambuilder. (Ex: Tera-Ghost as the chosen type. The team consists of Grimmsnarl, Cyclizar, Hatterene, Chi-Yu, Roaring Moon, Dragapult. Really Dragapult is the only abuser of Tera-Ghost here, but then as you go to revenge Roaring Moon, it Terastallizes. Another example: Tera-Fire as the chosen type, same team. The Tera-Fire dissuades you from bringing in Scizor on Hatterene. Instead, Hatterene is actually running Giga-Drain, and makes progress early into less-optimal checks because Scizor couldn't come out. Then, late-game, Scizor comes in to revenge Roaring Moon only to find out that it was the Tera-Fire pokemon.)
- Overall, I feel as this restriction balances Terastallization to a more competitive standard, while also preserving the themes of what makes Terastallization so fun. Sure, you can no longer effortlessly bait in a check that your pokemon had no business beating, but now you can bait your opponent in other ways. This change would open up a new level of complexity in games that would reward creative teambuilding and give more opportunities for skill expression.

This is not a finalized proposal by any means, but I do think this is heading in the right direction.

 

[furyofyuriy]

Limiting it only STAB types removes ALL defensive utility. It doesn't address any issue people have with it, and reduces it to worse Z-moves.

I am replying to this solely too highlight this talking point that I agree with. The mechanic is designed with ALL pokemon in mind. Even with preconceived connotations that gamefreak does not care about 6v6, the last generation has proved that they care about the competitive scene. There is next to no utility for defensive mons like Toxipex or Blissey to opt to use the mechanic this way. This can only be seen as a buff to hyper offensive mons. Now I am by no means in favor of stall teams, however their contribution is vital to meta games in some capacity. Of course there are going to be mons that utilize this poorly, but to outright deny pokemon that can in favor of offensive mons is not only uncompetitive, but frankly un-sportsman like to other styles of team building. Any major deviation from the cart mechanic skews in favor of offensive threats, even with the tera type preview. And as I have stated in other posts, Terastilzing isn't a magic win button. Even if your Pokemon can tera into a new type, that doesnt mean it can into a type that can change the outcome of the game.

The biggest argument against terasilization is that "any mon can become one of 18 types, so how can I beat that?" Counter point, any mon can become one of 18 types but that doesn't mean the correct one was brought to win the game. Dynamax gave the pokemon bulk, Mega's gave defensive/speed buffs to handle a situation, but terastilziation gives neither. Your speed tier doesnt change and neither do your stats. In an extreme example, if you are stareing down a +6 DD Garchomp because you let it get that far, no tera type is going to save you by itself. Those complaining about the mechanic forget that you need to actual pre plan what tera type you are bringing before the game begins. And wouldn't you know it, if someone keeps bringing a tera type that makes them lose, they correct it for a tera type that gets them wins. And what happens when a specific set keeps resurfacing because it is performing well? This is called a Meta game. We are no where near a meta yet, and while a decision may not be made until December frankly thats still to short a time to make proper calls on a new mechanic no one has used before.

 

[Duckstroyer]

I think that merging that merging this restriction and showing the Tera-type on team preview may be our best option. The catch is that you wouldn't be able to see which pokemon can Terastallize.

To clarify, are you suggesting that over your player's name you have a type assigned to your team? Like I would select Fairy from the teambuilder and that is the type I can tera as in game, and then select the mon which will be tera-ing in teambuilder. Or are you suggesting that you can see each and every individual mon's tera type, but have to select one specific mon from teambuilder?

Also, are you suggesting the "Tera mon" is something that is decided in teambuilder, or decided during team preview?

 

[LilBenjii]

To clarify, are you suggesting that over your player's name you have a type assigned to your team? Like I would select Fairy from the teambuilder and that is the type I can tera as in game, and then select the mon which will be tera-ing in teambuilder. Or are you suggesting that you can see each and every individual mon's tera type, but have to select one specific mon from teambuilder?

Also, are you suggesting the "Tera mon" is something that is decided in teambuilder, or decided during team preview?

I'm not really sure what you are trying to say.

I'm suggesting you select both the type and which pokemon can tera in the teambuilder.

 

[quziel]

Yo, here with some cracked suggestions.

1) Mono Tera: You only get one tera typing for the entire team, its shown on preview, but any mon on your team can tera at any time.

Fairly simple one, this allows you the flexibility to Tera any mon on your team for defensive purposes at any point, while also allowing for builds that focus on Tera-ing a sweeper of choice at a certain point. Downsides are that it keeps the 50/50s, albeit heavily restrained because the number of potential Tera options is one, for the whole team.

2) Useless Item Tera: You must be holding a specific (useless) item, eg Tart Apple, to Tera.

This was suggested by ABR in the other thread, but this basically simulates Z-moves by forcing you to give up your otherwise incredibly useful item slot for what is basically a combo of a Gem + Resist Berry. This allows for teams that have multiple Tera options, but also heavily disincentives them, and allows you to scout which mons could be a Tera user by checking for boots, lefties, etc. Downsides such as basically denying Tera from mons like Volc are included in this suggestion (ish), but its relatively simple to implement, and would definitely add a major opportunity cost to using Terastalization.

3) Purely Defensive Tera: Your Tera typing cannot match that of any attacks you have on your current moveset.

One of the things that ik some people sorta like is the potential to use Tera to open up new defensive options. This sorta keeps it as a purely defensive option by completely removing the offensive components of the mechanic. This does still allow for stuff like Tera-Water Annihilape dodging SE hits, but hey, Tera-Flying GargaNaCl is still up. I really don't dislike this one, but the maligned 50/50s are still around.

4) Announcing Tera: You have to say you're going to tera next turn, and if you don't, you forfeit your ability to tera the entire game.

This basically gets rid of the 50/50 element almost completely, as if you try to use the announcement to force an opponent to misplay, then you just straight up lose access for the entire game. This is heavily in house rule territory, but hey, these are cracked suggestions for a reason.

----

Edit: While it absolutely opens up a can of worms, as you can see by the above, I'm very much so ok with allowing a complex ban in order to allow for a generations gimmick to stay a bit longer. There's obviously limits here depending on how insane the gimmick is, but these sorta define each gen, and also are balanced for doubles not singles. Hence keeping them around requires a bit of weird ruling. That said, Tera's quite fun, and mons is a game we play for fun.

 

[furyofyuriy]

every argument in favor of terrastalization is just saying that it can be fun to use it or the same bullshit points we saw being used to defend dynamaxing a few years ago. just ban ithink. limiting it to types that the pokemon already has is alright too, i would not mind that

You clearly have not read this thread or are willfully ignoring discussions made by the other camp. Either way, Dynamax and Terastilization are as different as night and day, comparing the two is beyond ignorant. Dynamax provided the user with double their health stat, boosting mini nukes and terrain/weather setters. And that doesn't even take into account the Gmax Variations. Terastilization is more akin to a watered down Mega or a less damaging Z move. Where both Mega's and Dynamax provided some form of stat boost, tera does not. Z moves provided way more damage output for a one time use, whereas Tera has the potential to last multiple turns for less damage output. The only common thread Tera shares with Dynamax is that any pokemon can use it at any given time. The difference being is that the only added defense they get from the type they turn into and the offense is less powerful.

 

[Moyashi]

I don't think the variance it creates is any more than previous mechanics like Z moves, hidden power, random resist berries or sashes, or even any metagame pre team preview.

You can't honestly compare Tera to any one of these features in terms of variance. Z moves, resist berries... These are things that come with an opportunity cost. There is a lot more strategic thinking involved when bringing them. Terastilize does not have any opportunity cost.

There's a reason Megas like Slowbro and Audino sucked. You're wasting your only slot on something that's

Audino sucked. MegaBro did not. It had an actual decent place. As for defensive tera, it could see actual use if teams were limited to one tera mon. Pokemon like Slowbro/king, Skeledirge, Dondozo and in general, specific pokemon on bulkier teams that can use Tera to better the range of what they check, easing the burden on teambuilding.

As for me, my biggest issue with Terastalize as a whole is how it can invalidate the concept of skillful building and the idea of mon checks mon. Let's say you bring Breloom. Its mach punch helps keep in check a number of powerful prominent threats right now, and its bullet seed provides strong wallbreaking more defensive pokemon (loaded dice sets especially). So you pack Breloom to be a check to Chi-Yu, Chien-Pao, Kingambit, Roaring Moon and a general way to pick off weakened boosting threats. This lets you focus on other areas of building to cover other parts of the metagame (and you can substitute a scarfer aa an offensive check for any of these threats). But all the mons Breloom checked can suddenly flip the script with a tera type and invalidate that match up. Roaring Moon becomes a flying type and sets up a DD to sweep. Chien-Pao becomes a ghost type to dodge mach punch and kill it back (or SD and then sweep afterwards). Chi-Yu picks ghost or a fighting resist and proceeds to KO Loom. And now your team is now seriously on the backfoot, through no fault of your own.

Some may try and argue "well you should know better" because of "meta trends", but where are you supposed to fit counterplay for both base mon and also tera forms, while also checking other big stuff (and their accompanying tera types)? And then X mon teras into something else to beat what you brought for their supposedly common tera? We've seen previously banned mons like Palafin and Bundle sometimes use tera to turn checks into opportunity. Bulk Up Palafin steel tera turning Amoonguss and Clodsire into set up fodder (while also turning a servicable check like Loom into a noncheck too). I've seen some also say "well get them to burn their tera use early" or "you can use tera too" and the former is not really consistently reliable while the latter is very reactive rather than based on teambuilding or playing skill. All of this is without talking about the 50/50 situations you can be put into as a result of the mechanic, and unlike Z moves or any sudden surprises like resist berries, terastilize has a lasting impact all game you must account for on six pokemon during battle.

So to close my post out, a player should be rewarded for good teambuilding and good playing during battle, and terastilize as it is doesn't really work for either of these I feel. If it worked the way we once thought where it actually had a cost (losing old stabs and only having tera type as stab), it would probably be a lot more reasonable and nuanced. But as it is right now, Terastilize in its current state is not balancer and I woupd argue is not competitive

 

[GoldenBoot04]

From what I've seen from terastalizing, the biggest problem it may pose is not its defensive capabilities but its offensive ones. As stated in the original post, it is posisble for an experienced player to predict what type a pokemon's tera type may be and therefore play around it. In addition, you can only tera once per battle and it stays that way forever, leaving the pokemon to be a monotype and therefore easier to deal with later in the game.

Offensively, however, there is less such counterplay to terastalizing. Its akin to the idea that just because you know what's coming doesn't mean you can do anything to stop it. For example, VERY few pokemon can wall Dragapult's Spec's tera ghost Shadow Ball. This same issue, I don't believe, cannot be attributed to the defensively capabilities of terastalizing because typically strong defense is less immediately threatening than strong offense and thus allows for more counterplay.

Despite my claims, I believe no tiering action should be taken for now. While I cannot stress enough the danger this mechanic poses offensively, as the meta develops I'm sure strategies to shut down HO tera strategies will be discovered. Going back to my previous example, Ting-Lu does an incredible job at walling special Dragapult AND can hazard stack or threaten a kill. However, if this does not prove to be the case then further action may need to be taken. But I imagine we will reach that when the time comes.