Smogon Forums

when we add dozen+ pkmn and plenty of new moves to the tier, we have to see if any of them are worthy of quickbanning or anything else is worth changing before we address things. we are dealing with an entirely new metagame. basing a suspect on old things and using theorymon to assume it's the same is not acceptable

I don't think it's fair to call it theorymon to say that fundamentally uncompetitive things should be banned regardless of whether or not dozens of new Pokemon/moves just got dropped on the tier. If it's fundamentally uncompetitive or broken, it's fundamentally uncompetitive/broken, and no amount of new Pokemon or moves or really anything short of a rework to how AT functions is going to change that.

look i wanted arena trap banned already. if it was just up to me, we would already be midsuspect. but we are not and other people are entitled to have diff opinions, especially those on the council/posters itt. the timing of things unfortunately overlapped with home, but everyone with any tiering experience knows you cannot hold a suspect based on a metagame that is entirely different than the one previously held.

I mean whatever, it's your decision, but people are getting sick of the silence, or at best cryptic "don't worry guys we'll do something soon maybe" type posts we've been seeing. It sure as hell looks like we're repeating SM/USUM all over again and I don't think anybody wants that. At the very least a little more transparency and communication would be nice.

if it was my decision and up to just me, i would have suspected it weeks ago. i represent a council which represents a community. there are always going to be people upset with every decision or indecision.

I mean you don't even have to suspect every little issue that comes along, like I said transparency and communication are key. Even a post every now and then saying "hey guys, these are the issues we're currently discussing, these are the options that we have on the table to possibly deal with these issues, we'll get back to you later with more concrete plans" or whatever would be enough to satisfy most people

This is the most transparent the council has ever been by a long shot. I spent hours even arguing for their to be a radar thread open to the public instead of all of the decision making being made behind closed doors like prior generations.

I spent days working on things like the dynamax suspect being as widely publiclly discussed as possible and then having the justification post that we did which tens of thousands of people used to understand why we were handling a mechanic. tiering is historically not particularly transparent. i don't know what you expect, but we are doing more than ever before and asking for more just is not fair.

Transparency with the council has been terrible historically, that doesn't somehow make it a good thing or mean that doing slightly better now somehow means things are in a great spot. Either way it's clear we fundamentally disagree about this and I can't see this conversation going anywhere productive for either of us, thanks for your time.