Metagame 1v1 Metagame Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
blondesasukeuchiha said:
So here’s the problem with banning Deoxys-S from tournaments.
1. Deoxys, to my knowledge, gets even less play in tournaments than on ladder. I think this is because higher skill players would rather play with skillful, non luck based strategies and rely on their own prediction skills instead.
2. That’s complex as hell and definitely wouldn’t be allowed.
Also what Theheheheh said
Click to expand...
Isnt the entire point of deoxys speed to win based off your prediction skills? predict your opponent to choose something that loses it. if you are in a weird matchup, predict a zmove and amnesia or irond, or predict a taunt/setup and taunt. saying "it forces 50/50s" doesnt make it luck based because the entirety of almost every 1v1 match is based off of 50/50s from team preview pick.
Edit: Forgot about this, in a tournament game, not knowing your opponent’s team or sets is bad preparation if it’s a team they’ve used in the past. Replays are a thing and even if they haven’t used this specific team before people are much more likely to gravitate towards using sets they’ve used before, especially in a stressful environment such as a tour. If you’re having problems with a Deoxys in a tournament it’s probably your fault not the Deoxys
Click to expand...
this just makes it easier for the opponent pick at team preview and makes it a 50/50 only if its a weird matchup like a zmove/taunt user predict. This would be even more of a reason to not ban deos at all
 
Guys, I don’t know why the heck we’re arguing about this because Deoxys-speed has way too many checks and can’t counter anything consistently. The PP stall set means the opponent gets lots of chances to crit, specs loses to bulkier variants of things, like spdef charizard x, the z-detect set, well, is a bit self-explanatory. I haven’t read all the arguments for it, so I’m probably missing something, but all the main sets do force 50/50s a lot of the time. Although, the guy who posted before is right, you’re meant to win of your prediction skills, that’s acting like your opponent has no prediction skills so it’s still unreliable: predictions don’t really get you to win that often. Maybe, just maybe, it ought to get boosted on the viability, but I don’t really think so, and I don’t want to make this a viability post. Darn it, I failed. Whoops I forgot about the awesome z-screens sets. S+++ rank, broken and ban worthy.
 
xd why people talking about deo-s

legit it's all 50/50s

if they taunt turn one you can nuke'em
if they id/amnesia turn one you can taunt/setup

its all 50/50s
 
Ok lemme do this real quick cuz I am on mobile.
adfjo said:
xd why people talking about deo-s

legit it's all 50/50s

if they taunt turn one you can nuke'em
if they id/amnesia turn one you can taunt/setup

its all 50/50s
Click to expand...
Its not just all 50/50s, as items like mental herb essentially allow deoxys to get free setup against threats, essentially negating the need to predict or take a risk in that scenario.

Also, there's not much that setup over +1 in this meta, so setting up is not justifiable in my eyes to be a W absolutely. Just wanted to say that.

Mageic Master said:
but I don’t really think so, and I don’t want to make this a viability post. Darn it, I failed. Whoops I forgot about the awesome z-screens sets. S+++ rank, broken and ban worthy.
Click to expand...
Not just banworthy, but 99.9% too broken needs quickbann xddd
 
this is why you use zhypnosis tailglow xurkitree

tbh banning this is basically the same argument as banning slowbro-mega
 
Hi guys, for those of you who don’t know me, I started playing 1v1 two days ago and have really enjoyed my experience so far. Introduction done, I would like to discuss a new set i’ve Been toying with: mamoswine.
Here’s the set.
Mamoswine @ Choice Band
Ability: Thick Fat
EVs: 252 HP / 144 Atk / 112 Spe
Adamant Nature
- Earthquake
- Stone Edge
- Icicle Crash
- Superpower
It’s a really strong wall breaker, it can beat charizard-mega x if they don’t use will o wisp (ok never mind), and is tanky enough to take an overheat from heatran. It can beat dnite with multiscale https://play.pokemonshowdown.com/battle-gen71v1-782170110.
Overall I just think it’s a good Pokemon.
 
Beesafree said:
Type:null is the better slowbro-m

Eviolite monster :P
Click to expand...
Does it get the chance to burn with scald? Does it get reliable recovery? With rest against very strong attackers, it can still get 3 Koed against Gyarados-Mega or something. It can’t boost its attacking stats or its defensive stats as easily as slowbro, eviolite can be tricked or knocked off, even with eviolite max defense isn’t as good as Mega Slowbro max defense. Oh, and it can’t kill anything with recovery like Slowbro-Mega can. I can’t believe that nobody has told this guy this, and that it’s down to me, the person a week into 1v1, to say this.
 
ZoroWarrior said:
Does it get the chance to burn with scald? Does it get reliable recovery? With rest against very strong attackers, it can still get 3 Koed against Gyarados-Mega or something. It can’t boost its attacking stats or its defensive stats as easily as slowbro, eviolite can be tricked or knocked off, even with eviolite max defense isn’t as good as Mega Slowbro max defense. Oh, and it can’t kill anything with recovery like Slowbro-Mega can. I can’t believe that nobody has told this guy this, and that it’s down to me (it's defo not), the person a week into 1v1, to say this.
Click to expand...
Almost all of your points are wrong but slowbro is still better
 
Last edited:
arthur.jpg

Sleep is a cancer to this metagame and should have been banned a long, long time ago.

I will now explain using undeniable fact, simple logic, and widely-recognized assumptions rather than argue based on the semantics of whether it is "uncompetitive" or "broken" or "unhealthy", or whatever the defenders of sleep try to label it as to distract people from reality ("Oh sleep isn't broken, its uncompetitive," "Oh, sleep isn't uncompetitive, it's possibly unhealthy"). As far as I see it, those types of discussions cloud the definition what is bannable or not by attempting to split apart, rebrand, and reclassify any type of assumption based on the smallest and most insignificant details. "Oh, I'm not a racist, I'm an ethno-nationalist" It doesn't matter how you slice it, what sleep is -- a practice that removes skill from the game -- is true. And at the end of the day, those arguments are designed to make a movement or action lose traction and energy while normalizing the opposition, until the issue is dropped entirely, whether intentionally or not. I will not let this happen with anything I even remotely care about.

Now that that bit of degeneracy is out the way, Imma put my points into nice little hide bubbles, because no one enjoys reading giant walls of texts.

In any given competitive sport, or in this case, competitive video game, random chance is to be avoided at all costs. It is one of the two main definition what makes something a competition in general: if the results you receive are based on your merit, and if you or your opponent aren't unreasonably overpowered so as to invalidate a majority or the entirety of the competition (See Tapu Koko, Kyurem-Black, Marshadow, etc) (think "fair and balanced"). If you play soccer, there's no rule stating something like "If your opponent scores, you can choose to either get another goal or lose a player based on a coin flip". That's because when conceived, the creators of soccer intended the game to be entirely skill based; no luck involved.

Pokemon is a bit different, as it was designed with wacky fun and childish adventure in mind, not a competitive and predictable game; the original games couldn't be too formulaic in an already formulaic game, so adding random chance for additional affects (Waking up earlier rather than later, getting an extra status condition when you attack, your attack doing more damage than normal). We took the rules and mechanics set in place originally, and we molded and edited them the best we could in order to promote a competitive scene that we desired, removing unreasonable luck-based moves in the process. Let me repeat that: we molded and edited the game to make it competitive, there was no higher power or executive from Gamefreak that decreed what was to be held sacred and what wasn't. Therefore, any game mechanic or aspect is always subject to removal or limiting, based on what is best for a fun and competitive scene. That's why OHKO moves are banned; 30% chance of winning every matchup means the game would only be skill based 70% of the time. But moves with only a 10% chance to inflict a not-game-ending status condition is allowed, so players can enjoy a balance of the original game mechanics in a mostly competitive environment.

The point of this section is to remind people who may have forgotten that RNG is inherently the enemy of competitiveness and skill-based gameplay, and that we, the community and it's leaders, have the power to remove unacceptable forms of RNG at any time. While minor RNG can add flavor to any given metagame, such as the aforementioned 10% status moves and something like Mr. Game & Watch's hammer in the Smash Bros. series, any aspect that regularly introduces game-winning effects can, and should be, removed.

When a traditional 1v1 battle plays out, both players send out one Pokemon of their choosing, then they both choose what they believe to be the right move for the situation, then the battle quickly (or eventually) ends. In the entirety of that event, both players skills of predicting what the other player is thinking, based on not only the situation at hand, but also the playstyle of their opponent. Sometimes a player with a losing matchup can make a W if they can outpredict what their opponent plans to do. However, RNG is the monkey wrench in this whole equation. You burned your opponent, but they crit you next turn. You miss Hyper Beam, even though you predicted the switch in correctly. Waterfall flinches you, despite you having the better mon. These are all integral parts to Pokemon, that unfortunately play a role in taking away invalidating some skill from a player, but, honestly, I wouldn't have it any other way. RNG in small amounts keeps you on your toes, makes you think about the safest way to fight a matchup, and sometimes let's you win the matchups you shouldn't. But the point is: it is RNG in small amounts. Sleep creates a scenario controlled entirely by RNG if the move hits once (aka, being in the state of sleep itself makes the entire situation luck-dependent for both players). Because if it does, suddenly you need to hope and pray that you wake up ASAP, which, since each turn for wake has a 33% chance of happening, is clearly entirely luck-based. The only exception to this is Rest, a cost-benefit move that will always put you to sleep for 3 turns. Something like this is perfectly fine; there is no chance a rest user will wake up any earlier than 3 turns. However, every other move that causes sleep is not. The most common sleep moves, being Sleep Powder, Hypnosis, Spore, and Yawn, will put the player into a state of sleep 60%-100% of the time. In a metagame where most games are decided in around 1-5 turns, that is not okay. Sleep essentially makes a majority of the match RNG dependent (by "decided in 1-5 turns", I don't mean they are literally 1-5 turns long. I just mean a player only gets 1-5 turns before their fate is sealed. Leech seed stall whimsicott wins if it hits leech seed and lives one attack, but the game lasts much longer than one turn).

This would be perfectly acceptable if, like many other moves in the game, the chance of taking away a player's skill was relatively minute, something like the 1/24 chance of critting, or the 10-30% chance of getting a secondary affect on most moves. However, a minimum chance of 60% to enter a state where you, the player, can no longer make decisions for the majority of the game, is far too high for 1v1, considering once you are asleep you have no other option, as switching out is not possible.

jirachi.png

Remember this bugger? An annoying mon, to be sure. Serene Grace and iron head/zen headbutt, on a mon with 100/100/100 bulk and 492 effective speed, was a pain in the ass, if you weren't prepared. And even then, if you got unlucky, most of Jirachi's so-called "answers" could and would get flinched to death, even if they resisted stabs or had high defense. The only reason why it took so long to ban in the first place was that it's main counter just happened to be the best pokemon in the meta (Gyarados-Mega), giving the illusion that it wasn't a problem. However, not even taking into account the fact that this required teambuilding with Gyarados-Mega in mind if you wanted the best odds at winning, the fact that Jirachi mainly relied on getting the odds in it's favor It doesn't matter if a strategy is massively effective, if the core mechanic of winning a game is designed around random chance, it has no place in a competitive game. There's no strategy in rolling a die.

And, frankly, Jirachi wasn't even as bad as some of the most notorious sleep users. Taking Jumpluff as example, a bad Jumpluff player will win any matchup it outspeeds, baring disadvantageous type matchups and specific counterplay options, about 55% of the time (assuming wide lens, assuming they don't sub after successfully landing their sleep powder, which is what should be done in most scenarios) (.83 x .99 x .66), and it just gets more unlikely for the person fighting sleep to win if the sleeper subs after sleep (Honestly I don't know how to calculate the exact odds of winning vs sleep after a sub, but you're basically gambling on you to get the 33% first turn wake continuously and him missing the 83% sleep powder once. Not very good odds). And if you look at basically every yawn user, like Snorlax, Relicanth, and Camerupt, you need a first turn wake to win, as you can attack turn one, do something turn 2 while they protect, then hope and pray, meaning they win 66% of the time. Hypnohex user Gengar-Mega, thanks to his gross base speed and special attack, just needs to hit hypnosis in the first place to win most of the time, or not get a first turn wake, bringing his chances of winning to be between 60% and roughly 40% (for when it's a 2HKO). All of these odds are closer to coinflips than consistent strategy.

Jirachi, on the other hand, needed a 60% chance to happen multiple times in a row, as for the most part it had trouble 2hkoing anything in the meta, and so on. Getting one flinch in a row was going to happen 60% of the time, getting a second, 36%, getting a third, 22%, and so on. Worse or comparable odds to the sleep users mentioned above. And as I said, it wasn't 2HKOing anything it wouldn't have already if it didn't have it's broken ability, so usually it wasn't going to win the highest 60% of the time.

Despite the relatively low odds of Jirachi cheese, council voted for a Jirachi ban after the community barely missed out with a 59% majority/non-super majority. The official reasoning given for the ban literally states that it was banned "Because an entirely hax-reliant niche has no place in a competitive metagame,", 'hax' just being another word for RNG. The same logic applies with sleep.

When I think "sleep answers", I think of mainly taunt, encore, and substitute, and also the answers to sleepseed stall, those being rest, flame charge and sound based moves. While there are obvious numerous taunt, rest, and substitute users, a whole host of them cannot synergize properly with these moves. First of all, frail offense is immediately out, as any attempts to use moves that can't immediately hit hard will leave them wide open in other matchups that are not related to sleep, severely reducing their usefulness, if they cannot devote a moveslot to type coverage. Bulky offense, the current offensive meta in 1v1, can afford to run these moves, but, as previously mentioned before, they lose coverage. In 1v1, coverage is essential, as that can mean the difference between being 3-0ed by something or not, and finding the right balance and coverage with 3 mons is crucial to being successful in 1v1. Forcing a player to dedicate a moveslot or more to fighting a mechanic that is objectively luck-based is incredibly limiting and inhibits/promotes certain playstyles over others.

But that doesn't even really matter, as 4/5 out of the 6 best options are not guaranteed answers, either, and are directly affected by the RNG of how long you take to wake up. Ergo, if your opponent is lucky, and you are unlucky, they can "predict" when you are going to wake up, protect on that turn, and not get affected by the taunt/encore/flame charge/sound move (except Clangorous Soulblaze), and put you right back to sleep the next turn. I have lost many games because I got unlucky with when I woke up, and my flame charge/taunt wasn't able to work. The most available "answers" to sleep shouldn't be luck based, as well. Obviously, the most egregious and obnoxious one to do this is Jumpluff, as it is the fastest sleep powder user, but mons like Vivillon do the trick as well. And, when concerning substitute to avoid sleep, A) that doesn't even work with Jumpluff, thanks to infiltrator, and B) with the 3 main yawn users, they can just attack you with brutal attacks on the sub, breaking it and leading to multiple 50/50s, which is admittedly more skill-based than straight RNG in 1v1, thanks to the emphasis placed on recognizing and predicting playstyles, but 50/50s are naturally going to lead to inconsistent results and essentially random guess, at the end of the day.

To summarize, consistent counters to every variant of sleep user and sleep inducing move is few and far between. Taunt overcoat Kommo-o would probably be the best one, as it can taunt the usually-slow yawn users, be unaffected by sleep powder, and not have to worry about protect or sub shenanigans, but even then hypnohex still wins 40% of the time (see Point 4). Or you can just run Chesto Berry xd The point is, while there are ways to beat sleep in theory, in practice these ways prove inconsistent, and teambuilding to beat all commonly used forms of sleep is challenging and unreasonable, to say the least.

In every other 6v6 tier besides AG, there exists a clause dating since October 30th, 2010, essentially stating that you cannot knowingly put 2 or more of your opponent's team to sleep, only one at any given time. A clause like this would be designed to as to not abuse sleep, that's obvious. However, think about what the idea of 'abusing sleep' means. It means, in the environment of 6v6, putting most or all of your opponent's team to sleep whenever possible. A clause like this wouldn't exist in the first place if the people making the Smogon rules didn't recognize that sleep-inducing moves naturally aren't good for competition, and therefore the RNG involved in sleep should be limited to promote skill-based gameplay.

When you take those values and apply them to 1v1, it is clear that there has been a misinterpretation of what a 'Sleep Clause' means. When a player sends out a Pokemon of there choosing in 1v1, that is their entire team. They cannot use more in their arsenal because there is nothing more to use. Therefore, when someone puts your Pokemon to sleep in 1v1, they are putting an entire team to sleep, all at once. If a move existed in Pokemon that could put an entire six-Pokemon team to sleep, all at once, that would never be allowed in a 6v6 environment. The reason someone is allowed to put one Pokemon to sleep in a 6v6 environment is because you have the choice, as a competitive player, of whether or not you want to test your luck or switch out, knowing that it is illegal/impossible for your opponent to put your next Pokemon to sleep, and thus limiting the amount of luck involved. This preserves skill, compromises with the mechanics of the game and the people who want to use sleep-inducing moves, and for the most part doesn't require you (immediately) to deal with luck, you can burn sleep turns when it is most convenient. In 1v1, we don't have that luxury. When you get put to sleep, all choice on your end is removed, you just have to hope. And that would be the same as getting all of your Pokemon put to sleep in something like OU, on the switch in.

In conclusion, sleep is a mechanic that erodes competitive values and, while acceptable in a 6v6 environment, becomes unacceptable when presented in 1v1, where the whole team is the one Pokemon sent out. 1v1 is one of the most unique metagames on smogon, as we are not simply changing what Pokemon can have what moves or abilities, we are completely removing a majority of a player's team, something no other metagame does, and therefore we shouldn't think we are the same as every other 6v6 metagame.

I am personally advocating for the ban of all sleep-inducing moves, those being defined as moves that put your opponent to sleep. Rest is perfectly acceptable, as the turn when you will wake up is already decided, and not affected by any type of RNG, and it is a choice you make as a player. But your fate being decided by the whim of chance in a supposedly skill-based metagame is unacceptable, and any defense of such a practice is not a defense of competition nor competitive values.

I am tagging Monsieur Mace, uop is definitely very bad yes, Ti, and Mr. Crabs, as they all voted Do not ban or were inclined to vote DNB concerning sleep in their decision in the 1v1 council (although Uselesscrab abstained in the official vote). It is obvious that all of y'all care about the wellbeing of the 1v1 metagame, so I strongly encourage you guys read these points and, just as importantly, discuss a revote on sleep.

Time to go to bed.
 
Last edited:
i think tda has a decent point with his post. sleep i feel is somewhat problematic. however i will make a post with kind of the same concept but different, and way more feasible/realistic way to change the banlist.
ban snorlax.
yeah, maybe not the most partys thing to say but i really think that this is the best way to shut up sleep complainers. i really think snorlax is the root of the sleep problem, because the second best sleep user is jumpluff which really has all sorts of counterplay: taunt, speed, sound moves, etc.

Snorlax (M) @ Normalium Z
Ability: Immunity
EVs: 8 HP / 236 Atk / 252 Def / 12 Spe
Adamant Nature
IVs: 30 Spe
- Yawn
- Protect
- Belly Drum
- Double-Edge

this set (fc's spread i think) is pretty problematic. in your builder, you need to run either a fighting type, very fat steel type, or really strong ass mon like banded archeops, or maybe a mon like jumpluff or whimsicott to reliably deal with this thing. you CAN run shit like golem, but you have to worry about yawn and shit. additionally, the mind games with yawn, double edge vs something like sub or setup moves are so lame and just make 1v1 more uncompetitive, esp since sub is fairly common (not solid counterplay btw, check first replay below)
here's some replays of normalium lax being fucking dumb:
seasonal tournament game: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-733300532
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787588144 normalium beats megagross
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787929852 zygod
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787925639 zygod
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787898253 zygod
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787924004 normalium beating a fucking scizor
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787918621 sciz losing again lol
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787541627 taunt gyara
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-788330086 taunt gyara
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787590578 magnezone
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787611427 throh lol but still a strong fighting type
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787589841 armoldo lol but still a strong rock type
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787588756 mega lopunny

the way it forces stupid mindgames with yawn/tect/drum, the way it makes normal resists just hope they get the chance to wake up is just stupid. i myself think that this mon normalium is alone is unhealthy enough to ban. but what if there was another set? oh there is bc lax is versatile as hell.


Gyff gave this to me (Snorlax) @ Aguav Berry
Ability: Gluttony
EVs: 192 HP / 252 Def / 64 SpD
Impish Nature
- Curse
- Amnesia / Earthquake
- Chip Away / Earthquake
- Recycle
while "just use sub" is a pretty terrible argument on its own, it's what many players end up using against snorlax to avoid yawn, which is fair, nobody wants to be yawned on. however, curselax not only doesnt mind sub being used against it, it benefits from being subbed on because it gets free turns to set up a curse or amnesia. when sending out your sub megagross you should have no fear if they go lax, but you'd be wrong.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787576826 vs golem
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787595734 vs fucking rockium counter aggron. this set might seem wack but its an amazing non ghost lax check.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787850539 megagross
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787575119 golem
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787498964 dual dance magearna 1
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787548861 dual dance magearna 2 (miss didnt matter)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787550785 bandchomp
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787521451 jumpluff
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen71v1-787147194 dnite
i also played a subgross using curselax and i won because 3 mash raises weren't enough to break thru without crits. i can't find the replay tho. take my word that curselax beats subgross, you can try it yourself.
i'd rather not have to run a sawk or mimikyu on every single team. snorlax, taking into account normalium and curse, warps teambuilding to an insane degree where you either have to use a strong fighting type or mimikyu, or you instead give up and use sub on something thinking it's better than nothing. if nothing is done i really think LTtour will show us all how stupid lax is. "just use sub" is completely invalid of an argument because of #1 thats an extremely smogon-policy ignorant thing to say and #2 curse loves when you sub and lose lol.

sidenote: sleep will 100% not be a problem without lax. i tried ursarang with snorlax's moves it sucks. and jumpluff is not good enough as an abuser.

tldr banning a status is stupid. normalium yawn is already uncompetitive and hard to build around enough for a mon in 1v1 but curse brings the stupidity of lax to a new level we shouldn't have to deal with when playing and teambuilding.
 
Last edited:
I'm working on my own sleep megapost (which will include specific ideas about Snorlax partially in response to dom), but I'll take some time to respond to yours, TDA. This is really big so I'll just put the whole thing in a spoiler.
The Dark Alakazam said:
I will now explain using undeniable fact, simple logic, and widely-recognized assumptions rather than argue based on the semantics of whether it is "uncompetitive" or "broken" or "unhealthy", or whatever the defenders of sleep try to label it as to distract people from reality ("Oh sleep isn't broken, its uncompetitive," "Oh, sleep isn't uncompetitive, it's possibly unhealthy"). As far as I see it, those types of discussions cloud the definition what is bannable or not by attempting to split apart, rebrand, and reclassify any type of assumption based on the smallest and most insignificant details. "Oh, I'm not a racist, I'm an ethno-nationalist" It doesn't matter how you slice it, what sleep is -- a practice that removes skill from the game -- is true. And at the end of the day, those arguments are designed to make a movement or action lose traction and energy while normalizing the opposition, until the issue is dropped entirely, whether intentionally or not. I will not let this happen with anything I even remotely care about.
Click to expand...
It is important to define which of these things sleep supposedly is. If someone made an argument for banning sleep on account of it being broken, the argument could have been completely and utterly countered in two sentences, because it simply isn't. I also feel as though this isn't really an issue that I've seen with pro-sleep people. The only time that I've seen this used as a "distraction" is when countering someone else's argument, which again, is the person who claimed that it's broken or similar's fault. You also make it sound like some kind of leftist conspiracy, as though pro-sleep people are all using this tactic, which again, isn't something that I've seen. Anyways, let's define this once and for all if it bugs you so much. My stance is that sleep has the potential to introduce uncompetitive scenarios. I think that that wording is very important.
The Dark Alakazam said:
In any given competitive sport, or in this case, competitive video game, random chance is to be avoided at all costs. It is one of the two main definition what makes something a competition in general: if the results you receive are based on your merit, and if you or your opponent aren't unreasonably overpowered so as to invalidate a majority or the entirety of the competition (See Tapu Koko, Kyurem-Black, Marshadow, etc) (think "fair and balanced"). If you play soccer, there's no rule stating something like "If your opponent scores, you can choose to either get another goal or lose a player based on a coin flip". That's because when conceived, the creators of soccer intended the game to be entirely skill based; no luck involved.

Pokemon is a bit different, as it was designed with wacky fun and childish adventure in mind, not a competitive and predictable game; the original games couldn't be too formulaic in an already formulaic game, so adding random chance for additional affects (Waking up earlier rather than later, getting an extra status condition when you attack, your attack doing more damage than normal). We took the rules and mechanics set in place originally, and we molded and edited them the best we could in order to promote a competitive scene that we desired, removing unreasonable luck-based moves in the process. Let me repeat that: we molded and edited the game to make it competitive, there was no higher power or executive from Gamefreak that decreed what was to be held sacred and what wasn't. Therefore, any game mechanic or aspect is always subject to removal or limiting, based on what is best for a fun and competitive scene. That's why OHKO moves are banned; 30% chance of winning every matchup means the game would only be skill based 70% of the time. But moves with only a 10% chance to inflict a not-game-ending status condition is allowed, so players can enjoy a balance of the original game mechanics in a mostly competitive environment.

The point of this section is to remind people who may have forgotten that RNG is inherently the enemy of competitiveness and skill-based gameplay, and that we, the community and it's leaders, have the power to remove unacceptable forms of RNG at any time. While minor RNG can add flavor to any given metagame, such as the aforementioned 10% status moves and something like Mr. Game & Watch's hammer in the Smash Bros. series, any aspect that regularly introduces game-winning effects can, and should be, removed.
Click to expand...
I don't think that Pokemon is, or even could be (within reason) be an absolutely competitive game. Let's think about the anatomy of chess. Both players have the same layout and there is zero RNG involved. That's something that you don't think about very often: having a different team than your opponent is indeed uncompetitive to an extent. From the get-go, this practically invalidates the idea of Pokemon being molded to that level of competitiveness. Therefore, we have to draw a line at which level of RNG we will tolerate. Let's consider one more thing in regards to where that line should fall in regards to Smogon policy. The only modification, or in other words, things that happen within a simulated battle that don't happen on a cartridge game, in the sleep clause mod, is the only modification that should ever be implemented. This pushes the line back much further than chess does, because while things can be banned, game mechanics cannot be altered. Ice Beam, until banned, will always have a 10% chance to freeze, and banning Ice Beam is absolutely ludicrous. Again, we'll have to decide where this line falls, but sleep isn't inherently behind this line.
The Dark Alakazam said:
When a traditional 1v1 battle plays out, both players send out one Pokemon of their choosing, then they both choose what they believe to be the right move for the situation, then the battle quickly (or eventually) ends. In the entirety of that event, both players skills of predicting what the other player is thinking, based on not only the situation at hand, but also the playstyle of their opponent. Sometimes a player with a losing matchup can make a W if they can outpredict what their opponent plans to do. However, RNG is the monkey wrench in this whole equation. You burned your opponent, but they crit you next turn. You miss Hyper Beam, even though you predicted the switch in correctly. Waterfall flinches you, despite you having the better mon. These are all integral parts to Pokemon, that unfortunately play a role in taking away invalidating some skill from a player, but, honestly, I wouldn't have it any other way. RNG in small amounts keeps you on your toes, makes you think about the safest way to fight a matchup, and sometimes let's you win the matchups you shouldn't. But the point is: it is RNG in small amounts. Sleep creates a scenario controlled entirely by RNG if the move hits once (aka, being in the state of sleep itself makes the entire situation luck-dependent for both players). Because if it does, suddenly you need to hope and pray that you wake up ASAP, which, since each turn for wake has a 33% chance of happening, is clearly entirely luck-based. The only exception to this is Rest, a cost-benefit move that will always put you to sleep for 3 turns. Something like this is perfectly fine; there is no chance a rest user will wake up any earlier than 3 turns. However, every other move that causes sleep is not. The most common sleep moves, being Sleep Powder, Hypnosis, Spore, and Yawn, will put the player into a state of sleep 60%-100% of the time. In a metagame where most games are decided in around 1-5 turns, that is not okay. Sleep essentially makes a majority of the match RNG dependent (by "decided in 1-5 turns", I don't mean they are literally 1-5 turns long. I just mean a player only gets 1-5 turns before their fate is sealed. Leech seed stall whimsicott wins if it hits leech seed and lives one attack, but the game lasts much longer than one turn).

This would be perfectly acceptable if, like many other moves in the game, the chance of taking away a player's skill was relatively minute, something like the 1/24 chance of critting, or the 10-30% chance of getting a secondary affect on most moves. However, a minimum chance of 60% to enter a state where you, the player, can no longer make decisions for the majority of the game, is far too high for 1v1, considering once you are asleep you have no other option, as switching out is not possible.
Click to expand...
The meat of my upcoming post will be the math of sleep hax, so I'll not respond to that directly lest working on my upcoming post changes my mind. I will say, however, that I don't see an issue with the match being decided in x amount of turns relative to RNG. Similarly to how you said "you burned your opponent, but they crit you next turn. You miss Hyper Beam, even though you predicted the switch in correctly. Waterfall flinches you, despite you having the better mon," is the nature of 1v1. 1v1 can only be competitive under the understanding that it happens over an amount of games so that the above happens and over x amount of games, the hax balances out. This happens with or without sleep. In reponse to you last paragraph, specifically referring to the 60% chance of Hypnosis hitting... that's why I want to ban low accuracy sleep (only). As for not being able to not make decisions for the rest of the game, I kinda don't see how this is different than hyper offense. You really just have to KO the opponent so there's not any level of "do I click this or this?" and if they outspeed and OHKO you, you didn't get any input in the situation.
The Dark Alakazam said:
Remember this bugger? An annoying mon, to be sure. Serene Grace and iron head/zen headbutt, on a mon with 100/100/100 bulk and 492 effective speed, was a pain in the ass, if you weren't prepared. And even then, if you got unlucky, most of Jirachi's so-called "answers" could and would get flinched to death, even if they resisted stabs or had high defense. The only reason why it took so long to ban in the first place was that it's main counter just happened to be the best pokemon in the meta (Gyarados-Mega), giving the illusion that it wasn't a problem. However, not even taking into account the fact that this required teambuilding with Gyarados-Mega in mind if you wanted the best odds at winning, the fact that Jirachi mainly relied on getting the odds in it's favor It doesn't matter if a strategy is massively effective, if the core mechanic of winning a game is designed around random chance, it has no place in a competitive game. There's no strategy in rolling a die.

And, frankly, Jirachi wasn't even as bad as some of the most notorious sleep users. Taking Jumpluff as example, a bad Jumpluff player will win any matchup it outspeeds, baring disadvantageous type matchups and specific counterplay options, about 55% of the time (assuming wide lens, assuming they don't sub after successfully landing their sleep powder, which is what should be done in most scenarios) (.83 x .99 x .66), and it just gets more unlikely for the person fighting sleep to win if the sleeper subs after sleep (Honestly I don't know how to calculate the exact odds of winning vs sleep after a sub, but you're basically gambling on you to get the 33% first turn wake continuously and him missing the 83% sleep powder once. Not very good odds). And if you look at basically every yawn user, like Snorlax, Relicanth, and Camerupt, you need a first turn wake to win, as you can attack turn one, do something turn 2 while they protect, then hope and pray, meaning they win 66% of the time. Hypnohex user Gengar-Mega, thanks to his gross base speed and special attack, just needs to hit hypnosis in the first place to win most of the time, or not get a first turn wake, bringing his chances of winning to be between 60% and roughly 40% (for when it's a 2HKO). All of these odds are closer to coinflips than consistent strategy.

Jirachi, on the other hand, needed a 60% chance to happen multiple times in a row, as for the most part it had trouble 2hkoing anything in the meta, and so on. Getting one flinch in a row was going to happen 60% of the time, getting a second, 36%, getting a third, 22%, and so on. Worse or comparable odds to the sleep users mentioned above. And as I said, it wasn't 2HKOing anything it wouldn't have already if it didn't have it's broken ability, so usually it wasn't going to win the highest 60% of the time.

Despite the relatively low odds of Jirachi cheese, council voted for a Jirachi ban after the community barely missed out with a 59% majority/non-super majority. The official reasoning given for the ban literally states that it was banned "Because an entirely hax-reliant niche has no place in a competitive metagame,", 'hax' just being another word for RNG. The same logic applies with sleep.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that sleep is not off-limits on account of the reasoning given. In the second paragraph, you said that Jumpluff had a 55% chance to win and that subbing before seeding was a suboptimal play. Incorrect. Subbing before seeding is the standard play and doing it brings your odds of winning up to approximately (to 1 decimal) 82.81% (notice how it's literally almost 83% because Sub mitigates sleep rolls to that extent). You can do the math by adding up the odds of every winning scenario happening (note: I excluded every scenario in which Leech Seed misses because eww no I don't want to) A big difference for me between Jirachi and sleep is that sleep has a maximum of 3 turns while Jirachi doesn't have such a cap. Another attitude I want to address is the idea that losing to 2 turns of sleep is somehow getting haxed. That's what you should be expecting, preparing for. It's statistically favorable to get at least 2 turns of sleep.

The Dark Alakazam said:
When I think "sleep answers", I think of mainly taunt, encore, and substitute, and also the answers to sleepseed stall, those being rest, flame charge and sound based moves. While there are obvious numerous taunt, rest, and substitute users, a whole host of them cannot synergize properly with these moves. First of all, frail offense is immediately out, as any attempts to use moves that can't immediately hit hard will leave them wide open in other matchups that are not related to sleep, severely reducing their usefulness, if they cannot devote a moveslot to type coverage. Bulky offense, the current offensive meta in 1v1, can afford to run these moves, but, as previously mentioned before, they lose coverage. In 1v1, coverage is essential, as that can mean the difference between being 3-0ed by something or not, and finding the right balance and coverage with 3 mons is crucial to being successful in 1v1. Forcing a player to dedicate a moveslot or more to fighting a mechanic that is objectively luck-based is incredibly limiting and inhibits/promotes certain playstyles over others.

But that doesn't even really matter, as 4/5 out of the 6 best options are not guaranteed answers, either, and are directly affected by the RNG of how long you take to wake up. Ergo, if your opponent is lucky, and you are unlucky, they can "predict" when you are going to wake up, protect on that turn, and not get affected by the taunt/encore/flame charge/sound move (except Clangorous Soulblaze), and put you right back to sleep the next turn. I have lost many games because I got unlucky with when I woke up, and my flame charge/taunt wasn't able to work. The most available "answers" to sleep shouldn't be luck based, as well. Obviously, the most egregious and obnoxious one to do this is Jumpluff, as it is the fastest sleep powder user, but mons like Vivillon do the trick as well. And, when concerning substitute to avoid sleep, A) that doesn't even work with Jumpluff, thanks to infiltrator, and B) with the 3 main yawn users, they can just attack you with brutal attacks on the sub, breaking it and leading to multiple 50/50s, which is admittedly more skill-based than straight RNG in 1v1, thanks to the emphasis placed on recognizing and predicting playstyles, but 50/50s are naturally going to lead to inconsistent results and essentially random guess, at the end of the day.

To summarize, consistent counters to every variant of sleep user and sleep inducing move is few and far between. Taunt overcoat Kommo-o would probably be the best one, as it can taunt the usually-slow yawn users, be unaffected by sleep powder, and not have to worry about protect or sub shenanigans, but even then hypnohex still wins 40% of the time (see Point 4). Or you can just run Chesto Berry xd The point is, while there are ways to beat sleep in theory, in practice these ways prove inconsistent, and teambuilding to beat all commonly used forms of sleep is challenging and unreasonable, to say the least
Click to expand...
No one ever try to beat sleep in general ever again, PLEASE. When teambuilding you will ALWAYS look to beat each user individually in the same manner that you would try to beat each Pokemon of X type or user of X move individually. Everything in this paragraph is under the assumption that the reader is a bad teambuilder.

The Dark Alakazam said:
In every other 6v6 tier besides AG, there exists a clause dating since October 30th, 2010, essentially stating that you cannot knowingly put 2 or more of your opponent's team to sleep, only one at any given time. A clause like this would be designed to as to not abuse sleep, that's obvious. However, think about what the idea of 'abusing sleep' means. It means, in the environment of 6v6, putting most or all of your opponent's team to sleep whenever possible. A clause like this wouldn't exist in the first place if the people making the Smogon rules didn't recognize that sleep-inducing moves naturally aren't good for competition, and therefore the RNG involved in sleep should be limited to promote skill-based gameplay.

When you take those values and apply them to 1v1, it is clear that there has been a misinterpretation of what a 'Sleep Clause' means. When a player sends out a Pokemon of there choosing in 1v1, that is their entire team. They cannot use more in their arsenal because there is nothing more to use. Therefore, when someone puts your Pokemon to sleep in 1v1, they are putting an entire team to sleep, all at once. If a move existed in Pokemon that could put an entire six-Pokemon team to sleep, all at once, that would never be allowed in a 6v6 environment. The reason someone is allowed to put one Pokemon to sleep in a 6v6 environment is because you have the choice, as a competitive player, of whether or not you want to test your luck or switch out, knowing that it is illegal/impossible for your opponent to put your next Pokemon to sleep, and thus limiting the amount of luck involved. This preserves skill, compromises with the mechanics of the game and the people who want to use sleep-inducing moves, and for the most part doesn't require you (immediately) to deal with luck, you can burn sleep turns when it is most convenient. In 1v1, we don't have that luxury. When you get put to sleep, all choice on your end is removed, you just have to hope. And that would be the same as getting all of your Pokemon put to sleep in something like OU, on the switch in.
Click to expand...
My issue with this is that it's so abstract and quite nearly post-modernist. Such reasoning only really works when you're talking about ethical/moral issues because when translated back into actuality, it won't necessarily work anymore. Let's say the FDA banned chemical "x" in product "a" and you tried to reason that because chemical x is banned there, it should also be banned from product "b." It would be dismissed as nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tol
Dazel said:
There's also speed control + Taunt to consider, which adds Heatran (LOSES to Specs if they have a move they can 2HKO you with), Tyranitar (loses to Specs), Buzzwole (loses to Specs), and Tapu Bulu (loses to Specs) also Landorus-Therian (loses to Specs),Bulldoze Zygod (loses to Specs),Bulldoze/Laser Focus Mega Metagross and more to the list of counters to PP Stall Deo.

The biggest problem with Deo is how many 50/50s it forces. Facing off against it is a 50/50 to begin with, and unlike Charizard and Mimikyu, there's very few paths turn one you can take to beat both offensive and defensive Deo, and if you predict turn one wrong, you lose. While Taunt can be a viable way of dealing with it, without Prankster or other Speed control, it essentially comes down to a prediction game. If I have Gyarados, will Deoxys Taunt me, or Iron Defense? If they Taunt when I Crunch, I win. If they Iron Defense when I Crunch, I lose. If they Iron Defense when I Taunt, I win, if they Taunt when I Taunt, I lose assuming it has both Crunch and Taunt,obviously. Add to that the fact that crits tend to round out to 50/50 chances unless the attacker is Choiced, and you're left with it getting most of its big wins through them.
Click to expand...
late af reply but I just got time
 
I remember a while back shortly after the Deoxys-Defense ban I was worried about Speed being problematic, and everyone assured me it wouldn't get out of hand. now people are considering a ban, lmao

Also, shoutout to The Dark Alakazam for his amazing sleep post. I used to be anti-ban, but man did his post open my eyes. Forget a lax ban, kill sleep
 
Yung Dramps said:
Forget a lax ban, kill sleep
Click to expand...
Second short post in a row but this is something I have to respond to. The reason we can't get anything done banlist wise in this community is not the drastically different opinions and approaches that different users take to what should or should not be banned, its our inability to compromise. Snorlax isn't what I want banned either but I think its a good start and a good middle ground. In a community where no one can agree on anything you have to take what you can get even if it means both sides don't get exactly what they want. If anti ban sleep users think that Snorlax is the only abuser worth banning and that sleep is a non problem without it, then appease them for now and pray that they're correct and can make the metagame more competitive and balanced. Not every argument has to end with a clear cut, black or white answer and I think a lot of people either don't realize this or don't believe it to be true. So before taking either extreme in a post or comment think what we can agree on and start with that.

Unless you're calling a mon bad in the room when someone brings up how Florges is super viable in 1v1, then never back down and make sure they know they're wrong.
 
motogp said:
late af reply but I just got time
Click to expand...
Don't know why I forgot to mention that those guys pretty much lose to specs but yeah there you go.

Since discussion on sleep is cropping up again, I'd like to talk about it and some other stuff, but before I do, I have a few humble requests to make.

I understand that at the end of the day, I'm not nearly as versed in 1v1 as many of you are. I've played the metagame in a serious fashion for a whopping three months, I'm a complete newcomer to the community, and outside of getting some lucky wins in a tournament, I haven't done anything deserving of people's respect. I get that I'm as firmly on the bottom rung of the ladder when it comes to whose opinions matter and who's to be taken seriously. But I still don't think any of that merits being talked down to, derided, or called stupid, even if my opinions are misinformed, ignorant, or misguided. If I'm wrong, correct me. Call me thin skinned, but I don't have the constitution to be demeaned over whether or not I think it's fair to use a move in a children's RPG, so if that's the tone with which I'll be treated if I throw my hat back into the discussion, I'll bow out right here. Maybe hop back in again if Deoxys-Speed discussion heats back up after the Sleep and Snorlax stuff.

If that's all copacetic, then Dazelpost incoming soon™
 
Dazel said:
Don't know why I forgot to mention that those guys pretty much lose to specs but yeah there you go.

Since discussion on sleep is cropping up again, I'd like to talk about it and some other stuff, but before I do, I have a few humble requests to make.

I understand that at the end of the day, I'm not nearly as versed in 1v1 as many of you are. I've played the metagame in a serious fashion for a whopping three months, I'm a complete newcomer to the community, and outside of getting some lucky wins in a tournament, I haven't done anything deserving of people's respect. I get that I'm as firmly on the bottom rung of the ladder when it comes to whose opinions matter and who's to be taken seriously. But I still don't think any of that merits being talked down to, derided, or called stupid, even if my opinions are misinformed, ignorant, or misguided. If I'm wrong, correct me. Call me thin skinned, but I don't have the constitution to be demeaned over whether or not I think it's fair to use a move in a children's RPG, so if that's the tone with which I'll be treated if I throw my hat back into the discussion, I'll bow out right here. Maybe hop back in again if Deoxys-Speed discussion heats back up after the Sleep and Snorlax stuff.

If that's all copacetic, then Dazelpost incoming soon™
Click to expand...

"children's RPG" our boy xsc wouldn't like the sound of that like the baguette he is

also how do u quote an amount of text without quoting the full post tyty

 
hey guys i want zmoves to be banned and im a bit bored so i will dissect mace's beloved zmove post and tell you why it's absolute flaming dogshit that should be completely ignored if not laughed at. i know im very late on this just had the motivation to reply.
MaceMaster said:
​
Fun
Let's be real: Z moves are fun. Like, really fun. Imagine: Your opponent selects Zygarde, and you've sent in Tapu Koko. Your opponent experiences a rush of dopamine as he believes that the game has been won. Little did he know that you were using Fairium Z. Zygarde's health bar drops to zero instantaneously. Those are the moments I live for. However, they can also be not fun. Think about this: You send in your Magearna against Kyurem-B. You can taste victory. Suddenly, Kyurem's sprite is enveloped in an aura, and your stomach drops. "Kyurem-B used Tectonic Rage!" Fuck. Not so fun. You know what the best part of Z moves is? Barbaracle. Just Barbaracle. This brings me to my next point...
Click to expand...
https://www.smogon.com/philosophy
smogon aims to have a competitive metagame. not fun. i don't care if the only way you get happy in your pathetic life is if you go on a pokemon sim and click a button and win turn 1 and get 20 points. this point is invalid because mace clearly does not demonstrate any sort of knowlege on smogon philosophy.
MaceMaster said:
Diversity
Pokemon like Barbaracle are some of my favorite parts of 1v1. In what other metagame can Barbaracle hold a niche in a meta with behemoths like Mega Metagross? If it wasn't for my heat mons, I honestly don't even know if I would like 1v1 all that much. It's so rewarding to innovate. With this, we have to ask ourselves a couple of questions, however: "Where do Z moves stand in regards to innovation?" and "is more diversity better?" In regards to the first question, it can definitely be said that Z moves increase the number of viable Pokemon in 1v1. I'll tell you right now that if Z moves didn't exist, Salazzle, Zygarde-10%, Clefable, Barbaracle, Thundurus-T, Ninetales-A, Keldeo, Entei, Volcarona, Umbreon, Carracosta and Blissey wouldn't be ranked. In regards to whether this is a good thing, however, we enter an area of opinion. In one train of thought, more viable Pokemon means a less centralized metagame. Another idea, however, is that more viable Pokemon means more things you have to prep for, and therefore more things your team loses to, adding an element of uncompetitiveness.
Click to expand...
smogon does not aim to have a diverse metagame either! it aims to have a competitive one. i don't care if you have fun using shit mons that are better in sm than oras because they can use something blatantly overpowered, flexible with almost no opportunity cost. bad point!]

think about it this way. we all know perish song is broken. just because you have fun using a cubone or a kricketune with perish song doesn't mean it should be allowed. 1v1 is supposed to be competitive, not fun or diverse. if you don't like that then succeed from smogon or something.
MaceMaster said:
1v1 as a Competitive Metagame
Lately, 1v1 has been becoming increasingly mainstream. There's been drastically more tournaments, and a revival of the analyses. With this, along with the considerations of Z moves' place in 1v1, it is important to define whether 1v1 is, and should be: a balanced and stable metagame like OU, or a laissez-faire tier for fun like AG. Some common arguments for 1v1 being uncompetitive are that it is a glorified game of rock-paper-scissors, and that is too dependent on luck. The luck dependency is definitely worse than 6v6, but is exaggerated. A crit or freeze can absolutely win you a game in 6v6. Why its less luck-dependent, though, is because the crit has to be at precisely the right moment whereas in 1v1, you either get a crit or don't. By the nature of 1v1, short battles, and in tournament play, best of 3-9 scenarios, these issues are somewhat mitigated, however. By amassing a large quantity of battles, the hax sort of just equals out. I don't know myself, but here's the implications if 1v1 was decided to be either fun or competitive. 1v1 for fun: Z moves are more fun than no Z moves. Banning them would be controversial, which is to say that they aren't considered to be obviously broken, and thus we let Z moves stay. 1v1 for competitiveness: How fun, enjoyable and rewarding the meta is isn't taken into account, and we ultimately decide to either ban or to not ban Z moves.
Click to expand...
i really have no clue what this paragraph is tying to say. "Z moves are more fun than no Z moves." again this shouldn't matter. it shouldn't matter that it's controversial either, looking at the kyub ban, sm 1v1 clearly has no problems with controversy. the last sentance makes sense. it follows smogon policy. but this whole paragraph feels like you took 3 pills of adderall and just cooked up a somewhat lengthy paragraph that's all over the place with no real meaning. i don't get what the hax thing has to do with z-moves. this paragraph is the "we live in a society" of mace's z-move post.
MaceMaster said:
Hard Counters, C-Teaming, The Playerbase, and Lures
When Kyurem-B was suspected, the primary reason was as follows: Kyurem-B has a number of hard counters that is all but zero, and its sets beat radically different things from each other. Because of this, paired with the fact that all of its sets are indistinguishable at team preview, it can be argued that there is no way to reliably beat Kyurem-B unless you use certain Mega Metagross, SpD Magearna, Terrakion or Jirachi, resulting in a decrease in the importance of skill in the metagame. If we didn't have Z moves, would Pokemon like Kyurem-B still be a problem? Although it could be argued either way, I'm inclined to say yes. Looking at Kyurem-B's less common/lure sets (everything but Icium and Scarf), only three of the twelve sets utilize Z moves. Additionally, the other Pokemon that emulates the uncompetitve manner of Kyurem-B best, Charizard with its split Mega Evolutions, by nature of the mechanic, uses Z moves 0% of the time. Another thing to talk about is distinguishing between lures and c-teaming. Lures are a permanent fixture of a team, designed to fool opponents into picking the wrong 'mon while patching up the weaknesses of the team, while c-teams are active efforts by players to 3-0 someone else's team, thus getting a free win. C-teams are quite simply uncompetitive. C-teaming exists as a result of 1v1's small playerbase, which like it or not, is a reality. The ultimate thing to be considered with these ideas is whether or not Z moves contribute to the uncompetitiveness of the meta in the aforementioned regards and also whether or not these factors make 1v1 a meta "for fun" or "for competitiveness."
Click to expand...
"is kyurem-black broken without z-moves" gee, i don't know, not like we had a previous team preview gen where kyurem black was allowed for its entirety. (this is my way of saying that kyub was not banned in oras and thus shouldn't be banned in a zmoveless sm meta, for the idiots reading this post).

if it's also not obvious, z-moves make cteaming and lures way too easy, with grassium fires, poisonium dragons, or shit like firium/groundium/electrium dnite. in a z-moveless meta where it's infernape vs tapu fini, nape will probably never beat fini. but all you have to do to get points on the ladder is snipe a dude running fini/snorlax/magearna and click the right zmove. so yes, they absolutely do contribute.
MaceMaster said:
"Slap On a Z Crystal"
One thing that I've heard a lot is that Z moves are mindless, outclass other items, and dumb down the meta. I fervently disagree with this mindset. Let's take a look at a resource: the Sets VR. You'll find some Pokemon that use only Z moves, some that would never consider using Z moves, but for the most part, what you'll find is Pokemon who can perform moderately well with or without Z moves. Straight off the bat we can say that Z crystals do not outclass other items. As for the other points, stupid people will be stupid people. Every good player ever does not mindlessly slap Z crystals on their Pokemon. If someone does do this, that's their problem, and even if we ban Z moves, they will continue to be bad players. One other thing to talk about here is whether or not Z moves are overcentralizing. Looking back at the sets VR, excluding Mega Evolutions, you'll find that Z moves make up about half of the viable items in the meta. I do not see this as a problem, but for the sake of a fair analysis, I've included this idea.
Click to expand...
Mindless ✓
Outclass other items ✓✓
Dumb down the meta ✓✓✓

z-moves in every way outclass every non choice scarf/mega stone item. very hard. there's a reason people run normalium meloetta (pre-celebrate), fairium magearna, electrium-z magnezone, ghostium aegislash groundium chomper , etc over choice items. z-moves have little to no oppurtunity cost and should almost always be used over choice items, which have a ton of opportunity cost (being locked into 1 move means you #1 can only use that move and #2 not use setup moves like sd on groundium chomp, cm on fairium gear). you can't say "might as well ban choice items" because they aren't just stupid brainless items you can use on a goddamn onix. they do consume the entire meta. as i said earlier, previous choice mons have converted to z-moves almost every time. there will be megas but almost everything else runs z-moves.
MaceMaster said:
As a Game Mechanic
One argument I've seen for not banning Z moves is that they are equivalent to a game mechanic. Quantum Tesseract had some really good thoughts on this, so I'm just gonna quote part of his post here:

I agree with most of this, but want to talk more about banning the users versus the mechanic some more. If something is going to be banned because it is overpowered, I definitely agree that the users, not the mechanic should be banned. However, this isn't about overpowered. This is about uncompetitive. If Z moves are uncompetitive, they should be banned outright instead of banning their individual users, as only one of them (in my opinion, of course) is actually broken.
Click to expand...
z-moves. are. not. a. mechanic. they are a series of items that boost the power of a move. mega stones ARE a mechanic. they turn 1 mon into a completely different mon. banning mega stones would be silly. you're just arbitrarily banning a group of pokemon when they really cause no problem (((unlike zmoves))). i have no clue where them being a mechanic comes from.
MaceMaster said:
The Meta Without Z Moves
What exactly the meta will look like after Z moves are banned cannot be said with any certainty. There certainly will be drastic changes to what's more or less viable, but that's not what I'm concerned about right now. What I'm concerned about is if certain Pokemon could become over or underwhelming without Z moves. In particular, I'm scared of Mega Gyarados and Zygarde. With Z moves gone, Koko, Lele and Mimikyu are sure to be far less viable. These three Pokemon are some of Mega Gyarados' best checks. While Gyarados' checks simply become less viable, Zygarde actually loses a lot of checks. While it can't brute past Magearna anymore, previously good checks like Swords Dance Mimikyu. I don't think that either will end up being broken, but if Z moves are banned, 1v1 will enter a completely new era, and the meta will have to be built from the ground up again.
Click to expand...
this section is 100% speculative bullshit that has 0 weight. no, gyarados won't be broken without zmoves (re: oras) and even if it is broken checks broken is NOT allowed in smogon philosophy. this should be completely ignored.
MaceMaster said:
Diversity Part 2
Previously, I talked about diversity in the manner of the number of Pokemon that are viable. Now I would like to talk about it in the manner of the number of sets that are viable. The thing that is causing me the most anxiety in regards to Z moves being banned is losing set diversity. Back to the Sets VR, you'll see that most non-mega Pokemon have at least one viable Z move set. The fear here is that the meta could become one-dimensional without Z moves. Here's some examples of Pokemon that would suffer not in viability, but in set diversity: Magearna (Fairium, Specs->Specs), Tapu Koko (Electrium, Fairium, Specs->Specs), Dragonite (Flyinium, Dragonium, Band->Band), Magnezone (Electrium, Specs, AB, Steelium->Specs, AB), Snorlax (Normalium, Curse->Curse), Primarina (Waterium, Specs, Fairium->Specs), etc.
Click to expand...
lol, it's really funny. just the other moment you were saying how they don't outclass every other item, now you're actually using facts to show that they in fact do! it does not matter if the meta is one dimensional or not. period. if anything, it's healthier when any mon can't just use some random z-move set and win games when it shouldn't.
MaceMaster said:
Conclusion
Before we decide whether or not Z moves are broken, we need to decide what 1v1 is really about. When it is time, I encourage everyone to really think about what they want from 1v1. I myself don't know if I want them banned yet. If/when Z moves are suspected, I believe that it needs to be a long suspect. The meta will change in ridiculous ways with Z moves gone, so I think that we should let the meta develop during the suspect. One option, although some upper people might not be too excited about, I think would work remarkably well: we have two suspect ladders up at the same time (one with and one without Z moves). In order to vote, you'd have to get reqs on both ladders to demonstrate that you understand what the new meta would be like. I hope my post exposed you to some new perspectives. Thanks for reading.
Click to expand...
1v1 IS ON SMOGON. THAT MEANS IT SHOULD FOLLOW SMOGON POLICY. that means that "b-b-but they're fun" in actuality carries 0 weight. what the 1v1 meta is about is NOT subjective. it should follow smogon policy. i like the dual ladder thing though. well, i like really any suspect ladder at this point.

overall mace, your post makes 0 coherent points and should be ignored. feel free to try again i guess.

really, i feel like a lot of the 1v1 playerbase at this point are kids with 2017 smogon regdates who don't want to ban z-moves because z-moves are all they know. they don't know smogon policy, only an insanely skewed and unhealthy meta. it's sad, really.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top