Metagame 1v1 Metagame Discussion

Le Creme Brule

Formerly AllFourtyOne
I'd like to open up a discussion about a Pokemon that might be uncompetitive: Grimmsnarl.

Standard set I'll refer to is the one I've seen on ladder and in roomtours: Drain Punch / Brick Break + Play Rough + Darkest Lariat + random status move.

Grimmsnarl's main attribute is its G-Move, G-Max Snooze, which prevents sleep. In most conditions, it uses it turn one and Max Guards on turn two to prevent being 2HKOed. After a Pokemon falls asleep, Grimmsnarl spams Fairy-, Fighting-, and Dark-type moves until the opposing Pokemon dies. Now this doesn't seem like much, but Dynamax gives Grimmsnarl enough bulk to survive most attacks.

Since Grimmsnarl is common on ladder, I've found that I have to run one of a select number of ways to beat it in order to be consistent on ladder instead of running, say, two Pokemon that require three turns of sleep to beat. Many Pokemon can 2HKO or 3HKO Grimmsnarl if they get lucky with sleep turns (e.g. Cinderace), but Grimmsnarl can win if it gets good sleep turn RNG. There are three ways to counter it: Fairy-types, Electric-types, and Steel-types. Fairy-type and Electric-type Max Moves set terrain that prevents sleep. Powerful Steel-types can OHKO Grimmsnarl. Problem is, many Pokemon that fit under these categories can lose anyway.

But can't Pokemon X beat Grimmsnarl? Here I'll list supposed hard counters and explain why Grimmsnarl can beat them (not a comprehensive list):
  • Poison-types: Poison-type Max Moves' power are capped at 95. Not enough power.
  • G-Max Alcremie: Doomed by its G-Move, which does not have the Misty Terrain effect.
  • G-Max Hatterene: Same as Alcremie.
  • Dragapult: Although it is a fine user of Electric-type coverage, its Fairy weakness prevents it from beating Grimmsnarl.
  • Dracozolt: Similarly doomed by typing like Dragapult.
  • :mew:: Has Thunder but a nasty Dark weakness.
  • :lucario: :life-orb: (Jolly): No joke, I've seen Grimmsnarl survive this mon's Meteor Mash. Similarly with Alcremie, people are forced to run Adamant now to OHKO bulky Fairies.
  • :ferrothorn: Not enough raw power to OHKO Grimmsnarl. Can be finished by Fighting-type moves into a Dark move.
  • :klinklang: Same with Ferrothorn.
  • Galarian :stunfisk:: Again, same.
  • :bronzong: Doesn't have the raw power to beat Grimmsnarl. Beaten by Dark-type moves.
Edit note: Non-G-Max Alcremie and Hatterene can beat Grimmsnarl. But who'd use non G-Max?

This is akin to Gen 7 Mimikyu: we've only seen the top level, the standard set, like Mimikium Z. It's too early for many players to realize that Grimmsnarl can use various sets to defeat its normal checks, such as Fire Punch and Babiri Berry for Steel-types, Stomping Tantrum for Electric-types, and special sets for physical walls. Likewise, Mimikyu had Curse sets with Ghostium Z, Rock Tomb, or even berries, and its offensive Ghostium Z and Mimikium Z sets.

The problem is that this is uncompetitive: regardless of your skill at mental games, Grimmsnarl has the potential to defeat a majority of Pokemon in the metagame. Teams are forced to run a Grimmsnarl hard counter for consistency. Two RNG-dependent checks are no good because of the unpredictability of sleep rolls. You don't need skill at mental games, a cornerstone of playing 1v1, to abuse Grimmsnarl. You just need good luck to beat many teams. Skill is irrelevant because there's little room for mental games against Grimmsnarl.

Now this is only the Gigantamax forme. In the cartridge games, it's confirmed that Gigantamax Pokemon are separately coded formes than their regular counterparts. If we are to ban Grimmsnarl for its G-Max move, we can just ban the G-Max form and keep the Dynamax.

Edit: Added a lot.
Alcremie just runs sweet Veil and ur cooked, hat’s G-max Move is super bad (probably will run Normal Dynamax) lucario should run special this gen due to steel beam, zolt can use electric move to stop the sleep
 
  • Wow
Reactions: pqs

Cantius

I COULD BE BANNED!
I've seen Zolt get 2-shotted by the Fairy move if my opponent's not greedy enough to go for sleep
But I forgot about Sweet Veil
My problem with running special Lucario is that it has bad coverage (physical gets Ice Punch, Stone Edge, and Thunder Punch), but I'll try Mixed
And yeah G-Max Smite looks bad in 1v1
Well thanks
 
View attachment 207531

So I'm not badged. So I can't put this is in Policy Review. Which is why I'm making this thread in the much more important and much more esteemed 1v1 discussion thread.

I think it's no secret that I am of the opinion that dynamax is inherently busted and should be banned outright. But before I get into the details of why dynamax as a mechanic should be banned, I want to make a small argument of why dynamax being swiftly banned, even if it's later tested is important.

Most suspects on smogon follow a general rule: the side that wishes for a change in the status quo is the side that needs to make the argument for change (see III) For example, during gen 7 1v1, Kyurem-B was suspected twice with the same requirement of having . The first time it was still allowed in the metagame, and despite having 50% of the votes for a ban it didn't meet the required threshold to change the status quo of being allowed, and was thus not banned. However after council shenanigans it ended up banned and retested much later on. This time with 55% of votes in favor of keeping banned, Kyurem-B didn't meet the threshold to change it's status quo of being banned, and was thus banned. I'm trying to illustrate here is that the mere context around how we initially treat Dynamax can have lasting impacts on the 1v1 metagame.

Part 2 of this argument is that, smogon, generally, and 1v1, typically, believe that a potentially broken element should be allowed in a metagame it's being tested in during that test. This is done so that players can directly play with the broken element, and don't have to theorymon about it. Essentially, no decisions are made from vague ideas about what the pokemon or metagame could look like. I have no intention on changing this tradition. I think it's smart and important. However, because dynamax is so ubiquitous the very core of the metagame is changed with its presence. From everything to EVing, move choices, item choices, etc on every single pokemon who dynamaxes (which is of course 95% of pokemon in the metagame). Because of this, it would be unfair to the playerbase and the format itself to not be given the opportunity to fully explore a non-dynamax metagame, and no, a single tour doesn't cut it. It doesn't have to last forever. It doesn't even have to last a long time. But we should be allowed to, we need to explore what a no dynamax gen 8 1v1 looks like.

Alright now to the specific argument on why dynamax should be banned. I'm going to try to hit a lot of points here not all of them are going to be directly related to the previous or the next, but I'll do my best to try organize them in a sufficient manner so that it doesn't seem like I'm jumping from one train of thought to a completely different one constantly. These are the points I'm going to try and hit.

1. Dynamax and Gigantamax fundamentally behave completely differently than every single other mechanic competitive pokemon battling has ever seen, can't be adequately compared to them, and how they function is broken.

2. Individual Max Moves and Gigantamax moves are excessively powerful and unable to be reconciled with a brief metagame like 1v1.

3. The lack of Max Status moves aside from Max Guard, among other factors, considerably limits the scope of playstyle viably available.

4. Dynamax's presence in the metagame is not limited to certain pokemon and will occur at the same level of oppression regardless of the best dynamax user being banned.

And finally, a quick disclaimer. My first claim is that Dynamax and Gigantamax can't be adequately compared to other mechanics. However, I will be comparing individual effects of Max Moves to regular moves and other things of that nature. Why I do this will hopefully become apparent throughout my argument, but briefly, while the mechanics themselves aren't comparable, the effects are.

And with that let's jump right in.

There seems to be some ideas that the council holds, that because Dynamax is a core mechanic to the game, it would be preposterous to ban it outright, in a similar vein banning moves or abilities would be. Furthermore, when you ban dynamax you're not disqualifying a specific entity from appearing in a match, but are essentially forcing a gentleman's rule where you both agree never to hit the button that will appear regardless.

These ideas are ridiculous.

First and foremost, Dynamax is nothing like abilities, typing, moves, or anything that is essential to the gameplay of pokemon. You can't ban moves. You can't ignore typings and abilities. That's how the game functions. If they weren't there you wouldn't be playing pokemon. It'd be something similar perhaps with complex damage calculations lacking modifiers that arise from typing or abilities or doing whatever you're doing without moves, but it wouldn't be pokemon. These mechanics aren't bannable. These mechanics aren't touchable. They have to exist. You cannot have pokemon without these mechanics. (I know someone would bring up abilities not being in a thing til generation 3, and so are generations 1 and 2 not pokemon? In this context it's fairly obvious that I'm talking specifically about modern pokemon where the ability is inseparable from the pokemon and has to exist, so shut up.)

Now, there are mechanics that can be upheld by a gentleman's rule. The broadest being, "don't use items". From a very, very far distance, there actually can be comparisons between holding items and dynamax. For example, every pokemon can hold an item (regardless of if the ability prevents it from having an effect, it still holds an item). Some pokemon can use items in general better because of a combination of stats, moves, abilities, etc. However, there are three huge things that differentiate "holding an item" and dynamax, which is why even the idea of "ban pokemon from holding items" sounds absurd. First, items are noticeably limited in scale. They have notoriously minor effects with minor drawbacks or very large effects with very large drawbacks. Wide lens only buffs moves accuracy by 1.1x. Leftovers, one of the most items in 6v6, heals a mere 6.25% per turn. These effects are so minor in comparison to moves and abilities that could have similar effects but take up a turn to utilize or are restricted in distribution. Meanwhile Choice items and Assault Vest limit which moves you can use at all, which means only a select role of pokemon can use them effectively in their tiers. Dynamax does not share this. Their effects are huge, which I'll get to more later. Nearly every pokemon wants to Dynamax and will Dynamax even if it behaves vastly differently from other pokemon. Secondly, items have typically singular effects. They change one aspect of that pokemon and what it does. Choice Scarf just boosts speed. Aguav Berry (the BEST BERRY) just heals the pokemon. Dynamaxing is multi-faceted, it boosts move power, causes secondary effects, becomes immune to flinching, boosts HP etc, etc. This allows a wide variety of use of by a single Dynamax that isn't comparable to the ability to hold items. Finally, Dynamax is turn-limited, meaning the length of the match is directly correlated to the effect Dynamax has, which in 1v1 is a lot.

Anyways, now let's talk about the real mechanics you want to compare Dynamax to: Mega Evolution and Z-Moves. And no, I don't think you can compare Dynamax to them either, at the very least, not in a 1v1 setting. Mega Evolution changed a pokemon's stats, abilities, and typing. Don't get me wrong. That's insane. Mega Evolutions were insanely powerful. But they weren't universal. Mega Stones had to be used by a specific pokemon to get a specific transformation. This limited scope of availability narrowed down Mega Evolution to a manageable way to deal with. Essentially, Mega Evolution just made new pokemon. And if a specific Mega Pokemon was broken you could ban it. And while this dichotomy of creating a different pokemon exists with Gigantamaxing, it behaves too differently to really classify a base pokemon and it's Giganta counterpart like we do with Megas. Now, the reason I spent so long on items, when no one really wanted to make that argument, is that Z-Moves are at their core fancy items. Now some people will want to claim, that Dynamax, because of it ignoring items while in a Dynamax form, acts as a singular fancy item as well. This isn't the case. Z-moves allowed for one time super strong moves to be used on every pokemon. Or in the case of status moves, somewhat buffed existing effects of the status move once. And that was it. Z-moves had a single effect with a drawback, even if the drawback was relatively less potent in a 1v1 setting. Now if you didn't read the item paragraph, I'll re-emphasize it here; Dynamaxing is multi-faceted, meaning the concurrent combination of effects allows it to behave vastly differently than Z-moves did.

And now lets break down the argument, "It's fine if Dynamax happens in 90+% of 1v1 games because Z-moves happened in 90% of the 1v1 games (where mega evolution wasn't first being used)" Z-Moves were used by the vast majority of pokemon in 1v1, not because it was absurdly powerful, but rather because it was the best item available for the 1v1 setting. Consider this Zeraora Set. Nothing about this set screams, "RUN ELECTRIUM Z". There's no ability that lets Zeraora augment damage akin to Tapu Koko's Electric Surge. There's no guarenteed survive and boost combo akin to Crustle. It's not gaining accuracy akin to Hustle Durant. Sure Fake Out's there, but realistically, it can be dropped. So why is Electrium Z used. It's there, because it's the least worst item available. Choice items would lock you into the move, Life Orb would damage you. Zap Plate isn't as strong. So why not just stick a z-move on it and call it a day. Now don't get me wrong there were plenty of pokemon that sought to use Z moves to their fullest capacity, but the majority of pokemon used them because really there wasn't a better option not because it was the best thing to do. Dynamaxing is not like this. The scenarios where Dynamaxing at one point during the entire game is always the wrong choice is extremely narrow, because the item effect is always necessary, the health gain is never necessary, and/or the base moves effect is better than the Max Moves effect (see: Body Press). This allows for sets like this Inteleon, where it's built completely absent from the concept of Dynamaxing, yet still will Dynamax every single game.

Now merely occurring in the vast, vast majority of games for no downside and simply because there is a free benefit is just one of the reasons dynamax should be banned. Yea everything above this was point 1. I still have 3 more. But before I can move on, I want to briefly address something of a precedent issue. While no, Dynamax isn't comparable to other mechanics. It is a mechanic. And banning it would mean having a ban in-game rather than one in validator. Which is a pretty big deal. But it has happened. Once. Now that I've set that bar for myself, I will now be spending the rest of this post trying to make the argument that Dynamax is indeed just as broken and deserves the same kind of action as Mega Rayquaza, at least in a 1v1 setting.

Ok so let's take take a closer look into the Max Moves. There's a couple different approaches to take for Max Moves. First there is power scaling.
Thankfully, the power scaling is relatively tame. For reference the important moves go from 80-100 BP to 130 BP, 110-120 BP to 140 BP, and 150 BP moves cap out at 150 BP. The damage scalar itself is pretty tame, that's not even a 1.3x boost from the most common moves powerful moves. But of course there's more. These moves don't miss. Which while initially pretty meh, is actually a pretty big difference. It is possible to calculate effective BP, of BP*Acc. After playing a thousand games, this would be the calculated average BP. Because Max Moves don't miss, while their base form does, the effective BP increases by more than just the scalar. Fire Blast for an example, has a BP of 110 and an effective BP of a mere 93.5, while flamethrower has a BP of 90 and an effective BP of 90 as well. However despite now similar effective BPs as base moves the effective BP of their max moves still follow get the boost base off a real BP, so the effective scalar BP is a lot larger, especially for lower accuracy moves, which tend to be the more powerful moves. However, even then the effective damage scalar isn't much. It's there and has a noticeable impact, but it's far from the main issue.

Most viable moves do things. Instead of losing accuracy, moves tend to include drawbacks for higher power BPs. For example, Flare Blitz for a nifty 120 BP and 100% accuracy also inflicts recoil damage. Hyper Beam, and variants, have a pricetag of losing the next turn. In 6v6 games, these drawbacks can really hurt. So much so, that these high BP moves are going to actually not be viable. But this is 1v1. A lot of the times these drawbacks are seriously mitigated by the simple fact that only one pokemon needs to faint for a win. Sometimes these drawbacks are significant, particularly against stall-oriented pokemon, but against offense vs offense, they don't tend to matter. Max moves drop these drawbacks entirely. Which again, is no big deal honestly. What is a big deal is what these moves add. For a lower BP move to be viable, it has to do something. Flame Charge raises speed, Electroweb lowers opponents speed etc. etc. Every single max move adds an effect. Most of which are incredibly desirable. All fire type max moves set up Sunny day which not only gets rid of a water weakness but also boosts that very same max moves damage out put. In fact, 9 of the max moves have the potential of increasing their own damage output on the second turn (Fire, Water, Electric, Psychic, Grass, Fighting, Ghost, Poison, and Dark). And those aren't even the best ones. Both Flying and Normal affect speed, and therefore turn order allowing a slower pokemon to suddenly move first on the following turn. Meanwhile Rock, Ground, Steel, Dragon, and Bug all can give some sort of bulk. Truly the only mediocre effects are fairy, who sets up misty terrain that doesn't boost fairy type moves, and ice, who sets up hail which doesn't boost ice type moves. Except because these moves are setting weather and terrain, they're also affecting abilities that interact with weather and terrain like Slush Rush, Swift Swim, Chlorophyll, Solar Power; abilities which are typically really bad in 1v1 because they are difficult to activate. Oh but that's not all of course. Let's not forget G-Max moves, which tend to package in a desirable status moves. G-Max Snooze gives Yawn, G-Max Finale heals. These Max Moves and G-Max moves completely flip the idea on its head that stronger moves bring drawbacks and weaker moves bring bonuses. Max Moves are effectively acting as regular moves that are 2-3x as strong as their base move (if they even have a comparable base damaging move), and I'd argue is the real damage scalar that should be discusses. Hyper beam may get a 1x max move scalar, but rapid spin is getting a 3x damage scalar.

But so what? So these moves make smaller moves much stronger, but so what. They're not Z-moves. They're not Choice Specs Hyper Beam. They're not OHKOing the opponent. But they're not trying to. What these moves do is build up over several turns. Dynamax lasts 3 turns. It's not necessary to OHKO when you can 2HKO consistently. The damage over 2-3 turns from these Max moves are so much more than anything else 1v1 has ever witnessed. For comparison, Tough Claws Mega Charizard X with Flare Blitz had an effective 2 turn BP of 468, now every single fire type has an effective 2 turn BP of 525 with Fire Blast. Dynamax isn't trying to OHKO. It wants to win in two or three turns. That's the game plan, and it's absurdly strong.

And all of the other facets of Dynamax bolster this game plan. Dynamax effectively over doubles base HP (while also boosting Base HP even more for pokemon with lower base HP). In other words, Blissey has the largest base HP at 255. Fully invested Blissey can have a max HP of 714. Vikavolt has a substandard Base HP of 77. While Dynamaxed, Vikavolt has a Max HP of 716. That's an over 3x Base HP modification. Now of course EV investment does have an impact as an uninvested HP stat is comparable to an uninvested 224. Meaning, Dynamax Vikavolt has a BST in the range of 647 - 678 depending on how invested its HP stat is. This is a pretty drastic bulk effect occurring for all pokemon. More than the HP Change for Zygarde > Zygarde Complete. For an idea on some other "DynaBST" see this chart.

Initially, it's tempting to say, well with this massive HP buff and bulk buff should massively favor defensive play styles and stall-oriented playstyles. This is simply not the case for one reason: Max Guard. Max Guard takes away the possibility for defensive pokemon to simultaneously enjoy dynamax buffs, while also still using their moveset. Defensive pokemon don't want Protect in their moveset. And they certainly don't want 3 Protects in their moveset. Because of this, defensive Pokemon can't Dynamax, or if they do, can't do it well enough. This leaves only the very best and the very strongest defensive pokemon left to represent the entirety of stall as a playstyle. Similarly, hyper offensive pokemon also are hurt by Dynamax. These pokemon like the new Galarian Darmanitan are forced to struggle as they can't Dynamax and get the push they need to get the extra power or speed from Choice items and the power from Dynamax. They are also forced to deal 2x the amount of damage they had initially needed to thanks to the bulk effect. In short, pokemon whose inital strategy was to OHKO in one turn, can't anymore, and the pokemon whose strategy is to survive over many many turns can't either. So what's left?

For the past 6 years, while 1v1 has existed, it's grown away from it's initial beginnings of getting the best thing that hits the hardest as it can as fast as it can. 1v1 has grown to have complex EV spreads, a lot of consideration to bulk requirements, and several turn focus that once eluded the format. Over the years, 1v1 has developed towards a bulky offensive play style. The goal usually remains the same: survive a hit or 2, set up the necessary boosts, and fire back with a strong enough attack to take out the opponent. Recovery wasn't utilized, because the opponent should be dead by the time it's needed. This can be seen in Psychium Z Tapu Lele, that chose to run Z-Reflect and 2HKO with Psychic or Psyshock, Dragonite who'd rely on Multiscale to gain extra turns while attacking, or Mega Charizard X who would hard invest in Defense or Special Defense to give it the bulk necessary to set up Dragon Dance and win with Flare Blitz or Outrage. And now, nearly every single viable pokemon will be doing something like this but better.

The increased HP for offensive pokemon, the additional effects on Max Moves that favor multi-turn power, and the complete utter disregard for Hyper Offensive or Stall-Oriented pokemon to gain pretty much anything, allows for one extremely viable playstyle: Bulky DynaOffense. The plan is simple. Take a Gyarados, survive a hit thanks to huge bulk, use a 120 BP max Airstream once or twice to get some speed, and KO by the end of Gyarados's third attack. Take a Charizard, survive a hit or 2, use a 150 BP max flare to set up sun, and then use it again to guarentee the KO. With Dragapult, survive a hit, use 120 BP Max Phantasm to lower their defense, and do it again or instead survive an extra hit with a Max Wyrmwind by lowering their attack, or do both! It doesn't matter. It's all the same. Dynamax gives so much extra power to Bulky Offense and so little to the other playstyles, that they are nearly invalidated. And that's a problem.

I'd like to share a story from the olden days. From when 1v1 was an Other Metagame, The Immortal led 1v1, Osra went by The Official Glyx, and Perish Song was allowed in 1v1. See back then, two brave users by the name of Dream Eater Gengar and Rumpelstiltskin had a discussion about Perish Song and how it fit into the 1v1 metagame. I won't bore you with details. But they came to the conclusion and presented the argument that Perish Song was an unhealthy addition to the 1v1 metagame and convinced a large number of users to ban it. They didn't claim it was broken, overpowered, uncompetitive, but rather as aesf puts in his post, that Perish Song completely invalidates the defensive playstyle. There wasn't a single way, for a defensive or stall pokemon to win, ever, against a simple Perish Song Meloetta. Despite users agreeing that Choice Specs Meloetta was stronger, the ability for Perish Song to stop a playstyle at large was too large.

And this is what Dynamax does as well. It forces a single playstyle and completely invalidates other ones. There is no way to utilize Dynamax stall. There is no way to use dynamax for hyper offense. It's just Bulky DynaOffense. That's all there is. And drastic action needs to take place to allow other playstyle the opportunity to even compete in the metagame.

Now at this point, there is only one real argument to talk about. The user argument. The argument has two parts to it. 1. Any issues with Dynamax or Gigantamax can be solved by identifying the most problematic users, banning those and then moving on. 2. Because bad or mediocre pokemon don't become really good with the addition of Dynamax, then Dynamax as a whole isn't problematic. Both of these arguments are flawed, and I'll try to explain why.

So the first part assumes two things. The first being that there is a fair way to utilize Dynamax and of course an unfair way to utilize Dynamax. This is the Tapu Koko assumption. That being Tapu Koko took Electrium Z to its absolute limits and was an extremely powerful force to be reckoned with. Tapu Koko was banned for as osra put "Electrium Koko itself is essentially just a blank slate with which you can make particular EV spreads and movesets to beat an insanely large variety of Pokemon, relevant and otherwise." Tapu Koko itself, with its moves, stats, and electric surge, allowed for it to do something with Electrium Z which was absurd. The second assumption is that the second best, but previously overshadowed user of the same strategy isn't good enough to warrant a ban as well. While Zeroara often does similar things to Tapu Koko, with the same Z-Crystal and everything, it is not as good. It's weaker and frailer and can't beat the plethora of things Tapu Koko did. What it has doesn't make up for what it lacks. Neither of these assumptions can be made with Dynamax. Dynamax can optimally be used by a vast swath of pokemon to accomplish the same goal of utilizing max moves to set up and then KOing. The second best user doesn't lack the key feature that the best user had, and that is setting up a powerful Max Move and getting a lot of gains from it.

The second part is a bad argument to make. It comes from the desire to try and isolate the broken element. For example, in the recent Dragonite Suspect Discussion, the possibility of Multiscale being banned was brought up, but as Quote said, "Trying to determine the "most broken" aspect only leads to mediocre arguments about subjectivity and sends us in circles." There is no most broken aspect of an element. It's the functionality of that element itself. In this case, it's irrelevant if Magikarp, Metapod, or Shedinja are still just as bad as they were before even with Dynamax, because it's the element of Dynamax that is the unbalance. When Baton Pass was banned it wasn't considered, if weaker pokemon also doing baton pass chains were also broken. When Shadow Tag was banned, it wasn't considered how a pokemon with little use from trapping would do with a trapping ability. They were discussed in the manner in which they existed and how they functioned, and in the same manner I believe Dynamaxing should only be discussed in how it functions.

Alright, and I think that's a wrap. I hope you enjoyed reading this, or not reading this, whatever floats your boat. I don't really want to make TL;DR for this, because I think it'd miss the whole point of a complete and total argument that I was trying to make. But if you want, just y'know

TL;DR: Ban Dynamax
I just wanted to add one other thing lost heros missed about why dynamax should be banned.
So in this post (read it if you haven't yet its wonderful) lost heros brings up the base power and secondary effects of each of the max moves along with of the regular moves they stem from but forgot to mention this, since there are 18 types + status moves all becoming max guard this means that, excluding gigantimax moves, there are 19 dynamax moves. Since there is no drawback to dynamaxing when you are about to attack, this means that the majority of the battles in 1v1 will have only 19 moves being used in them. No matter what battle replay you see, besides possibly setting up before you dynamax, you will only see 19 total moves being used. Part of the uniqueness of 1v1 is not just the Pokemon you can use in the format that wouldn't be seen anywhere else but the use of moves that can't be used anywhere else either. Stockpile; flame charge and rock tomb; endure; hyper beam and the elemental versions and many many more are all unique to 1v1 in viability. By having Dynamax in the metagame we take away so many of these moves and the strategies that come with them in favor of using the same 19 all of the time. We take away the individuality of the Pokemon that use them to stand out in favor of every Pokemon doing the same exact thing.

So basically ban dynamax
 

Alakazam

Why'd you leave the keys upon the table
is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Contributor to Smogon
Moderator
Dynamax Update Post

Hey guys, so after letting the metagame of 1v1 sit for a while, Dynamax has seem to have proven itself to be a potentially hazardous game mechanic. This was predicted before the release of Sword and Shield, but it would not have been right to remove a Generation-defining game mechanic essentially pre-launch before it had the chance to be experienced within the community and the chance for a metagame to develop around it, and to see if it truly would negatively affect 1v1.

However, time has been allotted, and several things are abundantly clear concerning the effect Dynamax has in a competitive sense.

For one, Dynamaxing as a strategy is always going to inherently force 50/50s. A winning strategy in a 1v1 Dynamax metagame is to attempt to stall out Dynamax turns through the use of Substitute, which almost every Pokemon can learn, and will inevitably lead to 50/50s concerning whether or not to use Substitute on an opposing Dynamax, or to use an attack to break a Substitute, and you have almost no reason not to when coverage options and setup moves are almost entirely useless, considering Dynamax gives you access to 100-150 base power moves with guaranteed secondary effects like weather and terrain. Depending on the bulk of the Pokemon in a matchup, this will involve anywhere from one or more 50/50s in almost every matchup, which severely takes away from the ability to play the game in competitive sense and actually turns the metagame into the RPS that everyone thinks we are, instead of the teambuilding- and lead predicting- metagame we focus on.

Another part of Dynamaxing that is problematic is the creative drain in setbuilding brought on by Dynamaxing. A Pokemon that cannot use Dynamaxing effectively cannot win in this metagame, and while dynamaxing is often touted as a great equalizer, in actuality only makes the already good Pokemon factorially better than the mediocre ones who could stand to benefit. Why bother changing your team around when you can run the same 3 busted Pokemon who can all use dynamax better than everyone else, and can even win in the team ditto if they pull off a 50/50, which all the other teams will be relying on anyway? And unlike how banning a Pokemon could be done in previous gens to remove specific strategies that only they could utilize, Dynamaxing will allow the next best Pokemon with a similar niche to utilize the exact same, not similar but worse, strategies as the banned Pokemon, because the Dynamax moves will remain the same.

These combination of factors, alongside numerous other reasons, have led the council to action. However, before a decision is made, we would like the community to speak up on how the process should be done. Would people prefer a potential Quickban of Dynamax, because the community at large thinks this issue is far too obviously unfit for 1v1 and does not even require further thought, or would the community prefer a Suspect Test of Dynamax, which would be more democratic in the process and the usual way 1v1 prefers to do things, but could take longer, would be harder to narrow down the exact reqs needed (due to the still-developing ladder), and could potentially lead to dynamax staying if the 60% supermajority isn't made?

Right now, we are looking for community feedback on what everyone would be most comfortable for. This isn't a voting process - our decision will be based on the clear and concise arguments for or against a quickban, or for or against a suspect test, or against either option. We don't want one liners, if you can't be bothered to actually vocalize why you have certain values or opinions, then they must not be important enough for you. Please make your opinions known, we will be keeping track.
 
Last edited:
Personally I think dynamax should be suspected in that I feel like without it the metagame would feel fairly dry (not a lot going for it to be new and interesting).
 

Jamez155

1v1's finest
imo we quickban this, I hate playing the ladder like this, dynamax takes place in 95 percent of 1v1 games it seems and really takes the skill out of the game and makes u predict the sub or protect or whatever move you use to stall out dynamax moves, then strike back with your own. imo dynamax isn’t fun at all and takes 0 skill and just 50/50s 95 percent of games not a fun way to play
Edit: I’m bad at typing these
 
I would go for a quickban for Dynamax. Dynamax has shown for the past 2 weeks that it's extremely unhealthy and centralising to the tier. Several threats have come and gone but none are as obviously deterrent to 1v1's progress as Dynamax/Gigantamax seems to be. This could be just me, but I haven't seen a serious gen81v1 team (or indeed a serious match) which can withstand most of the given scenarios of most used Pokemon. (I suspect) This is because the sheer amount of offensive possibilities that Dynamax provides makes it hard to prepare a team for an offensive threat.

Why not suspect test?

I feel like these two weeks have taught us much about the possibilities of Dynamax, and while it might not have displayed a clear picture of how a meta would shift(think: RegiSerp rising and falling in gen7), it has given us a broad picture about the whole thing. Though it would seem good in the long run, a suspect test could allow the meta to "adapt" to this abomination which shouldn't have been allowed in 1v1, and the "trend" I talked about in the previous sentence does not seem to offer a stability to the whole game in a way that previous gens has (or at least it didn't in my head).


Note: While a Dynamax-less meta would initially sound stale, I'm pretty sure that in the long run, no one would regret banning Dynamax, some the meta would evolve into something better than what a Dynamax 1v1 would be.
 
I think Dynamax should be quickbanned and then potentially suspect tested at a later date.

I've already shared my reasoning in a previous post for why Dynamax should be banned in the first place along with agreeing with all of Lost Heros' arguments so instead of another explanation merely summarizing those two posts I'm going to explain why quickban is the correct option. We need to see what a metagame without Dynamax looks like before we can decide if it really should be included into the meta. The problem with Dynamax is that in the current state of the meta its not fundamentally broken because Dynamax Pokemon check each other and therefore make nothing that broken; instead it puts a strangle-hold on all strategies and play-styles except for itself, making it greatly over-centralizing (that was a lot of compound words in one sentence). If we spent a week or two developing a new meta without Dynamax we could then see if we could somehow fit it into the new meta without limiting creativity and versatility, two staples of 1v1.

I'm just going to be honest here, a 1v1 metagame with Dynamax is not enjoyable and if it continues to remain unbanned I see myself losing interest in 1v1 as a whole very quicky
Also did no one above me read the part about no one-liners or are y'all just dumb
 

Cantius

I COULD BE BANNED!
It doesn't look like we have to wait for the higher metagames. 6v6 is the central focus of the current discussion at Policy Review, and it does us no favors to find that we've wasted our time waiting because Dynamax is only banned in 6v6. Little Cup (Quote with the flashy LC Leader tag :psyduck:), a 6v6 format, has already banned Dynamax independently. 1v1 has major differences from 6v6, so we have to decide on a Dynamax ban by ourselves.

To the anti-Dynamax camp: do you really want a suspect test? Do you want to suffer for a few more weeks under Dynamax? Do you want your opinions to fade, Dynamax to grow old, because everyone will need to play a million games with Dynamax to set reqs? How about a suspect ladder without Dynamax? Do you want to judge on the basis of skill right now, or see a metagame without Dynamax? Similarly with the current No Dynamax Tour, or a Dynamax quickban with an unban suspect.

Quickbanning is going to be like Gen 7 Z-Detect. Everyone wants to ban Z-Detect; the council decides to quickban – poof! a backlash, and the council is forced to retract the quickban. Then a suspect is concluded soon and we decide to ban it anyway. At least it was "democratic."

It's now or never. We ban Dynamax early, or we don't do it at all. Let's not wait for a few months – by then, everyone will grow accustomed to Dynamax. Don't like Dynamax? Well, too bad – you might never gain the momentum needed to ban it again – because a central mechanic of the game, however broken, will be imprinted in the minds of the new while the old leave the community.

Finally, the Smogon tiering system is based on skill, which is a subjective metric. Pro-ban and anti-ban arguments, therefore, are not objective. We do not aim to maximize metagame health in every way possible; rather, we seek to selectively ban elements of the metagame that reduce the skill required "too much" – whatever that means, but we can decide. "Dynamax makes the game no fun," "Pro-Dynamax players don't have any arguments," are irrelevant – how does Dynamax actually impact the interaction between skill and the game's outcome? This is why we're buried under the centralization arguments that ignore the fact that broken checks broken while we forget to actually examine skill.
 
I feel that Dynamax (and Gigantamax) should be quick banned. Making the metagame revolve around 50/50s is super degenerate, and isn't fun to play. We have given it a pretty fair chance I feel, and it's proven to be pretty unhealthy. Dynamax is already being discussed for a ban in formats where it has more counterplay. I said in the video with Bandit that I feel Dynamax should see a suspect, but since seeing it in action I have changed my mind and think it should just be gone. If a suspect is deemed appropriate, I think a quickban still makes sense, with the suspect being to unban it, given how impactful it will be on the generation to come. If the number of people who want a Dynamax meta is really that significant, then they should be able to reach the 60% require to free it. Putting the burden of 60% majority on getting rid of a hugely busted mechanic would be a bad way to handle this imo.
 

Alakazam

Why'd you leave the keys upon the table
is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Contributor to Smogon
Moderator
It doesn't look like we have to wait for the higher metagames. 6v6 is the central focus of the current discussion at Policy Review, and it does us no favors to find that we've wasted our time waiting because Dynamax is only banned in 6v6. Little Cup (Quote with the flashy LC Leader tag :psyduck:), a 6v6 format, has already banned Dynamax independently. 1v1 has major differences from 6v6, so we have to decide on a Dynamax ban by ourselves.

To the anti-Dynamax camp: do you really want a suspect test? Do you want to suffer for a few more weeks under Dynamax? Do you want your opinions to fade, Dynamax to grow old, because everyone will need to play a million games with Dynamax to set reqs? How about a suspect ladder without Dynamax? Do you want to judge on the basis of skill right now, or see a metagame without Dynamax? Similarly with the current No Dynamax Tour, or a Dynamax quickban with an unban suspect.

Quickbanning is going to be like Gen 7 Z-Detect. Everyone wants to ban Z-Detect; the council decides to quickban – poof! a backlash, and the council is forced to retract the quickban. Then a suspect is concluded soon and we decide to ban it anyway. At least it was "democratic."

It's now or never. We ban Dynamax early, or we don't do it at all. Let's not wait for a few months – by then, everyone will grow accustomed to Dynamax. Don't like Dynamax? Well, too bad – you might never gain the momentum needed to ban it again – because a central mechanic of the game, however broken, will be imprinted in the minds of the new while the old leave the community.

Finally, the Smogon tiering system is based on skill, which is a subjective metric. Pro-ban and anti-ban arguments, therefore, are not objective. We do not aim to maximize metagame health in every way possible; rather, we seek to selectively ban elements of the metagame that reduce the skill required "too much" – whatever that means, but we can decide. "Dynamax makes the game no fun," "Pro-Dynamax players don't have any arguments," are irrelevant – how does Dynamax actually impact the interaction between skill and the game's outcome?
... What exactly are you arguing for? Do you want the quickban or the suspect test, you seem to be against both but want Dynamax gone
 

Le Creme Brule

Formerly AllFourtyOne
Quickban Dynamax my god.
1. It has no place in a balanced or diverse meta, shutting down creative potential and making the strong pokemon exponentially stronger.
2. It’s a 50/50 fest, too many matchups are determined by subbing on dynamax, its incredibly unhealthy. It turns the meta into a series of truly pointless 50/50s that turn common sense matchups into ridiculous shitshows.
3. It’s over centralizing. Dynamax is the strategy of Swish 1v1. I’ve called it “turbo cancer”, and my feeling on this has only grown. Every pokemon is forced to use dynamax by A. The massive boost to power and B. The lack of item requirement. Dynamax is almost impossible not to use, and the only real way to beat a dynamax user is another dynamax user, Making it fit one of smogon’s ban policies, where if one player uses it and another does not, it gives the player who uses it a drastically unfair advantage.
 
Opinion: Quickban

Let's be real, the meta is super bland right now, I doubt new fun tech will be discovered soon, and at the end of the day, isn't that what 1v1's always been?
Nobody wants Dynamaxing in official tours, it hinders the use of creative sets and creates a metagame with about 20 usable mons (maybe like, a bit more).

Better quickban it now, instead of pulling the dead horse that is dynamaxing for a few more weeks.
 

Cantius

I COULD BE BANNED!
OK Alakazam. I support a quickban. It'll receive a backlash, but the council should ignore it. All that will happen is the same result from a suspect.
There is no way at all that Dynamax will survive the suspect. Will we suspect for the sake of "democratic progress?" Will we follow a flimsy guideline for the sake of following a flimsy guideline? Well, I have a little statement:

If an issue has no way of being accepted by a certain process, there's no need for it to be run through the entire process.
 

ayedan

Andre Iguodala of 1v1
It doesn't look like we have to wait for the higher metagames. 6v6 is the central focus of the current discussion at Policy Review, and it does us no favors to find that we've wasted our time waiting because Dynamax is only banned in 6v6. Little Cup (Quote with the flashy LC Leader tag :psyduck:), a 6v6 format, has already banned Dynamax independently. 1v1 has major differences from 6v6, so we have to decide on a Dynamax ban by ourselves.

To the anti-Dynamax camp: do you really want a suspect test? Do you want to suffer for a few more weeks under Dynamax? Do you want your opinions to fade, Dynamax to grow old, because everyone will need to play a million games with Dynamax to set reqs? How about a suspect ladder without Dynamax? Do you want to judge on the basis of skill right now, or see a metagame without Dynamax? Similarly with the current No Dynamax Tour, or a Dynamax quickban with an unban suspect.

Quickbanning is going to be like Gen 7 Z-Detect. Everyone wants to ban Z-Detect; the council decides to quickban – poof! a backlash, and the council is forced to retract the quickban. Then a suspect is concluded soon and we decide to ban it anyway. At least it was "democratic."

It's now or never. We ban Dynamax early, or we don't do it at all. Let's not wait for a few months – by then, everyone will grow accustomed to Dynamax. Don't like Dynamax? Well, too bad – you might never gain the momentum needed to ban it again – because a central mechanic of the game, however broken, will be imprinted in the minds of the new while the old leave the community.

Finally, the Smogon tiering system is based on skill, which is a subjective metric. Pro-ban and anti-ban arguments, therefore, are not objective. We do not aim to maximize metagame health in every way possible; rather, we seek to selectively ban elements of the metagame that reduce the skill required "too much" – whatever that means, but we can decide. "Dynamax makes the game no fun," "Pro-Dynamax players don't have any arguments," are irrelevant – how does Dynamax actually impact the interaction between skill and the game's outcome? This is why we're buried under the centralization arguments that ignore the fact that broken checks broken while we forget to actually examine skill.
I’m not gonna write a story about this but, you aren’t ever going to have an entire community agree with one decision, even when it seems that way. From Deo-D’s ban to Dragonite staying legal, you never saw everyone agreeing with any of those decisions. Sure, you will want to go with the decision that most people advocate for but you aren’t ever going to get that 100%, receiving backlash as the result.

oh, and to go with this, I agree with quickbanning Dynamax. This mechanic is way worse than Z move and overall is very unhealthy. Nearly every, if not every mon uses it and it overall comes down to who has what coverage move.
 
Last edited:
I vote >quickban< personally.

Its super overcentralizing. There is no place for dynamax in 1v1. Even though Gen 8 hasn't been out for very long, the same pokemon and same strategies with minimal variation show up on ladder due to dynamax as a mechanic being completely busted in 1v1. It was fun to experiment with at first but I think its very clear that dynamax was created for 6v6/doubles battles rather than a format where you can't switch pokemon. While there is argument that dynamax is unhealthy in regular battles as well, at least there is more to each match than just dynamaxing and clicking your move as it only takes up 3 turns. You can play around dyna a bit more by switching around mons to tank hits, entry hazards, focus sash, status, or just dynamaxing as an answer. Sure, some mons become unstoppable sweepers but I would confidently say that there is far more counterplay compared to 1v1.

In 1v1 you are severely limited in your options to counterplay it, even knowing that the opponent is going to dynamax every time. Previous strategies revolving around setup and stall are suboptimal when the opponent can just dynamax and boost their stats/hit you for insane damage with overtuned moves. I thought sub/petaya etc. sets to stall out the turns was genius at first but after playing 1v1 for a while, one realises that this is really the only option apart from picking an advantageous type matchup and dynamaxing yourself. I tried running some sleep mons to see how they do in this meta but even then, once the opponent goes to sleep I just dynamax in return so that I can tank 2nd turn wakes/use more powerful moves. Its just dyna dyna dyna bro.

I see a lot of potential for gen 8 1v1 with many diverse items and new moves being added, as well as a bunch of fun new mons to try, that simply can't be used right now due to dynamax. It limits creativity and, in my opinion, skill expression as well. Other mechanics such as z-moves and megas were far healthier.
 
I would personally prefer a quickban of dynamax, as it is extremely constricting and unhealthy for the metagame as a whole..

Dynamax is generally ridiculously overcentralizing. Since Max Moves provide their own perks in addition to high Base Power such as setting weather, terrain, raising one of your own stats, or lowering a stat of an opponent, status moves (with the possible exception of Substitute) are rendered nearly useless, nearly invalidating most stall Pokemon as well as most other Pokemon who simply rely on stat boosts. This serves as a chokehold against creative teambuilding and generally makes the meta more bland, less balanced, and less fun. Additionally, Dynamax has essentially no opportunity cost, making it a significant disadvantage to not use it, which is in essence equivalent to one of Smogon's ban policies. Finally, the community's overwhelming consensus to ban Dynamax means that a suspect test would most likely be essentially a formality in which two weeks that could be used to develop a healthy meta are spent getting reqs with Dynamax still legal on ladder.

I know most, if not all of these points have already been stated in some form by other users, but I agree with those other users. Dynamax is a fundamentally unhealthy element in the 1v1 metagame that should be removed as soon as possible, and thus should be quickbanned.

P. S. Sorry for the wall of text
 
I think that we should absolutely quickban dynamax. This is like zmoves, but if every zmove had a secondary effect, and if every pokemon got 4 zmoves. The increase in HP is WACK for a tier where ya only have to kill 1 mon and 3 turns is usually enough, and the dynamax mechanic doesn't seem to have any true counters. Bopher said the majority of what I wanted to say, so if you'd like great reasoning, just look at his post. LH said so. Dynamaxxing isn't over-centralizing like kyub was, where every team needed a true counter to count as viable, but is much worse. Every game post-pick needs dynamaxxing to like... happen. dynamaxxing is wack council pls ban

TL;DR: bruh what do you think lmao nobody wants dynamaxxing

edit: lol I spelled "dynamaxing" wrong can't be bothered to change it sorry y'all
 
Last edited:

Alakazam

Why'd you leave the keys upon the table
is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Contributor to Smogon
Moderator
Oh yeah I should add my thoughts. We need to definitely quickban this.

My opinions Dynamax in 1v1 have been a roller coaster; initially when i first saw it, I immediately thought that the mechanic would be broken beyond belief and turn the entire metagame into chaos. In my mind, i was imagining Gigantimax Mega Gyarados, every one of its stats boosted by dynamax as well, firing off moves with 200 base power, destroying everything in its path unless they dynamaxed in return. Then I learned about dexit happening, and the actual game mechanics of dynamax, and I became slightly optimistic, on the notion that it wasn't the hellscape i imagined. Gen 8 came out, and SWSH honestly didn't seem that bad at first, dynamax and all. But, very quickly, it become very, very apparent that Gen 8 1v1 was incredibly one dimensional and fake. Dynamax is the meta, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, until you realize the Dynamax is also the anti-meta. There's no healthy alternative strategy available to most mons, which kills diversity.

Then we have the issue of the lack of prediction necessary. The bulk allotted in dynamax vs without + the power of your moves makes it so you have an immense advantage if you can be in Dynamax against a non-dynamax opponent, no matter the type matchup or defensive stats. So, people will use sub to wait out Dynamax. But, if you can afford to set up on their sub, or break it, without dynamaxing, then suddenly you're in the advantage, but if you are about to sub but predict they're gonna take advantage of that with an attack or setup, then you can dynamax and attack them immediately, but if you predict that they're going to attack immediately then you can use your own Sub because everyone runs sub because coverage means nothing when you're dropping 100+ BP STAB moves with guaranteed side effects and the cycle goes on and on. Its not a mechanic that rewards skill, which is especially significant considering the length of our games - the random outcome of 1 play can potentially decide a game

Something I also don't see being brought up is that we can already tell for certain that Dynamax affects competition - the GXE in our ladder is super underdeveloped. Part of that can be contributed to the start of a new gen, but not when looking at other tiers like OU and Ubers show that their GXE are already at the levels they were at in Gen 7, whereas we are all stuck in mid 60s-low 70s, compared to the healthy distribution between high 60s-high 70s that it was like for 1v1 in Gen 7. Why is that? Because dynamax is actively harming skillful gameplay in the tier.

TLDR: Quickban, we're better without it.
 
Last edited:

Alakazam

Why'd you leave the keys upon the table
is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Contributor to Smogon
Moderator
OK Alakazam. I support a quickban. It'll receive a backlash, but the council should ignore it. All that will happen is the same result from a suspect.
There is no way at all that Dynamax will survive the suspect. Will we suspect for the sake of "democratic progress?" Will we follow a flimsy guideline for the sake of following a flimsy guideline? Well, I have a little statement:

If an issue has no way of being accepted by a certain process, there's no need for it to be run through the entire process.
The backlash received with Z-Detect was primarily because A) There was literally no communication from that council and B) The community was split on the issue. Obviously none of that applies here, I think we'll be mostly good.

And in general, any decision will get backlash, no matter what.
 
Quickban.

Dynamax makes the meta very set choice reliant,by that I mean that almost all the matchups are not exactly 100% or even 70% safe.In this way,considering that items aren't really the winning factor for many mons, it is possible to run a lot of different items just to gain some advantage on a specific pokemon and win that matchup.
My second argument is that,as I have been saying from the start of the generation and that I thought would apply to all tiers,dynamax shifts the meta by making the players find the best overall dynamax abusers, force everyone to find checks of these abusers and find checks of these checks.1v1wise that makes the meta very stagnant, boring and little skill requiring
 
Last edited:
One thing I want to bring up is how the schedule of a suspect would affect meta development. If we started a two week suspect today we would have a measly nine days to develop the entire no-dyna meta before Winter Seasonal. With the acknowledgment that a suspect is guaranteed to end up with a ban verdict (see above, so many people want it gone and people will fight hard for suspect reqs to make sure it happens), a suspect test is a huge time waster that will drastically affect the development of the meta during our first major tournament.
 
Quickban

Dynamax defines every match in 1v1 in a negative way. The endless 50/50s (do I max t1 or wait for opponent?), the over-reliance on Substitute spam, the lack of depth in move/ability/item combos, everything is overwritten by Dynamax.

Good Dynamax play beats good team preview play - fast/prankster Sub to stall turns and KO back with the absurd advantage Dyna provides
against any Pokemon not in Dynamax. This undermines the basic structure of Team Preview focused 1v1 by replacing clear-cut wins and losses with hazy "I guess I might win if I just dyna the correct turn" matchups.

The variety within a Dynamax metagame is severely limited by Max Moves. Pokemon's wide range of attacks effectively is reduced to 18 Max Moves with set +1 / -1 or weather bonuses. There is no more use of Encore, Disable, Priority, Calm Mind, Taunt, Trick Room, Skill Swap, Choice Items, Trick, it's just click Dyna and win the "18 moves game" or stall out opposing Dynamax at all costs.

Double HP means matches take twice as long. 1-3 turns average becomes 2-6 turns minimum, and the 2-turn matches are almost always because someone failed to Dynamax turn 1 against a Dynamaxed opponent. This leads to a noticeably slower and more boring metagame for people used to rapid-fire, team-preview based meta where a win or loss is determined almost as soon as Pokemon are selected.

I can feel my soul slowly withering away as I force myself into match after match of this nonsense. 1v1 should Quickban Dynamax for a more fun, diverse, and interesting metagame.
 
A suspect test is kind of impossible with how new the ladder is I think, Quickban should be done
Max Guard is stupid and should commit die, prevents use of status moves, so there are 20* viable moves in the game (18 types, Max Guard, and Shell Smash)
*does not include gigantamax moves
On a side note, I as soon as Dynamax is banned Imprison Mew should be banned asap
It gets Imprison Transform this generation, with no z moves to break it, and with dexit coming in to lower the general power level of everything
You can either outspeed its max invest 100 speed and 2hko through berry or ohko it with its 256 EVs to invest in bulk and 100/100/100 bulk
Or you can outspeed and Taunt/Sub (just hope they don't have mental herb or seismic toss)
It also gets Taunt for beating your Taunt/Shell Smash

Seriously though, this thing is actually stupid
252+ Atk Choice Band Mold Breaker Haxorus Outrage vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Mew: 354-417 (87.6 - 103.2%) -- 18.8% chance to OHKO

It's not that there's no counterplay, it's just very difficult (and technically it can do mew's movepool things and c team you)
 
Last edited:
What's there to enjoy in this meta? Literally no game I've played feels enjoyable or fun at all and laddering is more something I do for the sake of laddering rather than having fun. It doesn't help that all Dynamax brings are the same boring moves, and that there's really no strategy involved in it other than super effective coverage. Oh yea and status moves being killed by it means using status moves often has to be done in your base form which usually just gets you killed. I don't see a reason not to ban it other than "new mechanic" but even then, it's just not enjoyable at all and not something a format like this should have. Not to mention that Dynamax is also your way of beating other Dynamax in most matchups unless you create specific sets to beat specific mons but who actually wants to do that? imo we really need this gone.

Shorter answer: zzzz ban this boring shit
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 3, Guests: 0)

Top