Metagame 1v1 Metagame Discussion

[fake tom numbers]

heya its DOUG

While Custap provides new sets to run, I wouldn't say it makes teambuilding easier; at least good teambuilding, as it leaves your custap mon vulnerable to losing to the things it's intended to beat, whereas custap proofing does the opposite and makes you less vulnerable while being restricting.

Examples??? This is literally just saying "no ur wrong" with some fancy wording

I'll use landorus incarnate as an example here. Obviously, it'd like to run specs for the extra power, but that sacrifices the skeledirge matchup which is significant so it runs life orb with protect.

Pretty bad example, Calm Mind is a pretty easy counter with some bulk which is also nice for Sylv/other stuff. There's tons of other options like taunt (252+ SpA Skeledirge Blast Burn vs. 4 HP / 52 SpD Landorus: 271-319 (84.6 - 99.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO) so no, you are not forced to run Protect.

Endure taking up a slot isn't a good argument against it as it is necessary for the strategy to function properly and certainly isn't dead weight or better used elsewhere like protect.

Not sure how endure being necessary for custap to function doesn't come at an opportunity cost. Endure can definitely be dead weight sometimes (something like faster custap regidrago vs cress, idk there's tons of examples) and custap berry can also be dead weight. And let's say you are running Protect LO Landorus, protect can be used to scout moves, which is super helpful for ladder.

The Custap user is always favoured as even if they get the endure turn wrong, they can bank on the 1/3 chance without any issues. My post outlines reasons it should be banned and reasons it shouldn't be, did you not read the second half.

Well my post says that's an endure problem and not custap, dID You noT rEaD ThE SeCOnd HAlf.

Custap will obviously not be run viably on everything, but that's in the same way that not everything can run a stall set, or not everything can run a specs set. This argument is irrelevant.

Anything Can Run It
While there are more prominent custap users such as sylveon and skeledirge, anything can choose to run it and many mons can run it decently for odds at a matchup they usually don't have. See tournament implications for more info.

I think ur contradicting urself

This is irrelevant and selective, it is round 6 of masters. People obviously aren't hard teching opponents.

Dude it's the current round of masters lol, it has the most recent information for the meta in a tournament setting. You can check the other rounds and there would probably be 1/2 custap wins, but it doesn't change that custap isn't super influential currently. Also people are starting to cteam, look at bo biden's series: Game 1 Game 2 Game 3 Not to mention that after 2 or 3 rounds the points will start going into the hundreds which will help qualify others for Champs.

The discussion is Custap and not Endure for a reason. Endure enables other pinch berry strategies to be used, ones that for the most part don't aim to flip a matchup, but enhance a mons tools and allow for strong use of these.

Incredibly niche strategies yeah. The only one I can think of is liechi berry sneasler, which band/normal gem is much better. Meanwhile, even without endure sturdy mons like Magnezone can still use custap quite effectively.

You cannot hard counter random custap is what you fail to realise. Especially in tournaments like this where players will be cteaming and matchup fishing fairly hard, which are known for decreasing how solid teams are overall. If you're idea of building better is running 3 mons with protect or priority, then you'd be correct, but it is impossible to prepare for custap on random mons.

... It's not that hard??? If this cteam is so hard to realize then 1. That mon is running a huge opportunity cost or 2. That mon is not effective at running custap. So if you get 3-0d by this incredibly niche custap mon then yeah, build better teams, l2p

Don't selectively argue with a post that supports both points of view, it's a waste of time.

True but ur original post is just speculation, kinda ironic

vacuum wave val literally exists for custap users primarily lmao.

Chien Pao, -spdef mixed gren, can also be nice for opposing priority like rilla, idk I don't use valiant because its cringe and bad but its not completely for custap

fraud DOUGLAS out

 

[bo_bobson27]

Also people are starting to cteam, look at bo biden's series: Game 1 Game 2 Game 3

dude i reused a team from umpl

 

[Marshme1to]

heya its DOUG

Examples??? This is literally just saying "no ur wrong" with some fancy wording

Pretty bad example, Calm Mind is a pretty easy counter with some bulk which is also nice for Sylv/other stuff. There's tons of other options like taunt (252+ SpA Skeledirge Blast Burn vs. 4 HP / 52 SpD Landorus: 271-319 (84.6 - 99.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO) so no, you are not forced to run Protect.

/dt blaze Tom1535

 

[NTG Cuz IDK]

Correct me if I am wrong

Custap berry shouldnt even be discussed with dlc1 since most mons can easily slot protect and/or priority and generally have a 4th moveslot empty.


[Encore/Disable/Protect/Moonblast]
[4th moveslot is p much empty, only options are taunt, sub, or blizzard]
[4th moveslot can wisp, flame charge, earth power, protect works here as well]
[pressure]
[qd, attack, morning sun/attack, sub/protect/wisp]
[pressure] also beats the main custap users w/o it
[Encore/Disable] same as zapdos
[Encore/Disable]
[4th moveslot] same as zapdos
[leech seed]
[leech seed user]
[wow this guy]
[leech]
[leech]
[wow encore disable]

Theres also an option of priority on a lot of mons:
Quick Attack
Ice shard
all forms quick attack
Ice shard
Sucker punch
Both sides have a fighting priority
It can also slot tect technically
Sucker Punch
Ice shard
Theres more to name

Theres also a lot of skeptical custap checks with taunt, encore and disable(substitute even), priority is the easiest way to check it and we HAVE been running priority on a lot of standard sets.



My point is not that custap is not uncompetitive(it still is!!), its just that the moves that entirely counter can be slotted on a lot of mons


I said dlc1 earlier, you know what spoilers for dlc2

Reminder that custap will get more prominent because atleast 50 pinch abilities are returning(overgrow, swarm, torrent, blaze) so custap will get more usage due to how splashable its on these mons(i think currently we only have empoleon, volcarona and skeledirge who actually abuse it)

/dt blaze Tom1535

cm t1 and calc shows unaware for the worst case scenario

 

[DEG]

The Custap Berry issue has been a hot topic around 1v1 metagames for what can be attributed to months and even around a year, starting with SS then now with SV. Instead of acting on theories and emotions, I have decided to educate myself and do a research on the usage of Custap Berry in current SV meta tournaments (Post Snorlax and Ogerpon-C). This research and conclusion DOESN'T translate to SS, and whether the item is unhealthy/uncompetitive in SS should be analyzed alone.

I've used a replay scouter and analyzed all 1v1 replays from Masters (R5>R8 to yesterday) and UMPL (W2>W5 to yesterday) and ladder stats for September. This sample isn't as big to give us data with a low margin of error but it should be pretty accurate since the topic is fresh. Other analysis should be done when the sample size is bigger. You may feel free to re-do your own research / analysis if you believe I missed replays or data because the replays are open data. You may also freely dispute my analysis and let me know what is your thought process.

UMPL -

UMPL item data attribute an important usage to Custap Berry but the margin of error here is important as it autofills the item for a Pokemon even if the Pokemon wasn't picked - ex: Skele Chomp Corv had Skele revealed Custap g1 so it autofills it even if skele wasn't picked for g2. Now there's a possibility the user didn't change the item but nothing is for certain. This is why I have manually watched replays that contain Custap Berry and created my own data.

https://pokepast.es/9c602b5fbc68a613
You can find above in the pokepast.es all Custap Berry games from UMPL with the outcome of the battle. The available data is insufficient to conclude Custap has any negative effect on UMPL games where it was present - it lost the majority of the time and when it won it mattered it affected the outcome of the game only twice. To counter Custap Berry we saw some priority moves and protect. Sucker Punch Molt-G isn't a rare phenomena, so Custap Berry didn't force the Pokemon to use Priority, however it may have favored its usage. Ice Shard on Baxcalibur however might be hard to fit on usual sets - it usually have a restricted move space for SD/Glaive/Icicle/Scale/Iron head and Ice Shard, now it might have other usage and was used pre-custap so it's also not very rare.

UMPL usage stats show that Pokemon that are highly used naturally defeat Custap Berry shenanigans. Both Valiant and Ogerpon runs Protect and Spiky Shield on some their sets which invalidates the usage of Custap. Ninetales-A too. Zapdos runs LO and PP Stall which both can circumvent custap without much issues. Priority users like Azu, Bax, and Shifu naturally checks custap. Bulky Pokemon like Cresselia and Corviknight aren't affected by the outcome of custap berry.

1v1 Masters item push Custap a bit down the order but it was still fairly used. Once again, the numbers isn't 100% correct so I manually did it.

https://pokepast.es/98d83d873d9ff575
Above you may find Masters replays that has Custap Berry. The item affected more outcomes than UMPL, however two of these outcomes come from Misplays which is independent from Custap Berry - Manaphy and Iron Hands game. One Custap vs Custap mindgame was created from Encore and not Custap (Skele vs Zapdos)

Masters core follow same Pokemon analysis as UMPL so refer to that.

From tournament plays, Custap users aren't "random" and are exclusive as of yet to a specific pool of Pokemon most of the time (Empoleon, Skeledirge, Sylveon, and Hoodra). Empoleon and Skeledirge are mostly locked into Custap Berry as item so there's rarely any mind game created by setguessing. However, Sylveon can run LO, and Hoodra can run its other sets which can be annoying.

https://www.smogon.com/stats/2023-09-DLC1/moveset/gen91v1-1630.txt
September Ladder stats showcase the following;
Sylveon, Skeledirge, Manaphy, Zone, Chomp, Empoleon, Alola Golem, Thuggsui, Rotom-H, Glastrier have Custap as their first or 2nd item. To note that everything after Empoleon is questionable since the usage gets really low. This is in line with tournaments custap users Skele, Sylveon, Empoleon with three additions - Mana, Zone, Chomp. Expecting Custap on Sturdy users (Donphan, Zone, Avalugg) should be the minimum expected as casual ladderers enjoy putting Custap on Sturdy since forever.

Conclusion:
From the relevant and accessible data the following can be said;

1) There's no concrete evidence to label Custap Berry as Uncompetitive/Unhealthy in-game, it rarely directly / indirectly changes the outcome of the game in SV
2) It doesn't have the abundant usage to be able to pull more data from games
3) Custap Berry remains used by a specific group of Pokemon and did not cross the random Custap Berry in SV

This is a pure data driven post, as said, if you think my data is incorrect you can do your own research since this is open data. The limitation is that I think HPL had some post-DLC games which I haven't checked and that the sample size isn't too big so we cannot for sure conclude whether its a healthy or unhealthy addition as of yet.

From the obtained data suspecting on Custap Berry is strictly emotion driven as there's no concrete evidence to back up the suspect or ban. This action would be Anti-tiering at best. This only represents the SV metagame - SS would most likely wield different results.

 

[Local Dog]

I've been thinking about running Grafaiai and I've seen that it's sample set has Prankster and Lagging Tail at the same time? What's the point of that? Isn't that both a waste of an item and an ability slot?

 

[recti]

I've been thinking about running Grafaiai and I've seen that it's sample set has Prankster and Lagging Tail at the same time? What's the point of that? Isn't that both a waste of an item and an ability slot?

hey, t it uses dig on first turn and copycats (assuming it lived the atack used on it t1) , the lagging tail makes it move last when its under the ground but not when using copycat cuz dig is a two turn move this assures that you almost certainly win if get the dig off . sorry if you didnt understand a thing but tldr it assures you almost guarantee win if you like hit t1 w dig

 

[Itchy]

I've been thinking about running Grafaiai and I've seen that it's sample set has Prankster and Lagging Tail at the same time? What's the point of that? Isn't that both a waste of an item and an ability slot?

Yeah what Arvin said, you want Dig to go off as late as possible to stay invincible for as long as possible and so Copycat gets to copy Dig instead of whatever the opponent uses. Lagging Tail on Prankster moves doesn't usually matter since it only makes Copycat go after all other +1 priority moves

 

[Local Dog]

Thanks for telling me - I tried it out and it works out then and again, but when it works, it works very well

 

[DripLegend]

Now that results from our recent Tiering Survey have been voted on I wanted to share my votes as well as reasoning for each since transparency is something I value a lot and think consistent flow of information between those on Council and those outside of it is important.


I voted in favor of suspecting the item, which wasn't ultimately followed through but I do think as the tier develops the potential of a suspect could surely become a reality (this was especially possible to be on the slate because of community input so post about the metagame i promise you it matters). While SV isn't a great gen for it with most of the top mons being fine into it, i think it encourages the gap in our top threats between the rest of the metagame. even though there's clear favorites and top tiers in any given metagame it was made clear with this dlc that the good became great and the mid stayed relatively in similar spots. I think custap is at it's best a unique tool, but it has a much worse overall effect in my eyes that i would've like to see it receive a test before a lot more circuits continue to have a different take on the rest of the year and gen as a whole. I think when we have new mons i'd like to see how it changes/just how much it ends up getting used or pushed to the limits of mons it gets used on and the like. (not to mention u can double endure and cheese matchups which is uncompetitive but most examples of that are more shown with oldgens so not one of my main factors)


As much as i was really open to having this mon back in the tier from the jump basically, i decided to leave it out of the picture until we next consider unbans. This would have been a slightly messy unban situation, as the route council would have taken in unbanned would have left ace only playable on ladder during pools of World Cup, and if it was unbanned it would have returned for playoffs, which would have been a huge change just for pools to be a much different meta. If you look at the sheer movepool and versatility of ace it has a lot of great matchups into potent meta mons rn like sylveon ogerpon h and alola ninetales, and i think our time would be used better during WC pools by looking at the current metagame and monitoring possible unhealthy metagame aspects/mons instead of potentially allowing a mon with huge ability to shift the metagame back into the tier if voted back in.


voted DNB for this mon. I have been pretty vocal about valiant previously but i dont think the meta centralizing around this mon is a bad thing. it has consistent checks/answers to all sets it runs as well as really not being flexible or ambiguous at all on previews in my experience. i do think this mon has even more options so i could see it potentially developing into a problem but it really hasnt wowed me and choice items aren't in a great spot regardless of this mon ( bc custap lol). you can end up catching someone off guard with surprise coverage but valiant is inherently pretty easy to tell if it's choiced on preview which limits itself even more.

 

[DEG]

Played a bit on ladder and I don't necessarily see anything new as overwhelming. I think the council should mostly focus on the unbanned Pokemon.

Hmm, I haven't seen too much from it but I think it's more broken than not broken. It has better set up moves than Greninja, better priority, and really good moves. I see it as a nuisance but I don't believe it's necessarily broken, I would like to see more of it.

outshined by other psy: Melo & Deoxys-S, theoretically it should get broken the more we ban stuff.

Not broken

V strong and bulky, can tech darks with pirouette form. I believe this is broken

HOLYYYY GET THAT THING OUT OF THE META! It creates a hole of setguessing, it has a lot of speed so it can pp stall your scarf mon, it can run specs, and can run defensive stored power. You literally have to run specific 4-5 mons to beat it. Extremely wrapping. It beats stuff like Primarina, Sylveon, Iron Boulder w/ Stored Power sets and alongside it other sets it beat 3/4 of the meta lol. this should be the first to go...

Meta has been fine, more fires and steels limited the usage of fairies however Sylv, Prim, and Valiant should all be good fairies. Drago can now be checked by metagross and iron crown to say the least on top of fairies, maybe that would fix its unhealthiness, though I doubt. Gouging fire is extremely good, and keeps a lot of the meta in check, hopefully it stays being good and not too broken. Iron crown is very good thanks to its typing and I think it'll be good in future metas. Iron boulder is a good anti-meta pick rn. Old brokens like Hearthflame should still be good when the storm passes, and valiant should also be back to its previous levels of good, however with the rampant psychics it has to wait some bans before being unhealthy again imo.

I encourage everyone to post their teams/sets/opinion on the metagame here!

 

[LittEleven]

laddered a bunch, here's my thoughts on new mons:

- gets great mus regardless of set, is really annoying to account for in a builder (dark types are great tho) and it finesses some even matchups with item slot. powerful mon

Gouging Flame: - spdef set seems really good in what it beats, attack booster can shred some resists that aren't eved for it specifically (i.e heard it beat a ladder prim w/ raging fury secondhand), lots of decent util but not an unfair mon, very clickabl

- in my experience of not using it i think cb gets accounted for in builder and its setup set isn't very good, sucker is a good move, counter is a good move, idk tho it's not the strongest fire and you're not running baby zardx by running this so is it really worth it

- life orb is a fraud (use melo), id is fine; usually ends up as crit bait and doesn't do very well into current meta; haven't used any other sets (surely cb x scissor is fake)

Iron Crown: fraud, he does nothing, use meta

- decent enough with encore custap, kind of good glue but also decently bulkable by mons it should have a good mu against

- av is probs its best set rn, knock is great; hone claws is probs usable ive just not seen it

- strong, worth choicing cause val is fake, specs is a drug and you have , you can can ev to guarantee diff specific mus; melo + fairy slaps

Raging Bolt: fraud with unreliable moves

- it's decently good, not overbearing and couple of mons beat it regardless of set, prolly becomes a benchmark mon - milk take that'll get disproven eventually

Iron Boulder: fraud that kills nothing and dies to everything that it doesn't have an SE move vs, also shafted by psychic meta

- id say use fast specs or np custap with bulk, good enough mon, one taps some mons

archaludon: feels like a better zone but no fire move sucks for it, it's fun but that's all it is with mons bulking way more powerful special moves

maybe i missed some new mons but that's probs cause they suck /hj, have fun laddering (alternatively spam deo-s prim gouging)

 

[RTM]

my take on what should go. i'm of the opinion that we should try to have a really large 1st slate in which people lean towards being a bit ban happy, followed by a 2nd slate 2-3 weeks after in which more bans take place / some unbans are made. while this is a controversial way to undertake this process, it would compress likely 3-4 months of tiering into 2-3 weeks. the mons involve both unbanned/ dlc2 mons as well as some predlc2 mons which were the main talking points regarding tiering action.

the mons I would put on the slate are:
i lost to Shuca counter cteaming my landot on ladder this shit is too techable ban plz

- needs to go, beats everything between a few sets, extremely versatile and techable, and has the luxury of being able to do whatever while still being fast due to its speed stat

- necro but stronger, ban

- definitely will need to go not banning it now would prolong that

- good as ever, despite the introduction of metagross and prim. probable suspect because of the nature of the mon although i'd qb.

- extremely unhealthy for the tier. A unique case that should go to suspect, however, some people have seemingly become attached to it due to it somehow not getting banned for so long earlier. Not broken right now due to 4 counters being the 4 best things in the meta! I'd go on about how fundamentally broken booster energy is in 1v1 and how banning it solves a lot of problems instantly but I don't want that kinda backlash.

- hasn't changed in power between DLC1 and 2 despite a tier essentially being created above it with the added mons. the suspect involving it was very flawed (hard reqs amidst wc, wc voters opting to keep it so they can use it)

- kinda just because it was freed I don't believe it is that great personally

Pros to ban / unban slate:
- Stable, competitive meta reached fast
- More enjoyable meta
- Freedom of building
- Less need for resources / less wasted resources

Cons to ban / unban slate:
- Higher chance of errors being made by council
- Low community say (no suspects) and trusts judgement of council
- Risk of a decentralised meta which isn't necessarily a bad thing
- Untraditional (1v1 bans and discussions traditionally take too long or result in nothing lol)
- Miss out on certain phases of meta development (skip the tutorial type beat)

Why rush?
Champs is coming up, gc is coming up. Yeah, players can play through this meta as it changes, although I'm sure it would be a lot more entertaining to both play and watch if the meta isn't centralised around 3-4 mons, which is where the meta would be at if the approach of small slates often is taken. At this rate if only the insane broken mons are banned and rest are left to suspect, champs will be dlc1 + prim, meta and gouging (speculation). Suspecting is just a drag for now. I don't see the more traditional method of slow slates leading to one ban usually will help us here.

Why?
I'm bored of playing oger val drago meta (which this will become post qbs/suspects)

lmk ur opinions on this so I can help think of the best solution.

 

[Akuu]

ban deo-s, ban melo, ban necro, i hate psychic types free me from these shackles please save 1v1

 

[MattC (Banned)]

my take on what should go. i'm of the opinion that we should try to have a really large 1st slate in which people lean towards being a bit ban happy, followed by a 2nd slate 2-3 weeks after in which more bans take place / some unbans are made. while this is a controversial way to undertake this process, it would compress likely 3-4 months of tiering into 2-3 weeks. the mons involve both unbanned/ dlc2 mons as well as some predlc2 mons which were the main talking points regarding tiering action.

the mons I would put on the slate are:
i lost to Shuca counter cteaming my landot on ladder this shit is too techable ban plz

The first thing you say gotta go is Cinderace because you got gimped by a Shuca Berry variant. I'm not one to say this a lot, but I actually think you got skill issued on bro

But even aside from the obvious thing in 1v1 called "tech", said Shuca Cinderace still probably easily beats it's normal things without a Life Orb boost or smth. But I do agree with everything you did say -- shits broken it gotta goooooo

 

[Chrispy Burns]

Hello, it is time for another completely unwarranted analysis on a random move: Fickle Beam

Spreadsheet to show very lazy math bc my program can't run fickle beam yet:

Premise: On the first turn of the battle, does fickle beam, dragon pulse, or draco meteor do more damage on average.

Fickle beam, a strange special dragon move with a 30% chance to do double. Does a move with a 30% chance to do 160 damage with perfect accuracy defeat the reigning champ draco meteor? No! but fickle comes in at 91% of draco's damage. That's worth considering imo (seeing that Fickle's highest damage is more than draco's with no chance to miss.)

How I did the math

Total Damage = Normal damage + Damage due to crits without secondary + Damage due to secondary chance without crits + Damage due to secondary & crits - Damage due to misses
(all assuming high rolls for now)

Expanded out for fickle:
Total Damage = [240 * Base Damage * (1-Secondary %) * (1-(1/24))] + [240 * Base Damage * 1.5 * (1/24) * (1-Secondary %)] + [240 * Base Damage * 1.5 * Secondary % * 2 * 1/24]

Verdict:
While this move is limited to just one pokemon, Hydrapple, we could see it spread over time. Other moves that have lost their signature move status: Heat Crash, Sacred Sword, Soft boiled, etc, so this one may as well. Maybe Hydreigon, Dragapult, or Alolan Exegg could get it.

It ultimately comes in pretty close as a weaker alternative to draco meteor, but a better move than dragon pulse.

...
Bc I get comments like "what does this mean" or "why" or "this is confusing & it was obvious" on these type of posts, need I remind everyone of the fruits of these weird studies: Charge Koko/ Zera/ Eleki, Guardian of Alola + Brine, Tough Claws + Stomping tantrum Mega Metagross, etc.

 

[Opchurtle100]

Hello, it is time for another completely unwarranted analysis on a random move: Fickle Beam

Spreadsheet to show very lazy math bc my program can't run fickle beam yet:

View attachment 583093

Premise: On the first turn of the battle, does fickle beam, dragon pulse, or draco meteor do more damage on average.

Fickle beam, a strange special dragon move with a 30% chance to do double. Does a move with a 30% chance to do 160 damage with perfect accuracy defeat the reigning champ draco meteor? No! but fickle comes in at 91% of draco's damage. That's worth considering imo (seeing that Fickle's highest damage is more than draco's with no chance to miss.)

How I did the math

Total Damage = Normal damage + Damage due to crits without secondary + Damage due to secondary chance without crits + Damage due to secondary & crits - Damage due to misses
(all assuming high rolls for now)

Expanded out for fickle:
Total Damage = [240 * Base Damage * (1-Secondary %) * (1-(1/24))] + [240 * Base Damage * 1.5 * (1/24) * (1-Secondary %)] + [240 * Base Damage * 1.5 * Secondary % * 2 * 1/24]

Verdict:
While this move is limited to just one pokemon, Hydrapple, we could see it spread over time. Other moves that have lost their signature move status: Heat Crash, Sacred Sword, Soft boiled, etc, so this one may as well. Maybe Hydreigon, Dragapult, or Alolan Exegg could get it.

It ultimately comes in pretty close as a weaker alternative to draco meteor, but a better move than dragon pulse.

...
Bc I get comments like "what does this mean" or "why" or "this is confusing & it was obvious" on these type of posts, need I remind everyone of the fruits of these weird studies: Charge Koko/ Zera/ Eleki, Guardian of Alola + Brine, Tough Claws + Stomping tantrum Mega Metagross, etc.

ily

 

[armaldlothearmaldo]

Hello everyone. I thought I would share my thoughts on the post-Indigo Disk metagame. I'm not particularly good, and my past experience with 1v1 is extremely limited, so please take what follows with a grain of salt. However, I have played a not insignificant amount in the past couple of weeks, and I managed to get to accounts into the top 10 on ladder simultaneously (ephemeralidea peaking at no. 4, and armaldlo at no. 7). So, perhaps that gives me just enough credibility to make my post worthy of a cursory glance.


I don't have much to say that's worth hearing on the vast majority of returning pokemon or unbanned pokemon, so I won't self-indulge by talking about Meloetta, Cinderace, Necrozma, Iron Boulder, Primarina and so forth. However, there is a short list of pokemon I would like to discuss:

1. Deoxys-Speed - In my personal opinion, which is rather uneducated on banning, Deoxys-Speed appears ban worthy, and I would like to see tiering action of some sort, whether a quick ban or a suspect test, taken. The stall boosting set is very strong, and it is able to beat a tremendous number of pokemon provided that it avoids being crit. Compounding this, Deoxys-Speed's choice specs attacker set can lure important checks to stall Deoxys and stands a decent chance to kill them with powerful special attacks. Deoxys also has the option to run counter-coat sets with taunt and can bulk for hits like Incineroar fake out into darkest lariat.

Calcs

252+ SpA Choice Specs Deoxys-Speed Focus Blast vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Incineroar: 378-446 (95.9 - 113.1%) -- 75% chance to OHKO
252+ SpA Choice Specs Deoxys-Speed Focus Blast vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Urshifu: 522-616 (129.2 - 152.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252+ SpA Choice Specs Deoxys-Speed Psycho Boost vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Regidrago: 520-613 (96.1 - 113.3%) -- 75% chance to OHKO (I'm not sure what non-bulky Regidrago really does, so this may not be relevant)
Of course, it is possible to ev for these attacks with Incineroar or Regidrago and to use assault vest on Urshifu, but it becomes quite restrictive on teambuilding.

252+ Atk Incineroar Fake Out vs. 248 HP / 216+ Def Deoxys-Speed: 35-42 (11.5 - 13.8%) -- possible 8HKO
252+ Atk Incineroar Darkest Lariat vs. 248 HP / 216+ Def Deoxys-Speed: 222-264 (73.2 - 87.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

2. Gouging Fire - It's been interesting to see Gouging Fire be regarded as Charizard-Mega-X II. I certainly thought that way when it was released, calling it "Megazard-X at home," but I've changed my opinion. There are three major differences between the pokemon, not including move sets. Paradox entei is noticeably bulkier, having 105/121/93 defences instead of 78/111/85. In practice, that is the difference between dying to timid Porygon-Z hyper beam and living. Additionally, because our friend from Area Zero is not a mega evolution, it has a free item slot. While booster energy attack is the most common, and likely best, option for Gouging Fire, booster energy defense, haban berry, and assault vest are all possible. However, not being able to mega-evolve means that Gouging Fire is not able to play the mind games that Charizard was able to; it cannot change its type, and so it is unable to gain the benefits of altering its weaknesses.

Gouging fire also has several notable additions to its move pool: burning bulwark, noble roar, and morning sun. Burning bulwark allows Gouging Fire to flip certain losing matchups, namely Haxorus and Roaring Moon. The other two moves create the potential for viable stall sets, especially coupled with defence-raising booster energy or a berry. Mega-Charizard-X never had that potential, and I can see Gouging Fire becoming broken because of that flexibility as the meta develops, though I do not believe it is currently.

That being said, Gouging Fire lacks the initial hitting power that the lizard-king of generation 7 had, and perhaps this holds it back significantly enough.

Calcs

252+ SpA Primarina Moonblast vs. 252 HP / 20 SpD Gouging Fire: 174-205 (42 - 49.5%) -- guaranteed 3HKO
252+ SpA Primarina Moonblast vs. 252 HP / 20 SpD Charizard-Mega-X: 186-220 (51.6 - 61.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 SpA Adaptability Porygon-Z Hyper Beam vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Charizard-Mega-X: 384-454 (106.6 - 126.1%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Adaptability Porygon-Z Hyper Beam vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Gouging Fire: 358-422 (86.4 - 101.9%) -- 12.5% chance to OHKO

252+ Atk Protosynthesis Gouging Fire Outrage vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mew: 256-303 (75 - 88.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252+ Atk Tough Claws Charizard-Mega-X Outrage vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mew: 280-330 (82.1 - 96.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

3. Iron Crown - In so far as I can tell, Iron Crown has three major sets: choice specs, booster energy speed, and weakness policy. The booster energy speed and weakness policy sets both have the same fundamental idea to them; they use either iron defence or calm mind to boost the relevant stats before unleashing a powerful stored power or tachyon cutter. The choice specs set is capable of hitting dark types that try to beat boosting sets, though I doubt this is very significant in practice. I have not looked at the boosting sets concretely, but I would suggest Iron Crown be watched; it may prove to be broken in time.

Calcs

252+ Atk Protosynthesis Gouging Fire Flare Blitz vs. +2 0 HP / 0 Def Iron Crown: 258-306 (80.3 - 95.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+2 252 SpA Iron Crown Stored Power (140 BP) vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Gouging Fire: 465-547 (112.3 - 132.1%) -- guaranteed OHKO

252 SpA Choice Specs Iron Crown Focus Blast vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Incineroar: 408-482 (103.5 - 122.3%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Choice Specs Iron Crown Focus Blast vs. 16 HP / 96 SpD Assault Vest Urshifu: 328-386 (95 - 111.8%) -- 68.8% chance to OHKO (Urshifu's evs are the standard damage calculator set; what they might be for, I do not know)

4. Archaludon - Archaludon was given all the tools it could have reasonably asked for. Sturdy is the third strongest ability in the tier by my reckoning, and it has a tremendous move pool to draw from. The power herb set is tremendously strong, OHKOing most things it hits super effectively, and 2HKOing everything that doesn't resist. Archaludon is also a viable user of custap berry, though I prefer power herb. At present, the alloy pokemon doesn't appear broken, but it certainly can become broken in the future. If physical attacking sets or mirror coat and metal burst are able to beat a significant number of Archaludon's answers, then it could easily be too much.

Calcs

+1 252+ SpA Archaludon Electro Shot vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Primarina: 398-470 (109.3 - 129.1%) -- guaranteed OHKO
+1 252+ SpA Archaludon Electro Shot vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Necrozma: 249-294 (62.5 - 73.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+1 252+ SpA Archaludon Draco Meteor vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Necrozma: 373-441 (93.7 - 110.8%) -- 62.5% chance to OHKO (with 200 special defence evs and calm mind, Necrozma can moonlight spam to victory)

5. Hydrapple - I haven't come across Hydrapple much. It's the least used of the new pokemon as far as I can tell. I haven't got much to say about it really, though I would like to mention that fickle beam may create a rather odd burden for calculating defensive evs. 160 base power happens frequently enough that it becomes the benchmark rather than draco meteor's 130, and I would be curious to see if potentially having the additional 30 base power allows Hydrapple to cheese through any matchups as the tier develops, even though, as Chrispy Burns has skillfully calculated, it does less damage than draco meteor on average.

6. Custap Berry - It's not a pokemon, but it seems to have generated considerable discussion on this thread so far. As someone who is in a very real sense new to the tier, perhaps my opinion carries mild interest. Very little weight, certainly, but, if I may flatter myself overmuch, interest all the same. The position of custap in the tier has not strengthened with the release of indigo disk. Though several prominent custap users arrived, most visibly Primarina and Porygon-Z, most of the good new pokemon really don't care much. Deoxys-S and Iron Crown are primarily defensive boosting pokemon, who are unlikely to suffer much from being surprised by custap berry. Gouging Fire likes having burning bulwark around anyway to handle Haxorus and Roaring Moon, and Raging Bolt is quite happy to run thunderclap. Archaludon is rather indifferent to custap berry, since it can either use or be victimized by the item depending on its set.

To give a note on the general metagame, I think that it was best summarized in the 1v1 showdown room: the meta feels like a bunch of broken things all holding each other in check. As things stand now, the tier feels balanced. However, I do not believe it will stay that way as pokemon are further optimized and develop additional sets. Specifically, I believe that the pokemon mentioned here, and perhaps Meloetta, Cinderace, Necrozma, and Hoopa-Unbound may merit tiering action in the future. I will leave the questions of Iron Valiant and Regidrago entirely to more experienced players.

I understand RTM's point about wanting a quicker suspect process with large slates to settle the metagame for the upcoming tournaments. However, I disagree. At present, the only thing that is clearly broken is Doexys-Speed and perhaps some of the unbanned pokemon. I would rather give the meta more time to develop and avoid possible Kyurem-Black scenarios in the future.

Please feel free to correct me if I have made any significant oversights in this post. This is not intended to be the final word on the matter, and I haven't that sort of authority even if it was my intent. Thank you for bearing with me on this overly long monologue.

As a final note, which is really more of a gripe, I strongly dislike that both forms of Urshifu appear the same on team preview. I understand the rationale behind it, and remaining faithful to cartridge mechanics is a noble goal. However, in the case of 1v1, I feel it violates the spirit of the tier. It's my own personal carthago delenda est, and I wouldn't want any tiering action taken against the wushu pokemon, especially given the precedent of the mega Charizards.

 

[MattC (Banned)]

Know what? I think I can give my insight on 1v1.

I peaked at 1468 ELO, but dropped down to 1324... Awesome. I was so close to cracking Top 500 and it took me 160+ games to do so. Soooo close man, so damn close. But aside from me being super salty about my lack of skill, this is my genuine thoughts on the current state of 1v1.

TEAMBUILDING
I wanted to use Incineroar on this team. I seen it's potential with beating the top metagame picks such as Cinderace and the multitude of Psychic types -- which is most of the unbanned pokemon. Little did I realize out of over 160 games, it was brought 7 TIMES. 7. It was used against 2 Kyurem's, 1 Cinderace, 1 Meowscarada, 1 Forretress, 1 Metagross and 1 Alolan Muk. That's it. It lost to both of the Kyurem's and the Metagross, but I had hoped to use it more. It just didn't feel right to me. My suggestion: please do not use Incineroar. It's not good in 1v1 at all. There's just so many better Dark types that can do its job better. In testing Incineroar, I wanted something that could beat certain Necrozma sets, Deoxys Speed, and Archaludon in the same slot. This eventually ended up being a fast Taunt pokemon instead. The last team member was Archaludon -- who ended up being used the most. I had used
and . The end team was and . And while I didn't use them, I did consider both and . These were the sets I used in the process.

Counterintuitive 1v1

SUPLEX (Incineroar) @ Chople Berry
Ability: Intimidate
Tera Type: Fire
EVs: 136 HP / 40 Atk / 244 SpD / 88 Spe
Adamant Nature
- Knock Off
- Flare Blitz
- Fake Out
- Protect
^ Bulk lives a Modest Hyper Beam from , outspeeds minimal speed invested base 70s like and , and the rest of the EVs are put into Atk. allows this Incineroar to beat and .


Hook Line & Sinker (Basculegion-F) (F) @ Assault Vest
Ability: Adaptability
Tera Type: Water
EVs: 176 HP / 100 Def / 160 SpA / 52 SpD / 20 Spe
Modest Nature
- Surf
- Shadow Ball
- Aqua Jet
- Mud Shot
^ Bulk lives both an Adamant Earthquake from :landorus t:, and a +1 Modest Electro Shot from -- as well as a Modest Psycho Boost from . The speed allows this set to outspeed Timid . You can forgo the Def EVs to put them into SpAtk in order to nearly guarantee an OHKO against bulkless with the combination of Mud Shot -> Shadow Ball thanks to Adaptability.


PK Rusty Bardiche (Spectrier) @ Sitrus Berry
Ability: Grim Neigh
Tera Type: Ghost
EVs: 92 HP / 32 SpA / 208 SpD / 176 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Shadow Ball
- Draining Kiss
- Calm Mind
- Taunt
^ Outspeeds the base 120 speed tier, lives a Modest Psycho Boost from even after the -2 thanks to and Calm Mind. The remaining EVs are put into SpAtk. Yea I uum... didn't really like this pokemon. It's cool and all, but it didn't fit my playstyle.


Aladdin (Landorus) (M) @ Life Orb
Ability: Sheer Force
Tera Type: Ground
EVs: 108 HP / 20 SpA / 128 SpD / 252 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Earth Power
- Psychic
- Focus Blast
- Taunt
^ Bulk lives a Blood Moon -> Vacuum Wave from Modest :Bloodmoon ursaluna:, maximum Speed Timid lets it outspeed the base 100 speed tier, with the remaining EVs into SpAtk. Pretty simple set that favors bulk > power.


Noah (Archaludon) @ Power Herb / Petaya Berry
Ability: Sturdy
Tera Type: Steel
EVs: 4 Def / 252 SpA / 252 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Draco Meteor
- Electro Shot / Thunderbolt
- Flash Cannon
- Thunder Wave / Scary Face
^ See, the funny thing about this is that Scary Face/Thunder Wave is actually like... really good unironically because now you just outspeed something that would otherwise beat you and you instead beat them because of it. Timid Archaludon is already threatening enough, but with the +1 given by or Electro Shot, it's downright obsurd. You could really honestly mix and match this thing to your liking. But whatever you do: DON'T USE A MODEST NATURE. This is suboptimal because you outspeed adamant things like and -- and besides, your strong enough on your own because well... you got a free +1 SpAtk against every non Volt Absorb and Ground type. I recommend this above all else unless you're a set, in which case a Modest nature is preferable.

THE METAGAME ITSELF
Finally! The part most of you were waiting for. After much testing and metagame development, here's what I think about this tier.

1) Archaludon is obsurd. The fact that this thing got me -- a pretty bad 1v1 player -- to 1468 just goes to show the variables and utter bullshit this thing is. WHY does it have Sturdy? I have absolutely no clue. But this single thing just pushes this guy over the edge. You actually can't OHKO this unless you have a wicked strong Scale Shot or Icicle Spear or like... Arm Thrust. And Electro Shot/Meteor Beam (because why settle for 1 SpAtk boosting move when you can have 2) additionally make this thing too damn strong in the context of 1v1. At least a Choice Specs set can be scouted with Protect or Disable fodder, but that's just not the case with this thing. This thing is actually the new Iron Valiant -- so many sets and you just can't deal with all of them. The most reliable answer to this thing is probably Ursaluna-Bloodmoon since it can anticipate a Mirror Coat with Blood Moon and has priority to answer Custap sets, but it also loses to Choice Specs. Specially Defensive Necrozma is also fairly decent, but I heard rumors of Metal Sound + Throat Spray to be an effective +3 SpAtk 85% of the time (15% of the time you're at +1 in this case -- which is more than enough most of the time). I really hope this doesn't become a thing, otherwise this is gone.

2) The Psychic types. Deoxys Speed is gone, but that leaves Meloetta, Hoopa-Unbound, and Necrozma left on the list. Meloetta is just so unfair to me with Relic Song and Serene Grace having a 20% sleep chance. You do switch forms in doing so, but that really doesn't matter if you get that sleep chance. Necrozma also has the same tomfoolery as from Gen 8 with its multiple annoying sets. It could end up like Sableye in the sense that the generational transition may nerf it to the point of no ban, but I doubt this. Hoopa-Unbound is perhaps the weakest link of these 3, but it still has 160 Attack and 170 SPECIAL ATTACK stats. 80 speed is the same as Regidrago -- which is by no means slow with a Choice Scarf. I didn't know much about Meloetta but I did know Hoopa-Unbound adapted it's slow speed with Rock Tomb and that was a wrap for it. I do hope the Psychic types of this tier follow suite to Deoxys Speed and get rightfully banned within time, or some savior of ours finds something to beat these annoying shitheads.

3) Custap Berry is as restraining as ever. Things have changed since the DLC 1 released. Custap Berry has only gotten better with the unpredictability factor of it. Everything can use this reliably with the only VALID WAY to beat it genuinely being priority moves. But its partner in crime Endure actually means you can't even do that. Custap Berry mind games to me are so incredibly tedious. My best answer is just Sturdy Archaludon -- which will be adapted to within time. Here's to me hoping maybe Indeedee F becomes meta to stop this berry menace.

4) Stall. Stall is a thing within every tier. I'm aware of this. But why the HELL is this Pressure Substitute Protect shit so annoying to face? Probably a teambuilding issue, but Taunt Landorus helps with this. I really hate the stall mons in this tier nonetheless. Kyurem, Zapdos, Wo-Chien, Corviknight, Ogerpon, Whimsicott. It doesn't matter who it is, it's still annoying as dogshit. Will this die down? No. Will something be banned because of stall? Also no. I just gotta cope and wait for things to mend themselves automatically.



I learned a lot with this tier. It's not balanced at all. It's not fun to me either. But maybe after this goes out, hopefully the tier can be a little bit more fun within time. I'll keep you guys updated on the things I find good to hopefully beat these things (unless they get banned before then -- in which case I'll be proud).
<- I'm watching you...

 

[Chrispy Burns]

Crazy additions to the meta rn.

Throat spray Hoopa-U with Psychic Noise & Magician is nasty & everything magnezone ran could be adapted to archaludon with nearly the same power.

Hard press scizor is also doing great, however with hard press potentially going from 120BP to 100BP, it becomes less of a choice band option (technician kicking up hard press's base power when the opponent is at half health or less). I do really like pounce and/or trailblaze as choice band scizor options to hit at the end of turn 1 and the beginning of turn 2. I still think a non choice set is the way to go with bullet punch/ swords dance.

 

[BigChuchu]

Necrozma is ban-worthy to me because of its exclusive access to 2 over-powered moves:

• Prismatic Laser which is the strongest move usable in 1v1 (on par with Gigaton Hammer but Tinkaton is mediocre with only 75 base attack).
• Photon Geyser which can work both as a physical and a special move, meaning Necrozma's set is hard to predict.

Photon Geyser into Prismatic Laser can 2HKO many mons on the meta, and Necrozma's ability Prism Armor makes it so tanky that's it's hard to OHKO. Bug mons are scared of the Meteor Beam set, which leaves only Dark/Ghost mons as a potentially reliable answer.

I wish Necrozma would at least go on a suspect list.

 

[RTM]

My view on tiering rn Pt.2

Last post, I talked about ban / unban slate, had that went through, we would have reached a fresh meta already. Unfortunately, council largely just laughed it off, however I did receive positive feedback from non-council. Despite this, I want to change my approach from ban/unban slate to something different. This post is my opinion and doesn't reflect the views of the entire council. Shoutout njnp for bringing the kokoloko method to my attention.

The Idea

Seeing the recent situation in ou regarding the kokoloko method being discussed, I see one main flaw with it which is every single mon is re-suspected. This would take a significant amount of time for results which would be mostly expected. I firmly believe that the best approach to take from here is similar to the kokoloko method, however, instead of everything being resuspected, a community feedback survey decides which mons are re-suspected (via 60% agreement from qualified voters). This would ensure a majority decision is reached not by the council, but the community, giving the wider community say on what should and shouldn't be re-suspected. This fixes many of the problems with my previous idea, as it makes bans not revolve only around the council, and it negates the speculative element of the previous method. After this process has played out, tiering would return to normal unless there was significant reason not to.

List of Mons To Ban







Scroll up for reasoning on any of these. I've removed as it was the most speculation based.
This wouldn't be a slate, these mons would be banned, without any council vote.

Why?
The way discussion is leading, the mons that are currently otr will not all be banned. Going off the latest suspect which took 2 weeks to complete, assuming a 2 week intermission to allow the ban to be implemented and meta to settle, the suspect process takes 4 weeks to complete. From collecting opinions from the otr thread and meta discussion, cinderace and likely one of meloetta and necrozma will be quickbanned and hoopa and necro/melo will be left to suspect. These 2 suspects would take 8 weeks together. Assuming regidrago, custap* and iron valiant are suspected at a later date, these suspects would take 20 weeks, or about 5 months altogether, given a generous 2 weeks between each of them. By following the method I proposed, only the things the community finds worthy of re-suspect would be suspected, greatly shortening the time needed to reach an ideal metagame.

*Custap will not be involved in this as a suspect is basically required for this sort of thing, but it will be happening.

Why the bans being speculative doesn't matter
One of the main arguments against this system is that banning mons that are only slightly unhealthy at the time on bans, but have shown they could be broken as the meta progresses is solely based on speculation, mainly . The bans being speculative doesn't matter as if the community sees fit, they can and will be undone through a majority vote into unban in suspect. If the community finds the meta better without them, then they are deemed unhealthy and the bans remain in place.

Why this Method is More Reliable than Traditional Tiering (In this specific case)
This methods reliability is based off the fact that the one mon would be isolated, instead of other broken mons co-existing, making it seem more healthy. I'll use random mons so people don't misinterpret what I say. For example, say is being suspected before anything else. In this scenario it is clearly unhealthy, however during the suspect, proves to be the bigger problem. This demographic continues and isn't banned, despite clearly being very unhealthy, as people believe that should be first to go due to being stronger, wasting 3 weeks and making it harder to suspect at a later date. However, if is isolated, people could realise that it is unhealthy and should be banned, then after is banned, could go to suspect and see a similar fate.

How this method grants the wider community more say
Despite this method involving the council removing more mons, it's no different to just quick-banning things, except for the fact it gives the community more input, as they can vote on which mons should stay banned/be taken to suspect. The recent survey showed that people largely thought the council was out of touch with the actual community and I see this as the perfect solution. While some believe the community just want suspects, I believe giving the community a fresh, more healthy meta fast is what the community deserve. As for suspect enthusiasts, there would be no lack of suspects, they would just be more meaningful.

Pros:
- Reaching an ideal meta faster
- Giving the community more influence and say
- Reducing impact of council so that everyone's opinion matters
- Isolated suspects increase reliability
- Less heavy-lifting for TLs in terms of suspects
- Less stress on room staff from people complaining about certain mons
- Very easy to revert decisions if shown to be wrong, unlike traditional tiering

Cons:
- Untraditional
- Speculative in nature, although this is fully remedied by a community vote for re-suspects, and the re-suspects themselves

As always, lmk what you think, I'd appreciate lots of feedback / discussion both here and on the on the radar thread. Contrary to popular belief, the most important thing behind many council decisions is community input and discussion, so if many of you agree, this could realistically happen. My discord is rtm24, hmu if u have any questions.

 

[bo_bobson27]

My view on tiering rn Pt.2

Last post, I talked about ban / unban slate, had that went through, we would have reached a fresh meta already. Unfortunately, council largely just laughed it off, however I did receive positive feedback from non-council. Despite this, I want to change my approach from ban/unban slate to something different. This post is my opinion and doesn't reflect the views of the entire council. Shoutout njnp for bringing the kokoloko method to my attention.

The Idea

Seeing the recent situation in ou regarding the kokoloko method being discussed, I see one main flaw with it which is every single mon is re-suspected. This would take a significant amount of time for results which would be mostly expected. I firmly believe that the best approach to take from here is similar to the kokoloko method, however, instead of everything being resuspected, a community feedback survey decides which mons are re-suspected (via 60% agreement from qualified voters). This would ensure a majority decision is reached not by the council, but the community, giving the wider community say on what should and shouldn't be re-suspected. This fixes many of the problems with my previous idea, as it makes bans not revolve only around the council, and it negates the speculative element of the previous method. After this process has played out, tiering would return to normal unless there was significant reason not to.

List of Mons To Ban







Scroll up for reasoning on any of these. I've removed as it was the most speculation based.
This wouldn't be a slate, these mons would be banned, without any council vote.

Why?
The way discussion is leading, the mons that are currently otr will not all be banned. Going off the latest suspect which took 2 weeks to complete, assuming a 2 week intermission to allow the ban to be implemented and meta to settle, the suspect process takes 4 weeks to complete. From collecting opinions from the otr thread and meta discussion, cinderace and likely one of meloetta and necrozma will be quickbanned and hoopa and necro/melo will be left to suspect. These 2 suspects would take 8 weeks together. Assuming regidrago, custap* and iron valiant are suspected at a later date, these suspects would take 20 weeks, or about 5 months altogether, given a generous 2 weeks between each of them. By following the method I proposed, only the things the community finds worthy of re-suspect would be suspected, greatly shortening the time needed to reach an ideal metagame.

*Custap will not be involved in this as a suspect is basically required for this sort of thing, but it will be happening.

Why the bans being speculative doesn't matter
One of the main arguments against this system is that banning mons that are only slightly unhealthy at the time on bans, but have shown they could be broken as the meta progresses is solely based on speculation, mainly . The bans being speculative doesn't matter as if the community sees fit, they can and will be undone through a majority vote into unban in suspect. If the community finds the meta better without them, then they are deemed unhealthy and the bans remain in place.

Why this Method is More Reliable than Traditional Tiering (In this specific case)
This methods reliability is based off the fact that the one mon would be isolated, instead of other broken mons co-existing, making it seem more healthy. I'll use random mons so people don't misinterpret what I say. For example, say is being suspected before anything else. In this scenario it is clearly unhealthy, however during the suspect, proves to be the bigger problem. This demographic continues and isn't banned, despite clearly being very unhealthy, as people believe that should be first to go due to being stronger, wasting 3 weeks and making it harder to suspect at a later date. However, if is isolated, people could realise that it is unhealthy and should be banned, then after is banned, could go to suspect and see a similar fate.

How this method grants the wider community more say
Despite this method involving the council removing more mons, it's no different to just quick-banning things, except for the fact it gives the community more input, as they can vote on which mons should stay banned/be taken to suspect. The recent survey showed that people largely thought the council was out of touch with the actual community and I see this as the perfect solution. While some believe the community just want suspects, I believe giving the community a fresh, more healthy meta fast is what the community deserve. As for suspect enthusiasts, there would be no lack of suspects, they would just be more meaningful.

Pros:
- Reaching an ideal meta faster
- Giving the community more influence and say
- Reducing impact of council so that everyone's opinion matters
- Isolated suspects increase reliability
- Less heavy-lifting for TLs in terms of suspects
- Less stress on room staff from people complaining about certain mons
- Very easy to revert decisions if shown to be wrong, unlike traditional tiering

Cons:
- Untraditional
- Speculative in nature, although this is fully remedied by a community vote for re-suspects, and the re-suspects themselves

As always, lmk what you think, I'd appreciate lots of feedback / discussion both here and on the on the radar thread. Contrary to popular belief, the most important thing behind many council decisions is community input and discussion, so if many of you agree, this could realistically happen. My discord is rtm24, hmu if u have any questions.

Im just going to voice my opinion about this course of action. First of all, there should be a community survey to determine what mons get banned to begin with, or at least a council vote based on otr. I assume that's implied, but it was notably missing from this post.

My main concern is that once we ban these mons, the meta will not support the return of any mons whether or not they would otherwise be balanced. This is because players would not prep for them, and therefore they would not fit easily back into the new post-ban meta. For example, if we banned Meowscarada or Porygon-Z, people would likely no longer run bulk for these threats, and many teams would be 3-0d by them. This would make it difficult to determine whether they should be resuspected.

If we take the more cautious method of only quick banning mons that are clearly banworthy (with community support), and suspecting those that are more controversial, it would certainly take significantly longer as you pointed out. However, this has the advantage of actually seeing the meta with the suspected mon where players adapt to deal with it. This makes it easier to accurately determine whether the mon should be banned.

 

[RTM]

Im just going to voice my opinion about this course of action. First of all, there should be a community survey to determine what mons get banned to begin with, or at least a council vote based on otr. I assume that's implied, but it was notably missing from this post.

My main concern is that once we ban these mons, the meta will not support the return of any mons whether or not they would otherwise be balanced. This is because players would not prep for them, and therefore they would not fit easily back into the new post-ban meta. For example, if we banned Meowscarada or Porygon-Z, people would likely no longer run bulk for these threats, and many teams would be 3-0d by them. This would make it difficult to determine whether they should be resuspected.

If we take the more cautious method of only quick banning mons that are clearly banworthy (with community support), and suspecting those that are more controversial, it would certainly take significantly longer as you pointed out. However, this has the advantage of actually seeing the meta with the suspected mon where players adapt to deal with it. This makes it easier to accurately determine whether the mon should be banned.

good post

1st off, a community survey would be the best method to decide the mons banned.

As for the meta not supporting the return of mons, I definitely see your point, however, people would be able to contrast their experiences with building/playing and opinions from before it was banned. To add to your example, people might be changing their teams from before the ban and realise, oh wait, my teams beat meowscarada without really trying. Or they might see, huh, I don't have to run av urshifu on every team (random example) to beat porygon-z reliably anymore. The experience building and playing in absence of these threats is what would help form peoples opinion of whether they should be banned or not and I believe you underestimate players in thinking they won't be able to see it from this perspective.

To give a relevant example, say regidrago is banned. After its banned, people realise that they still find themselves running a fairy and a steel type which beat drago on every team so they deem it fine to return for a suspect. So while I definitely understand your point, the opposite would also happen and it would lead to mons that require very specific counters or necessitate usually unviable counters staying banned, as players realise how far they had to go out of their way to counter those mons.

As for the standard method, you've acknowledged it'd take significantly longer, and also stated that it has the advantage of seeing the meta with the suspected mon as players adapt. One problem with this is as I stated:

:pikachu:

This methods reliability is based off the fact that the one mon would be isolated, instead of other broken mons co-existing, making it seem more healthy. I'll use random mons so people don't misinterpret what I say. For example, say is being suspected before anything else. In this scenario it is clearly unhealthy, however during the suspect, proves to be the bigger problem. This demographic continues and isn't banned, despite clearly being very unhealthy, as people believe that should be first to go due to being stronger, wasting 3 weeks and making it harder to suspect at a later date. However, if is isolated, people could realise that it is unhealthy and should be banned, then after is banned, could go to suspect and see a similar fate.

Its easy to act like there are no risks to tiering the standard way, however, the risks are more wasting time, and damaging trust with the community.

While it certainly does benefit from having the meta already somewhat adapt to the threat, making it focal point, being a re-suspect would also achieve the same thing. By having a community vote and counting voters for what is re-suspected, we can't go wrong, as a community consensus is the only real way to gauge the opinion of the community as a whole. Rather than tiering for just what council wants, we should respect everyone's opinion, so if the 1v1 community as a whole agrees on something by majority, it should be final, regardless of if some individuals disagree.

 

[bo_bobson27]

good post

1st off, a community survey would be the best method to decide the mons banned.

As for the meta not supporting the return of mons, I definitely see your point, however, people would be able to contrast their experiences with building/playing and opinions from before it was banned. To add to your example, people might be changing their teams from before the ban and realise, oh wait, my teams beat meowscarada without really trying. Or they might see, huh, I don't have to run av urshifu on every team (random example) to beat porygon-z reliably anymore. The experience building and playing in absence of these threats is what would help form peoples opinion of whether they should be banned or not and I believe you underestimate players in thinking they won't be able to see it from this perspective.

To give a relevant example, say regidrago is banned. After its banned, people realise that they still find themselves running a fairy and a steel type which beat drago on every team so they deem it fine to return for a suspect. So while I definitely understand your point, the opposite would also happen and it would lead to mons that require very specific counters or necessitate usually unviable counters staying banned, as players realise how far they had to go out of their way to counter those mons.

As for the standard method, you've acknowledged it'd take significantly longer, and also stated that it has the advantage of seeing the meta with the suspected mon as players adapt. One problem with this is as I stated:

:pikachu:

This methods reliability is based off the fact that the one mon would be isolated, instead of other broken mons co-existing, making it seem more healthy. I'll use random mons so people don't misinterpret what I say. For example, say is being suspected before anything else. In this scenario it is clearly unhealthy, however during the suspect, proves to be the bigger problem. This demographic continues and isn't banned, despite clearly being very unhealthy, as people believe that should be first to go due to being stronger, wasting 3 weeks and making it harder to suspect at a later date. However, if is isolated, people could realise that it is unhealthy and should be banned, then after is banned, could go to suspect and see a similar fate.

Its easy to act like there are no risks to tiering the standard way, however, the risks are more wasting time, and damaging trust with the community.

While it certainly does benefit from having the meta already somewhat adapt to the threat, making it focal point, being a re-suspect would also achieve the same thing. By having a community vote and counting voters for what is re-suspected, we can't go wrong, as a community consensus is the only real way to gauge the opinion of the community as a whole. Rather than tiering for just what council wants, we should respect everyone's opinion, so if the 1v1 community as a whole agrees on something by majority, it should be final, regardless of if some individuals disagree.

If we decide to use a community survey to determine what mons are banned initially, I doubt people will change their mind later on. Confirmation bias is going to come into play here, and resuspects will not go through.

People would not be able to accurately compare their experience building with and without a specific mon because your proposed method bans several mons at once, only allowing players to compare it with a completely different meta.
Top tier threats in 1v1 are always going to require other mons/teams to adapt to them. Teams do not beat strong mons without trying.

The problem with suspecting you cite here is really a non issue. Qualified voters are definitely smart enough to realize if something is banworthy whether or not there is another broken in the meta. Not to mention that council should suspect the most banworthy mon based on community input. I understand that council dropped the ball in dlc1, but that doesn't mean we need to rework the entire system.