We have not had a single Pokemon ban in BH yet, so I think it is a good idea to review why we are doing so.
Groudon Primal is probalby going to be our first ban. It has a great double tab that hits every part of the meta, it has the offensive stats to back them up and be used with nearly any offensive ability purely with its stabs, it has the defensive stabs to resist priority and retain its bulk, it has a good typing to not be affected by SR, and has only two weaknesses. It can get by its would be counters simply by changing its ability, or running a different end of the spectrum and that's not even touching on its coverage moves. This is just with base Groudon Primal.
Kyogre Primal is much similar, in that it has the offensive and defensive type, the ability to run nearly any ability, and the special case, the ability to be nearly invincible after just a single set up on its main set where it also has recovery. Without having a dedicated counter to its stab, it can get past its would be counters in much a similar fashion, and has the addition advantage of being imposter proof on its main set minus Lucky Punch, in which case it is a toss up, just like a speed tie with other mons.
It is important to note that these two are in the ban discussion because they centralize the tier beyond their main set, and the fact that they work with nearly any offensive and defensive ability, and have the stats and the typing to maintain their dominance in the tier. That is why we are discussing them for ban. If Groudon had the defensive stats of DeoxysA, or Kyogre was like a super defensive Shuckle, I am pretty sure we would not be here right now. They are difficult to find stops to
beyong their main set (in fact, I am not even sure what Groudon-Primal's main set even is).Therefore, these are the standards we should have to ban a pokemon from BH, which is an otherwise unheard of decision.
Therefore when you talk about Rayquaza Mega you have to make sure it follows the same standards. Many people say it is broken on its main set, Aerilate, the assumption of which I could contest myself right now. But let's continue on the basis that it is; then the correct decision is to ban an -ate ability on the mon
not the complete mon itself. This is because, Ray doesn't have the defensive type that Groudon and Kyogre do, it does not have the bulk to tank hits, it is weak to one of the hazards and it becomes debiliated by any coverage move from even a moderately strong defensive mon. Furthermore its stabs do not have the unresisted potential of Groudon nor does it have the versatility to work with multiple offensive sets, like Tinted, PH or Protean, to make it not have good enough answers to, like Groudon and Kyogre do. Every single set that currently works that is not Aerilate works only because people expect it to be Aerilate, or it needs a scarf to pull off completely. Am I saying Ray is bad? Of course not; it would do decently with a lot of different sets. But being "okay" is not grounds for a ban. Right now there is not even enough evidence to say that its second strongest set, Gale Wings is broken in the meta, and to say that it definitively would be in a meta that wil not have to worry about preparing for Groudon or Kyogre would be premature and foolish. If you want to ban a Pokemon you have to look at what it brings to the table completely, not because of a single set.
There have been a number of counterarguments to this option based on points that I do not think are sound and I shall get into why right now:
This is the number one reason that I receive in opposition and it is the most farcical one so I shall do this first. First of all, it is untrue completely because there have been precedents of not allowing a specific set on a pokemon in metas such as AAA, Inheritance, where Sableye-Chansey was deemed over cenrtalizing, as well as Averagemons, where Sableye was given Stall to keep Sableye-Mega in the meta, the latter of which I think is a very interesting decision because it basically is the same reason why I think Rayquaza Mega should remain in the tier. If a tree is diseased you take care of the infected branch - you don't chop the entire tree down.
Furthermore, this "tradition" business for not allowing a complex ban is ludicrous. How do you qualify complex? I'd say we have already started with complex decisions with the Assist vote (which was the preferred decision
over banning Groudon Primal at the time), as well as the ability clause, because the requirement for "two" is completely arbitrary. If this were not a case, this argument is still fundamentally flawed because you are not only assuming that your userbase is too stupid to understand a clause and thus be put off from playing,even though it does not seem any more complex than banning Rayquaza Mega entirely (which would evoke the same question as to "why", and still put off new players who would want to play with a mon that is not allowed anywhere else except AG), but also you are saying that the complexity of a clause and the ability for people understanding should somehow be incorporated into our decision making. Nowhere else on this planet does anyone make decisions based on whether other people get it or like it or not; they make the correct decision regardless (this is especially for any of you who support the recent Supreme Court decision which was made even though there is a sizable segment who "just don't understand it" or "just don't like it"). I don't see how the complexity of a rule should affect a mon's performance in a meta. Especially when the concept of banning a specific set on a mon based on its ability has precedents in other metas - and don't even get me started on the purported ways to "improve" Stabmons.
Neither has a pokemon been banned from BH before. There is always going to be a precedent.
The practices of standards have no bearing on what we do here, as people have already kindly pointed out in regards to usage. In any case, I will delve into this point as well
First feel free to refer to
this post because it is where most people are drawing this argument from. I took a look at it myself, and unless I am mistaken, most people actually did admit that complex bans would bea step in the right direction. However, the decision was ultiamtely made to not do so based on two basic points, which across all the posts I've read, can be summarized as:
1) Pokemon with the different abilities still perform roughly the same role, which is what is being attempted to stop. This argument is used against Speed Boost Blaziken vs Blaze Blaziken
2) This decision would affect every single pokemon across all standard tiers, resulting in many cases the same Pokemon being classified in different tiers basedon what abilities it has. This would be a massive undertaking that is simply unfeasible.
Neither of these arguments apply in BH. I'll start with the second point.All we are deciding is if a pokemon is in or out of the tier. There are no other tiers we need to put them into, and there is no reason to bucket every other mon that could be potentially banned (because we have only two other candidates, who are broken across their sets,
not on their main one, which is the assumption we made to begin with - if you want to refute this assumption, then you should also be questioning why Don and Ogre are being banned at all). The first point is also completely inapplicable to BH because the ability defines the role of a pokemon in this meta. You can't say "oh look Raymega is broken on aerilate, so we should ban it because it will behave the same across all of the sets". It just doesn't work. Raymega has drastically different sets for Aerilate, Tinted, Contrary, Gale Wings, PH, Fur Coat, Magic Guard and all. There is simply no way to blanket all of them together.
This is a meaningless question because I already don't think that banning an ability on a mon is needlessly complex but I shall humor it anyway. We stop based on the arguments that will be posed in this thread, that is the whole point of the suspect thread, and we all will have a say of what is overly complex. We aren't making a clause that "raymega is in the tier if it doesn'thave any normal moves, if it is running iron ball, if it has 0 ivs in speed, and if the user of the ray plays without a mouse" here. If it is taking more effort to keep a mon in a tier than it would to ban it, then that is when it needs to be banned imo. This is completely not applicable here. If you are going through with this argument then you are simply being facetious.
I can't deny and say I don't love offense, but I will change my view depending on evidence and I try to be objective as possible because in the end I want a better tier just like any of you. Kingslayer very succinctly posed why Groudon Primal is broken across all of his sets with just his main stabs
with sufficient and clear evidence and I had no counterargument even though I was initially against having bans in BH at all for whatever reason. I changed my decision based on what he said and that is why I support Don ban. If i was completely biased, I would only vote for Ogre ban, because I like him the least and Groudon and Raymega suit my playstyle far better and are far cooler. In any case, this is an
ad hominem argument which is a sure sign that you are already wrong.
tl;dr
You have to prove that Raymega is broken with more than just Aerilate to get it banned. This would especially be a laughable decision if we ban Raymega and then people actually do get around to suspecting -ates, which is what Kingslayer said (and which most of the people who want Raymega banned seem to support).
Innocent until proven guilty.
PS: If you reply with "tldr LOLOL" to this post, then I don't see how you have any business being in this thread which is based on discussion. Get your cheap likes elswhere
