Let me start this post with the disclaimer that I'm clearly not the best person to be discussing bans in Balanced Hackmons, nor have I ever claimed to be but I would like something to be clarified if possible. This is just the view of someone who plays BH on and off, and is more or less an outside view of the tier.
To anyone who reads this post, everybody's opinion should be considered if they provide enough logical backing. You should not neglect a point if they don't play the tier. I'll do my best to respond to your points with my own logic.
The current attitude towards Imposter is that discussing its removal from the metagame is quite "ignorant" or "irrational". I used to be of the belief that the reason for its existence in the tier was to keep set-up sweepers in check, which was undercut by my thoughts of potentially banning the potent set-up moves in addition to Imposter being a preferable option. Regardless, I never really spoke up about it due to my lack of knowledge about the metagame. Recently, I've had this clarified as a misconception and not at all the reason for its remained existence in the meta.
I disagree - It's less of an issue with the ban itself being a disagreeable concept rather than the "logic" that some people provide which provides poor representation from the pro ban, or the side that questions why it's allowed. Posts like these are fair and should be considered, but I don't think that when somebody says "Imposter is annoying and should go" that it's really fair to consider that point when it has no substance in the first place. You'll find that the majority of the arguments against Imposter eventually boil down to people not wanting to play against it - It's a proposal for convenience, not for healthiness, which I believe should be the priority when discussing a suspect.
So my assumption was that this thread would explain why it's not banned, bringing me to the "Why isn't ___ banned?" section of the header posts. I feel as if the reason provided isn't an adequate excuse to never look into what an Imposter-less BH would look like. Again, I have formerly forfeited the point that I am not the most knowledgeable about this metagame, so I'm looking for clarification rather than action necessarily.
Looking at a metagame without Imposter would definitely be an interesting idea, but I believe it's sound logic for not getting rid of it. In a metagame where you have a multitude of sets you yourself can control, this is the only set which you yourself control. If you are having difficulty facing this set, then chances are that you lose to other variants of this set as well. (For example, if the only answer to your Impostered Spooky Plate Gengar is hoping they don't have Spooky Plate, odds are you lose to Gengar anyway.) This isn't an issue with Imposter, it's an issue with the teambuilding and odds are that even if Imposter were gone, you'd still lose to this set if you neglected to prepare for it regardless of if you opted to run it or not.
The issue with Imposter however isn't that its sets are unpredictable or that it's difficult to imposter-proof your team; it's that it's heavily limiting the pool of usable Pokémon and that it forces the metagame into a much more defensive and drawn out state. By permitting Imposter, the ability to run many offensive Pokémon is nullified by the fact that running a Pokémon in the back to check it efficiently isn't a stable option or a viable one, whereas often it is not worth sacrificing a Pokémon slot on. By doing this Imposter is severely impairing diversity and creativity. There's not really a beneficial reason for it to exist in the metagame within this statement.
It's not limiting the pool of usable Pokemon, for starters. The Pokemon on the VR are there because they have the stats, typing and inherent natural qualities to compete in the BH metagame, which is what they have over unviable Pokemon. Unviable Pokemon are unviable because they don't have the qualities to fare well in the BH meta, not because Imposter renders them unviable. In addition, there have been many Hyper Offense teams that beat Imposter naturally - While it's fair to say that Hyper Offense in itself
may see a rise in viability if Imposter is gone, this is complete speculation and I'd honestly argue against it. Hyper Offense in BH has a multitude of other things holding it back - Namely Prankster Destiny Bond, Haze, and Encore, as well as Spectral Thief, Core Enforcer and opposing offensive Pokemon that you can't exactly answer assuming the worst. I'm not gonna say that Imposter isn't a concern for Hyper Offense, but it definitely isn't the only thing limiting it from flourishing in the meta. In addition, I don't believe that forcing the metagame into a drawn out state is exactly a bad thing. Requiring patience isn't for everybody, but using the argument that it makes the metagame more drawn out calls back to my point earlier on how it seems as though individuals on the pro-ban side at least partially want Imposter gone because of convenience rather than inherent brokenness. In addition, I don't believe Imposter inhibits creativity nor diversity - You can refer to my earlier points for the diversity part, and I believe that there's many creative sets in here even with the presence of Imposter. The claim that there would be more is simply speculation, because most of the Pokemon that run sets have already tried to run other "creative" sets and have other factors inhibiting them. This is already a pretty large paragraph so I'll stop here but I can build on it more if you PM me or reply to this thread.
Why is it though? You've provided absolutely no justification for it to be "woven into the experience of BH". It's inherently unhealthy in the fact that they get a direct upgrade of your Pokémon. Imposter-proofing is an obscure concept that isn't completely justified, as it turns the metagame into a defensive shitfest with games that average hundreds of turns. Defensive Pokémon excel due to their ability to "imposter-proof themselves", instead of being a balanced metagame where offense is viable instead of something to laugh about. Removing Imposter doesn't come with direct disadvantages so why is there such a negative stigma around possible removal discussion.
Imposterproofing should be woven into the experience of BH. When you're playing BH, you're aiming to answer as much of the metagame as you can in your own team - This includes your sets, and as such, you should have some form of counterplay to them with or without Imposter existing. While yes, the greater bulk does limit some options of this counterplay, this isn't inherently an issue. It's simply different, which I don't believe to be a bad thing exactly. No comment on the "defensive shitfest" part, I've already stated that I believe that isn't inherently an issue, just a matter of preference versus unhealthiness. If you can provide sound reasoning as to why that's a bad thing, then sure I'll be willing to consider it, but I don't exactly see any reasoning right now. In addition, offense is a viable playstyle. I dislike anecdotal evidence, but there have been plenty of viable offensive teams which both I and many other members of the BH community have built. The pool of Pokemon that Imposterproof themselves isn't exactly limited, either - At first glance, you may be misled as to believe that Mega Gengar is the only notable example. However, Regigigas, Xerneas, Primal Kyogre, Mega Rayquaza, Mega Mewtwo Y and X, Yveltal and other Pokemon all have viable self-Imposterproof sets. I'd argue that offensive Pokemon can actually outnumber the amount of walls that can Imposterproof themselves, but that's not your point right now. I've already mentioned why there isn't a negative stigma around possible removal, simply a lack of proper justification that makes that side so negatively perceived. In additon, the reasoning that "Removing Imposter doesn't come with direct disadvantages" seems like a huge "Why not?" argument to me, so I'm just gonna ask you why? Why would you remove something that isn't broken? If you used this reasoning in any other metagame or tier, you'd be called out for it and for good reason - We (as in the BH community) decide that things need to go when they are healthy, not when we wish to look at a metagame just because it wouldn't be a bad thing.
Sure. How does this argue for keeping Imposter in the metagame? I'm sure a lot more strategies would arise in the wake of an Imposter ban. This shouldn't be an unfair assumption to make.
It's an argument that checks do exist to Impostered Pokemon, even on the Pokemon that it Imposters. In additon, your latter point is complete speculation but I'll just take the time to say that stuff like Bellyburden, Contrary and other things would become better, but they're still relevant and even after an Imposter ban they would still have their fair share of answers.
It does give an unfair advantage. The Imposter virtually always has more HP or an unfair item such as Light Ball or Thick Club. This point is moot as well.
More HP changes the counterplay, but it doesn't completely limit it. In any metagame, a lot of Pokemon can run viable sets which have different checks and counters. The more HP argument is answered by that, I believe. Counterplay being different from your Impostered set than when you would face your set on the ladder isn't inherently a bad thing, and it's actually not as different as you'd expect. It forces you to prepare for the metagame in a different fashion, but that isn't bad inherently. Also, Light Ball relies on speed ties, support, can't switch in and often times can be answered on already viable teams just by playing different. If you see a Pikachu at team preview, you're gonna take a solid 10 seconds to laugh at it before you adjust your gameplay differently from if it was Imposter Chansey. Light Ball isn't always an advantage nor is it unfair, either - For the reasons I have already mentioned plus the fact that it's useless versus stall and versus walls, I'm gonna have to say that I'd generally rather run Chansey for overall consistency. Thick Club is... pretty unviable and falls into the same can of worms as Light Ball for the most part.
Now again, because I'm so afraid of causing conflict and just want an actual answer. Please tell me why I'm wrong.
Don't be afraid to cause conflict - Wanting clarification is fine and I'll call out anyone who tries to turn this into a huge conflict as well.
I'm not sure why this argument that "It let's you run stuff with no viable checks" is a good argument for banning imposter. Surely if a Pokémon doesn't haven't any effective ways to check it then it not being used can only be a good thing? I honestly can't see why it should be easier to bring stuff that's so broken that even if you know the exact moveset and the copy doesn't have the item of your choice then there are still no viable checks... I'm p sure what you outlined here is exactly the main reason we have kept imposter.
Just wanted to say that this argument wasn't made once in her post, really.
I'd like to point out that Chansey as an Imposter user meets all these requirements, except replacing "easy to patch weaknesses" with downright invincible levels of bulk.
First of all, they're not requirements, but guidelines. Chansey doesn't fall into any of the criteria presented from centralization nor the first point of multidimensional and unique sets.
I bring up Chansey in particular, because it's the only Imposter user that forces damage calculations to jump from this:
252 SpA Choice Specs Rayquaza-Mega Core Enforcer vs. 252 HP / 252 SpD Rayquaza-Mega: 494-584 (119.3 - 141%) -- guaranteed OHKO
to this:
252 SpA Choice Specs Rayquaza-Mega Core Enforcer vs. +1 252 HP / 252 SpD Rayquaza-Mega: 332-392 (47.1 - 55.6%) -- 77.3% chance to 2HKO
Even Blissey cuts the damage to ~3/5 the original roll:
252 SpA Choice Specs Rayquaza-Mega Core Enforcer vs. 252 HP / 252 SpD Rayquaza-Mega: 494-584 (69.1 - 81.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
This alone should show that there is a very clear distinction between fighting yourself and fighting a literally superior version of yourself. Not to mention that these calcs are specifically for high-HP threats like Rayquaza, Mewtwo, Xerneas, and more. Threats with low HP, like Diancie-Mega, just have their damage rolls skewed even more by Imposter:
252 SpA Choice Specs Pixilate Diancie-Mega Boomburst vs. 252 HP / 252 SpD Diancie-Mega: 355-418 (116.7 - 137.5%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Choice Specs Pixilate Diancie-Mega Boomburst vs. +1 252 HP / 252 SpD Diancie-Mega: 237-280 (33.6 - 39.7%) -- guaranteed 3HKO
252 SpA Choice Specs Pixilate Diancie-Mega Boomburst vs. 252 HP / 252 SpD Diancie-Mega: 355-418 (49.7 - 58.5%) -- 98.8% chance to 2HKO
Of course you can't guaranteed win 1v1 versus Imposter.. If you're trying to approach facing Imposter by trying to not switch out then you're not gonna be very happy.
The problem with Imposter is that almost everyone who plays the metagame on a regular basis has been preconditioned towards bending over backwards in order to not automatically lose to Imposter users, such to the extent that they now believe that because they counterbuild for Imposter on every team, that it suddenly becomes not broken. This would be fine if the way you "improofed" teams was simpler than having a highly specific combination of moves, abilities, and items on almost all of your mons, or otherwise neutering your offensive threats' capability of sweeping teams in order to have a proper switchin on your team for it, if it gets Impostered.
It's not preconditioning, it's adapting. If you refuse to prepare for a threat, then of course you're gonna lose to it and that doesn't make it overwhelming, it just means you're not playing the meta how it is, but how you want it to be. And you'd be surprised at just how inaccurate the latter part of your point here is (not in an aggressive way, though) - Having mained the meta, I can't tell you much aside from how this isn't true at all. You don't compromise any viability by running tried and true sets and you can do that while also still running a fairly standard defensive core or an offense team. I don't mean any offense here, but this point is just false to anyone who's played the meta. I don't mean to say that you shouldn't be posting because you're not a BH main, but there's a difference between that and bringing up untrue points.
The main thing I've heard about Imposter from anyone not named Flint is either that it's broken, or that removing it would cause the metagame to fall apart, since it acts as some kind of "glue", but if that were really the case, wouldn't that effectively mandate a suspect test to see if that logic holds true? Not even an outright ban, just a suspect test in which Imposter is banned so we can see what the metagame would be like without it, since all there really is to go off of is just speculation and theories instead of cold, hard facts.
If what these people said was true, it would indeed mandate a suspect test, but I feel as though most people who make those arguments don't really understand what they're talking about. I'll reserve my thoughts on an Imposterless metagame because as you mentioned, it's just pure speculation as of right now. I don't think a suspect test is really required, just a tour or so to see how BH without Imposter would be.