BH Balanced Hackmons

It appears that a ton of discussion has been sparked in this thread and as usual people have been going through their thoughts on each of the arguably broken elements of the metagame. This is good, but at this point I'd like to zoom out a bit and talk about why this meta has been feeling like a true BH hell original and the main differences in how the meta plays in general now compared to gen 7. After that I'll use those thoughts to explain what I think should be done with the meta.

The thing that strikes me about BH right now is how unstable it is. Normally when we talk about instability in mons we're almost exclusively referring to building/matchup aspect of the tier, but in this case I think this statement is relevant to both building and playing. It's pretty difficult to go into a tour game feeling confident right now because there's normally something that destroys the team you're about to bring.

Anyone who has laddered recently will have seen an assortment of teams using rain, sun, or Terrain to support their wallbreakers. While these are very matchup dependent, they can be very hard to play against if you have the wrong defensive core.

This comment was about the 170+ BP moves on ladder but it remains true for the metagame in general and also tour play. On top of weather and Eterrain you also have various forms of species spam running wild in the meta. There's a wide variety of teams that can remove player agency given the wrong matchup, and when you're playing in tours the dumb stuff will eventually get you. To avoid this, we really need those teams to either be less common or less good. Luckily there's a pretty simple way to help with this that doesn't involve banning styles that aren't broken.

this kind of leads into the next issue, flaws with the meta. we are playing with the pdons, the water bubbles, the psychic surges of gen 8 free. consistency is limited. there's too much sauce and it takes focus away from the nuances of building and playing that really separate the good players from the bad ones.

For the most part making BH balanced comes back to this statement. I'll roll with the use of "sauce" here to mean any of the borderline broken elements discussed in the last few pages. Currently with so much sauce in the meta there isn't really much room to specifically prepare for any of the other things that I mentioned in the last paragraph. The powerful things that dominate the meta are also dominant in the builder, to the point where most people just build to fit whatever broken things they can on their team and do their best to cover the top threats. This leads to really limited building and playing (do we have a breaker that wins? How well can we switch into their breakers?). In fact, SL42 has already beaten me to voicing this sentiment.

1582690825687.png


If the meta were in a good place (and this applies to any meta really), the middle ground would be good teambuilding. What we have currently allowed in the meta is a big flashing neon sign that says mons should do all of their work on their own - if they resist your STABs just slap them with some of the powerful coverage options. The fact that mons make huge progress on their own so often is detrimental to games; there's not much skill to demonstrate in playing like this, as the interactive parts of mons games don't really come into play if the outcome is hinging on whether your mon can successfully break its checks. Gen 7 was dominated by threats that could cripple but generally not break their checks. Things like Xerneas were good because they could make progress against their checks (thanks Spikes), even though they weren't breaking directly through them - that came later, with the help of their teammates. This is much healthier, as games don't feel random that way, and it was much easier to claim that the better player+team combo came out on top.

Following on from that point, Gen 8 features plenty of ways that the game state will pivot in the space of a turn. All it takes is a convenient Octolock or V-create, and suddenly you can be in a lot of danger. This is nothing new, but as loser mentioned in his post, the combination of more high BP moves and weaker defensive mons means that we're struggling for consistent defensive mons. Here's another funny excerpt from a conversation with Andy (who played some BH last gen and is now learning gen 8).

1582696209377.png



On the one hand, the problem here is using Hippowdon as an Electric check when it dies to Fishious Rend. On the other hand, how do we actually get around this kind of thing? Seismitoad isn't weak to Fishious Rend which is pretty cool, but it is weak to Grass coverage. The difference between this gen and last gen is that the outcome of one turn like this is normally OHKOing a crucial mon of a matchup. I'm not actually even asking for walls here - weaker checks to things being 2HKOed by coverage would already be a much better scenario. Then, if they predict correctly, you still get punished for having a worse check, however for the time being you'll be able to keep your weakened mon to deter the spammable move or to preserve a sack. This makes a huge difference in these matchups, and it's pretty crucial to surviving some of these matchups. The concept of making plays to recover from unfortunate turns is a central skill-based aspect of BH, and if a mon can't successfully recover from these scenarios that would typically cause it to be written off as a bad mon. Right now, however, there's not enough mons that aren't bad for the roles that you have to cover on a team, so instead we're stuck with things we already know are not ideal. To be clear, I'm not saying it's impossible to hard check the threats in this meta, this is more of a commentary on how much worse games can go when you bring softer checks to these threats. The give and take of prepping different amounts for different mons is messed up, because the middle ground that sl mentioned of mons that don't either lose or hard wall is tiny.


When it comes to fixing these gameplay issues, I'd suggest the following:

1) QB Octolock. I'm targeting Octolock specifically here because it's just not competitive or healthy. It offers nothing positive to the meta as every set that runs it apart from NormPult is slightly worse, except for when they get the matchup they want. Octolock's existence makes scouting an absolute mess, as it's yet another thing that can effectively OHKO some mons; even though checks dying to Octolock does not happen in the space of a turn, once Octolock is clicked you are stuck there. I noticed Chess pointed out one of my games vs MAMP in open, and I don't think there's too much to read into there, but the full removal of Hippowdon from that game was a big deal when against nearly every other Zacian-C set Hippowdon would be able to dip from that matchup if there was a problem. Honestly all things considered I'm lucky to even have a Bounce Melmetal there when alternatively I could just have a situation where I lose my Zac-C check and then lose the game to Zac-C.

2) Suspect... the sauce. I'm not even kidding, I literally think reducing the amount of stuff to prep for in just about any way would be much more help than harm to the meta. Personally the 170+ BP moves in some order or Intrepid Sword would be a logical start, but again anything that's been mentioned works with a close enough eye or good activity to run any follow-up suspects if needed. Right now my least favourite place to start would be Dynamax. From using some of the cheese styles myself and playing against them, Dyna is generally one of the only consistently strong elements holding these teams back, because it's hugely important to manage the situations where you can clean a team that's weak defensively, or to switch the momentum of the game by turning an OHKO into a 2HKO and taking out a breaker. While this is very clearly a broken checks broken argument, we have multiple broken things in the meta and the order in which we deal with them is still up for debate - I'm not suggesting that we don't deal with Dynamax, just pointing out that it's not a no-brainer to get rid of when it comes to the positives and negatives of its impact. I expect that the overall dumbness of the mechanic will easily outweigh any positives to keeping it in a balanced meta, but for now we're dealing with a crazy meta.


I don't think there's anything to wait for right now, since the Open's final round has already started, so I'd really like to see any type of tiering action soon. Like I said before I'm not too bothered exactly what it is, anything's better than nothing at this point.


I'll leave y'all with this completely unrelated video of someone trying to pronounce Worcestershire Sauce.

 
Longinsh post inc
I will share some thoughts on the meta and some changes i would like to see happen,granted that,i dont feel the meta is in a bad place right now but ladder activity does seem low at this point.

1.-Dynamax -Personally i think this is the most clear broken element in the game atm.While it has some healthy usages,particullarly an extra answer to a potential sweep,(ie belly drum/shell smash being answered in which case even if a sweeper is forced out predicting dynamax it still has to setup again and dynamax has done its job WITHOUT relying on prediction)in most cases,revenge killing-expecting dynamax and dynamaxing 1st-getting out of chioce lock/taunt/encore-countering opposing dynamax-setting/changing weather/terrain and most others,it falls on a category of either high stakes 50/50 or broken answers broken,situations we should try to avoid given the choice.It has been discussed to death in most tiers,and while bh isnt rly the place to max airstream and sweep it still even if only for one turn can swing the game in one side's favour by a (in)correct guess

2.-Interpid sword -A bit undertalked, i will also address evc/rend/bek here.I think bh is a slow tier with mons being more bulky than usual and many long 200+turn matches,and i find the existance of viable offensive abilities healthy,not the the extent of pure power and water bubble,but at least sth better than adaptability,tc and flare boost.The problem with interpid is that,coupled with a choice band more than doubles ur atk stat,essentially outvalueing fur coat (and unaware) due to how the multipliers work.I dont think a choice band ban is feasible?but at least this ability in particular with the 3 afformentioned moves is too much to handle.On the other hand i think the 3 moves,while broken in most tiers,in bh might be just balanced enough to make the meta more offensively orriented.This might feel weird to experienced players accustomed to the safer playstyle of bh but i would be in favour of such a change,especially when those 3 specific moves have ability immunities and thus can be somewhat accounted for in teambuilding.I rly suck on formatting so i wont directly quote,but xavgb above mentioned how its hard to tour prep without hard losing to something specific,but personally i dont think this is a negative issue,if there was a team or playstyle that could handle anything if played correctly everyone would try to do that

3.-Species clause-It has been discussed in past i know but i wana propose my dumb idea.I dont know its its feasible but could it be possible to force douplicate of mons to have diferent names,for instance if u wana use double/triple eternatus u have to name them differently.I have been many times in the position where,despite having scouted the sets of an enemy mon,due to it being mutliple i dont know which set am i encountering,an issue which counters actually scouting,a very important aspect of the game

4.-Octolock - Probably im not in line with everone on this move.It is a strong trapping move,yea its better than mean look and infestation which have been viably used,But its still a traping move.Anchor shot can pp stall,imprison transform can work,this thing only takes one slot to basically do 2 diferent thing but even then i dont think its broken.Ghosts exist,shed shell exists and pivot moves are very common.Usually octo can get one kill on the surprise,but with knowing a certain mon has octolock from my experience strong teams usually have an answer to it,like most trapping sets.

Lastly i wana talk about the game state overall.I dont think bh is that 'unbalanced' right now,maybe im just wrong here,but i think lack of play is mostly due to the lack of variety.We dont have many usable mons,some stuff(sets/mons/moves) are just that much stronger than the rest,the previous gen had more things u could work with so the current bh gen gets stale faster.Also just aesthetically mray m2 and zygod look cool and werent usable in other tiers,etern and dgz look very silly u have to admit.Might sound memeing but even such a thing could play a part on general game activity
 
I'm going to try keep this as short as possible

Problems with Gen 7- some balancing problems

Problems with Gen 8- it's bad

Let me elaborate. In gen 8 the main problem is you take away 75% of the mons and you are left with a pool of maybe 20 mons that actually are viable. That's awful. Getting rid of bolt beak, octolock, darm Z, will not fix this problem. The issue is that all the games are going to be very very similar, and the complete lack of all of those walls that existed in gen 7 means that things that were cancerous in gen 7 (smash/sleep/op breakers like rayquaza) are always always going to be worse. The amount of walls is so small that I could name 5 potential walls before i searched for a battle and almost always be right on one of them. This makes it super easy to prep for and thus super easy to break. Short games that are centralized on breaking walls and sweeping are bad. I'm sure you can find people who like battles like that, but from most players standpoint, games with 0 counter play are generally just bad. Nobody plays pokemon so they could flip a coin and decide battles at the preview. These games constitute most all games on the ladder because of this complete lack of walls. Because of this a large portion of the gen 7 player base just stopped playing. (I know that I am currently in the top 10 and thus am "still playing" but the fact is is that I've played about 60 games this gen and I played nearly ~1000 this far into gen 7, so game volume is also important (I think this goes for many other people high up on the ladder)).

People are generally smart and rational. If you give them something good, they will like it; if you give them something bad, they won't. The problem with gen 8 isn't the existence of this move or that move, it's the fact that the power of the sweepers (BST, access to boosting, sleep spam, terrain and rain spam, high powered moves) are just incredibly more powerful than the walls that are trying to stop them.

You can't just take away more than half the variability of the game and expect players to play it and like it the same amount. It's like making a movie that cuts out 90% of the source material of the book and then wondering why people like the book more. The lack of interest in gen 8 largely stems from the lack of variance and by extension the extreme low quality nature of the games. People say that we can't add a national dex, and that's fine, I honestly don't care much anymore, but my question is this.

Any game draws its power from its playerbase. A game that is incredibly fun but has no playerbase is essentially unplayable. The playerbase is the ultimate law of the land. If they want something, they should have it, because they are the beating heart of the game. Without them the game is nothing. So my question is: "Why should we ignore the playerbase if they ask for something?" I see lots of people asking for NatDex and I see lots of people giving logical arguments about why that makes no sense. To me this is nonsensical, it treats the game as the most important component, as if it were sacred and separate from the playerbase. That's not how it works. If the playerbase just up and leaves however, all those logical arguments for no NatDex are basically worthless. So until someone can prove to me that the playerbase does not want NatDex I don't think anyone should be shooting the idea down.
 
Any game draws its power from its playerbase. A game that is incredibly fun but has no playerbase is essentially unplayable. The playerbase is the ultimate law of the land. If they want something, they should have it, because they are the beating heart of the game. Without them the game is nothing. So my question is: "Why should we ignore the playerbase if they ask for something?" I see lots of people asking for NatDex and I see lots of people giving logical arguments about why that makes no sense. To me this is nonsensical, it treats the game as the most important component, as if it were sacred and separate from the playerbase. That's not how it works. If the playerbase just up and leaves however, all those logical arguments for no NatDex are basically worthless. So until someone can prove to me that the playerbase does not want NatDex I don't think anyone should be shooting the idea down.

There's literally two threads to potentially discuss NatDex BH, both of which are dead. The playerbase should show it's interested, not just say it and expect a section to flip on a whim. Here is one of those threads. Literally go and build that up until the next Pet Mod of the Season voting. Because the way it's going, it would not even be picked as a nominee and you want Other Metagames to make such a drastic decision with no basis.

Any further posts mentioning National Dex shall be deleted. It does not contribute to the development of this Balanced Hackmons metagame and just derails any real discussion.
 
I feel like you didn't really listen to what I was saying in my post. I wasn't asking for a NatDex mod. I was asking for a serious attempt by the council to figure out what people actually want. My personal opinion was that NatDex was a good idea, but as i stated in my post, all the power is in the hands of the community

Leaders look at what people are saying on this thread and then just haphazardly decide that the thing being discussed is what people care about. But very very rarely that's the case. In the shell smash suspect the entire thing got derailed and became the shedinja suspect. Looking at the thread leading up to the suspect you would not be able to guess this outcome. Had e4 not set up a poll then shedinja wouldn't of ever been suspected. My post was about figuring out the desires of the playerbase and your response to that was "we set up a mod with 0 users and nobody wants to play it!" I specifically said: "So until someone can prove to me that the playerbase does not want NatDex I don't think anyone should be shooting the idea down." and the response was essentially "I'ma just shoot that down real quick and prevent anyone from ever suggesting they like natdex ever again and relegate them to a thread with no users" That's literally the definition of voter suppression. How is that a fair process? I don't think that my needs or wants are important, but I do think that the communities needs are. About a third of my post was dedicated towards the importance of following the will of the community and I think in general, this thread does a pretty bad and inefficient job of doing that.

This is more than just a desire for NatDex but rather an expression of my frustration with the entire ethos of this thread. There are never ever ever polls to figure out what people actually want, so we are forced to use likes as a kind of psuedo poll. And that's just what they are, a poor representation of the real thing. I just want someone to setup an actual poll to figure out what the community wants instead of relying on a popularity system
 
Last edited:
I feel like you didn't really listen to what I was saying in my post. I wasn't asking for a NatDex mod. I was asking for a serious attempt by the council to figure out what people actually want. My personal opinion was that NatDex was a good idea, but as i stated in my post, all the power is in the hands of the community

My post was about figuring out the desires of the playerbase and your response to that was "we set up a mod with 0 users and nobody wants to play it!" I specifically said: "So until someone can prove to me that the playerbase does not want NatDex I don't think anyone should be shooting the idea down." and the response was essentially "I'ma just shoot that down real quick and prevent anyone from ever suggesting they like natdex ever again and relegate them to a thread with no users"

The reason why the thread has no users is because people like you don't make any effort to help build it up. This isn't just directed at you, it goes for a lot of other BH people. They make some reason up like "ew pet mod" and don't comment on it early on, and then now they say "ew it has no users." Since everyone thinks this way, there's barely any activity and it turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy. You say it has no users, so why don't you join, contribute, and invite other people do the same?
 
The reason why the thread has no users is because people like you don't make any effort to help build it up. This isn't just directed at you, it goes for a lot of other BH people. They make some reason up like "ew pet mod" and don't comment on it early on, and then now they say "ew it has no users." Since everyone thinks this way, there's barely any activity and it turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy. You say it has no users, so why don't you join, contribute, and invite other people do the same?
Since this seems like a direct jab at me given I've used the same wording on numerous occasions, I feel like I should reply. No, I don't feel like playing NatDex BH; Not because I wouldn't love the format, but rather it's on a side server so it's impossible to ladder (and you'd have to find people willing to play too), because it's not actually featured in any team tournament so I don't really feel like playing only friendly games of it when I could just benefit more by playing concurrent BH games, and there's no incentive otherwise to play a format. I find plenty of formats on PS fun, but all of them offer what I've listed that NatDex BH doesn't. If even one of these were fixed I'd be down to give it a try.

Also yes, pet mods give me a headache.
 
The reason why the thread has no users is because people like you don't make any effort to help build it up. This isn't just directed at you, it goes for a lot of other BH people. They make some reason up like "ew pet mod" and don't comment on it early on, and then now they say "ew it has no users." Since everyone thinks this way, there's barely any activity and it turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy. You say it has no users, so why don't you join, contribute, and invite other people do the same?

This is true, but it puts the burden far too heavily on users. Part of democracy is figuring out what a community wants and then making it as easy as possible to allow them to express their opinions. Because pet mods start with 0 users it takes far far more work to build up a userbase than it does to just logon to showdown and play a BH game. Yes we should encourage pet mods, but we should also make it easier for people to express their opinions. This thread and the gen 7 thread and every other thread I've seen has a tendency to start talking about one thing and then have it snowball into a squabble about nitpicking the original argument and why it would be good or bad. This type of discourse focuses solely on one idea, not all the ideas, which is not good for discovering community sentiment.
 
rather it's on a side server so it's impossible to ladder (and you'd have to find people willing to play too), because it's not actually featured in any team tournament so I don't really feel like playing only friendly games of it when I could just benefit more by playing concurrent BH games
Both of these problems are solved with an influx of users. With more thread activity comes the possibility of it getting on main as a ladder for half a year, and if it comes to prominence MBH can definitely hold tournaments. Not sure about team tournaments, but if the majority of BH players also played MBH it's definitely possible.

Also yes, pet mods give me a headache.
It's only in Pet Mods because it hasn't been accepted as an OM. If there is a MBH community that is competitively adept then why does the stigma of "pet mods" pose a problem?

This is true, but it puts the burden far too heavily on users. Part of democracy is figuring out what a community wants and then making it as easy as possible to allow them to express their opinions. Because pet mods start with 0 users it takes far far more work to build up a userbase than it does to just logon to showdown and play a BH game.
Fair point, but I've heard a lot of clamoring for NatDex BH so far, which means there is already a fairly large potential userbase. If all of these users actually shared their ideas on the MBH thread couldn't it become more popular?
 
i’m kinda confused here, you guys talked about the problem of the BH playerbase and now you’re talking about a large potential natdex bh playerbase, wouldn’t that pull even more bh players to leave gen8 and play natdex? also please post gen8 bh related stuff
 
7ebefe6dc0.jpg

So until someone can prove to me that the playerbase does not want NatDex I don't think anyone should be shooting the idea down.
I'ma just shoot that down real quick and prevent anyone from ever suggesting they like natdex ever again and relegate them to a thread with no users
bro the thread is dead. this is the best indicator that no one is currently interested in the metagame.

you're acting like getting people to play natdex bh is some kind of monumental task, but it really isn't. you literally only have to post in the thread. actually lab out the metagame. make sample teams and fight the few others interested in the meta. post replays. if you're interested in the meta this shouldn't even feel like work.
-
[Banning things] will not fix this problem. The issue is that all the games are going to be very very similar, and the complete lack of all of those walls that existed in gen 7 means that things that were cancerous in gen 7 ([things that were banned]) are always always going to be worse.
-
The amount of walls is so small that I could name 5 potential walls before i searched for a battle and almost always be right on one of them.
| 3 | Giratina | 40.60895% |
| 6 | Zygarde-Complete | 28.95164% |
| 9 | Registeel | 17.32937% |
| 10 | Yveltal | 16.73243% |
| 12 | Arceus | 12.44237% |
-
(I know that I am currently in the top 10 and thus am "still playing" but the fact is is that I've played about 60 games this gen and I played nearly ~1000 this far into gen 7, so game volume is also important (I think this goes for many other people high up on the ladder)).
you're not fooling anyone

if anyones having trouble w matchup just run good pokemon like offensive fc eternatus, pokemon that can take hits and progress the game are super valuable in this meta and i'd recommend them
 
Back to Gen 8 BH, which is the thread we are in right now, in case you all forgot.
1582919917712.png

The council has decided to quick ban Octolock. It is widely seen as uncompetitive for its ability to trap and remove would-be checks thanks to dropping the trapped foes' defenses each turn. This move alone has made some very average sets, like Normalize Dragapult and Poison Heal Zacian, into threatening wall/stall breakers.

We are still discussing further actions that should be taken to make this meta more healthy, like Dynamax and V-create/Bolt Beak/Fishious Rend. We'd love to see some more discussion on what you guys think is the biggest issue for the BH meta (other than the council lol).
 
I advocate for species clause as a first obvious and crucial step to fighting the uncompetitiveness of games. There are relatively fewer viable mons especially on the defensive side, and the offensive mons we have at possess roughly equivalent strength to what was available last gen. Additionally that Imposter is a lot less viable which means you can't scout sets as easily. Hazard removal is also a good deal easier because of court change, and the fact that the defensive mons aren't as bulky, meaning offensive removers get more chances to freely remove hazards. That means you can't chip sash users with hazard damage as easily and you can't distinguish between different mons with hazard damage as easily. Because of this, it's actually more profitable to species spam than it was last gen and it's harder to prepare for. Things like Darm-GZ + Reshiram sun spam teams or just plain old dgz spam without weather support are extremely deadly, even to opposing rain teams or teams with several darm-gz checks, since those can easily be lured one time and then beaten.

Of course, even if we add a species clause, there are plenty of extremely powerful elements of the game, but species spam is pretty much impossible to prepare for and turns the game into an extremely matchup-based affair. I want to see this implemented sooner rather than later unlike last gen when we only started discussing it seriously when the generation was a few months away from ending. But this shouldn't really need much discussion. It's simply uncompetitive straight from team preview.
 
I feel like the thing that holding this meta back right now and making it kind of not fun to play is the lack of viable pokemon. Dexit really slashed the pool of usable mons by removing megas and most box legends. Most notably, the lack of viable normal and dark types really hurts. There's not a lot of easy solutions to this, and in the long run it might just be better to live with it since most pokemon will probably come back over time with DLC. However, there is one radical solution to at least think about.

Hypothetically, if we shift the average BST of the metagame down by banning every pokemon above 600 BST, then we'd have a meta where nearly every fully evolved pokemon in gen 8 is viable.

Obviously, this is a nuclear solution that I wouldn't expect most people to be on board with. It's basically hitting the reset button on the metagame and starting from scratch, and would bring it's own problems. There are some pokemon like DGZ that would definitely be overpowered, some pokemon like Melmetal that are balanced now but might be pushed over the edge in a lower BST space, and maybe some pokemon/moves/abilities that become problems we'd have never seen coming from where we are now.

Coming from the point of view of someone who has always most enjoyed the teambuilding and mechanical aspects of BH, more viable pokemon with more varied typings to use is only a positive. The fact that some of the high BST mons are gone doesn't change much, you can just find new mons to love that work at the lower scale. However, I definitely don't expect most people to think the same way. I can see how banning all of the high BST pokemon would create an identity crisis and turn a lot of people off. Even if the mechanics are the same, not being able to use the most powerful pokemon in the game definitely has a different feel for a hackmons meta, even if it would probably be more balanced.

I don't expect the council (or most players) to really take this proposal seriously, but I did want to at least put it out there and see what others think about it.
 
+1 252 Atk Choice Band Darmanitan-Galar-Zen Fishious Rend (170 BP) vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Melmetal in Heavy Rain: 408-480 (86 - 101.2%) -- 87.5% chance to OHKO after 1 layer of Spikes

Melmetal with Primordial Sea is KOed at least 50% of the time by a predicted switch-in Fishous Rend after minor chip. (Intrepid + Choice Band)

+1 252 Atk Choice Band Darmanitan-Galar-Zen Fishious Rend (170 BP) vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Melmetal in Heavy Rain: 408-480 (86 - 101.2%) -- 50% chance to OHKO after Stealth Rock

Sure, you wouldn’t send in Melmetal against Fishous Rend knowingly, but you are literally going to have to send something in to take whatever move it uses, and most people assume anything but a Fishous Rend.

Moreover, let’s say you know it has Fishous Rend, now you cannot send in Melmetal at all. And the worst part is Darmanitan-Galar-Zen doesn’t need to set the weather, Melmetal does it for him.

So Fishous breaks its biggest check, while Ghosts like Aegislash / Doublade that could come in on Close Combat, V-Create, and Icicle Crash are hit very hard as well. If they pack Primordial Sea over Flash Fire, then they are screwed as well.

+1 252 Atk Choice Band Abomasnow Fishious Rend (170 BP) vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Doublade: 175-206 (54.3 - 63.9%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

+1 252 Atk Choice Band Abomasnow Fishious Rend (170 BP) vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Doublade in Heavy Rain: 262-309 (81.3 - 95.9%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

If we thought that PDon last generation was unstoppable due to V-Create and Thousand Arrows, just look at Fishous Rend UnSTABbed, and hitting the strongest physical walls in the game, amplified by a pretty common Defensive ability that actually benefits the Attacker...
——————
I think the biggest concern is Fishous Rend and Bolt Beak as they enable checks to be non-checks, and they establish a sort of presence where you can no longer feel safe unless you are using Prankster Strength Sap, etc. since oftentimes they can use Mold Breaker, or Intrepid Sword to bypass your (Fur Coat) defenses without having to set up (Choice Band), and if you mispredict... you lose a Pokemon.
Back to Gen 8 BH, which is the thread we are in right now, in case you all forgot.
View attachment 225197
The council has decided to quick ban Octolock. It is widely seen as uncompetitive for its ability to trap and remove would-be checks thanks to dropping the trapped foes' defenses each turn. This move alone has made some very average sets, like Normalize Dragapult and Poison Heal Zacian, into threatening wall/stall breakers.

We are still discussing further actions that should be taken to make this meta more healthy, like Dynamax and V-create/Bolt Beak/Fishious Rend. We'd love to see some more discussion on what you guys think is the biggest issue for the BH meta (other than the council lol).
Lets ask ourselves “Why do we need those 2 moves?” The alternatives seem adequate.

Bolt Strike is still fairly powerful, and Crabhammer, while average, is comparable to Earthquake which is nothing to scoff at.

Rather than repeat arguments on why they should be banned, I think my question is a simple way to bring the bottom line home. So unless we need those moves, I don’t find it healthy for them to stay.
 
Last edited:
Lets ask ourselves “Why do we need those 2 moves?” The alternatives seem adequate.

Bolt Strike is still fairly powerful, and Crabhammer, while average, is comparable to Earthquake which is nothing to scoff at.

Rather than repeat arguments on why they should be banned, I think my question is a simple way to bring the bottom line home. So unless we need those moves, I don’t find it healthy for them to stay.
I’m not entirely sure about what you are trying to explain here, tho I agree how Fishious Rend destroys V-Create checks. Actually it happens the other way round too, it’s just that Mold Breaker DarmGZ with V-Create is so dominant and forces Primordial Sea on almost every team so Fishious Rend users take full advantage of it. With rain teams flooding the ladder currently thanks to some particular people, Desolate Land is starting to become more popular and now DarmGZ can take advantage of the free 1.5x boost. I think this point suggests that V-Create and Fishious Rend are making each other even more powerful, but neither of them are broken on their own, including Bolt Beak. Although all of them has Terrain/Weather to boost their power level even higher, they all have immunity abilities and immunity type for Bolt Beak too. V-Create has stat drops and Beak/Rend are useless when outsped. Dimrah’s post above already explains clearly about that.

With Beak being the easiest to handle with Ground/Dragon/Ferrothorn, that leaves a debate between V-Create and Fishious Rend, and the answer is pretty obvious. VC is abused by DarmGZ which has one of the highest attack and speed stat in the meta, while Fishious Rend is mostly abused by Barraskewda, whose attack stat is nothing compared to the bouncy snowman. V-Create’s next alternative, Pyro Ball, is perfectly fine on DarmGZ. From what I explained here, I think V-Create should go. With VC gone it means less Primordial Seas so Fishious Rend would also be less broken without the auto 1.5x boost. DarmGZ could still be a dominant threat, but it’s power level would be essentially reduced by 1/3.

Considering the upcoming dlc (in june? idk) could bring back something like Giratina which just walls all three of these moves, a potential unban on VC (or Beak/Rend if council decides to ban) would also be foreseeable.

e: oops totally forgot about suspect, i’d prefer suspect on vc over qb
 
Last edited:
I'll drop a post in this thread to voice my support for some of the previous posts. I'm not really experienced with gen 8 at all, but following the ideas in the following posts definitely makes pre-dlc gen 8 bh more appealing.

I advocate for species clause as a first obvious and crucial step to fighting the uncompetitiveness of games. There are relatively fewer viable mons especially on the defensive side, and the offensive mons we have at possess roughly equivalent strength to what was available last gen. Additionally that Imposter is a lot less viable which means you can't scout sets as easily. Hazard removal is also a good deal easier because of court change, and the fact that the defensive mons aren't as bulky, meaning offensive removers get more chances to freely remove hazards. That means you can't chip sash users with hazard damage as easily and you can't distinguish between different mons with hazard damage as easily. Because of this, it's actually more profitable to species spam than it was last gen and it's harder to prepare for. Things like Darm-GZ + Reshiram sun spam teams or just plain old dgz spam without weather support are extremely deadly, even to opposing rain teams or teams with several darm-gz checks, since those can easily be lured one time and then beaten.

Of course, even if we add a species clause, there are plenty of extremely powerful elements of the game, but species spam is pretty much impossible to prepare for and turns the game into an extremely matchup-based affair. I want to see this implemented sooner rather than later unlike last gen when we only started discussing it seriously when the generation was a few months away from ending. But this shouldn't really need much discussion. It's simply uncompetitive straight from team preview.
yes. yes yes.
Species Clause is only ever a good idea. One of the biggest turnoffs in all of pokemon is facing uncompetitive strategies like spam, and I think this is the number one reason I haven't picked up this generation's BH yet. Watching games with 6-10 darmanitan spamming whatever the strongest fire or ice move is is the farthest thing from entertaining. Keeping species spam in the format limits actual strategy and replaces it with mindless low-skill no surprises games. BH should be one of the farthest formats from "just click attacking moves to win and don't really think", and no species clause is the number one thing holding BH back from being a higher skill format.

I feel like the thing that holding this meta back right now and making it kind of not fun to play is the lack of viable pokemon. Dexit really slashed the pool of usable mons by removing megas and most box legends. Most notably, the lack of viable normal and dark types really hurts. There's not a lot of easy solutions to this, and in the long run it might just be better to live with it since most pokemon will probably come back over time with DLC. However, there is one radical solution to at least think about.

Hypothetically, if we shift the average BST of the metagame down by banning every pokemon above 600 BST, then we'd have a meta where nearly every fully evolved pokemon in gen 8 is viable.

Obviously, this is a nuclear solution that I wouldn't expect most people to be on board with. It's basically hitting the reset button on the metagame and starting from scratch, and would bring it's own problems. There are some pokemon like DGZ that would definitely be overpowered, some pokemon like Melmetal that are balanced now but might be pushed over the edge in a lower BST space, and maybe some pokemon/moves/abilities that become problems we'd have never seen coming from where we are now.

Coming from the point of view of someone who has always most enjoyed the teambuilding and mechanical aspects of BH, more viable pokemon with more varied typings to use is only a positive. The fact that some of the high BST mons are gone doesn't change much, you can just find new mons to love that work at the lower scale. However, I definitely don't expect most people to think the same way. I can see how banning all of the high BST pokemon would create an identity crisis and turn a lot of people off. Even if the mechanics are the same, not being able to use the most powerful pokemon in the game definitely has a different feel for a hackmons meta, even if it would probably be more balanced.

I don't expect the council (or most players) to really take this proposal seriously, but I did want to at least put it out there and see what others think about it.
I haha reacted this post originally and kinda blew it off, but after reading it again I think larger waves of bans to make the power ceiling lower are a good idea. There is a noticeable gap between high power legendaries and "other mons" that leaves next to no room for innovation outside of trying to out-threat the already potent threats. This power gap is only made larger by the smaller available dex in pre-dlc, which leads to an extremely over centralized format.
Obviously going through with this would cause a pretty big identity crisis in BH just like Clank mentioned, but pre-dlc is such a different format than any of the previous gens of BH, so I think changes like this should be considered just because of the giant sidestep that BH took from gen 7 to 8.
This process wouldn't be quick: I don't think the best way to do it would just be instituting a rule banning every mon over 600 bst immediately, but it's definitely an idea that needs to be considered.

My own ideas on the fossil moves
These moves really limit BH playstyles and while they exist the meta will just get pushed to a faster and more aggressive state. I believe this hurts the integrity of BH and limits player creativity. BH should have room for both fast and slow teams, but I think these moves push BH into a purely fast speed format.

I'll add some more ideas to this post if I get to it, but these are just kinda some ramblings for now.
 
Lets ask ourselves “Why do we need those 2 moves?” The alternatives seem adequate.

Bolt Strike is still fairly powerful, and Crabhammer, while average, is comparable to Earthquake which is nothing to scoff at.

Rather than repeat arguments on why they should be banned, I think my question is a simple way to bring the bottom line home. So unless we need those moves, I don’t find it healthy for them to stay.
i agree that bolt beak/fishious/vcreate are pretty crazy and should probably be banned, but this is a pretty bad reason to ban things.

the meta doesn't necessarily "need" anything in order to be good. we can have a good meta even if physical electrics or whatever are completely unviable cause they have no good moves. as an example, mega banette in gen 6 had no physical ghost stab besides shadowclaw, so it was a bad mon and the meta progressed without it.

we shouldn't keep around broken moves and abilities just because there's no balanced alternative.
 
i agree that bolt beak/fishious/vcreate are pretty crazy and should probably be banned, but this is a pretty bad reason to ban things.

the meta doesn't necessarily "need" anything in order to be good. we can have a good meta even if physical electrics or whatever are completely unviable cause they have no good moves. as an example, mega banette in gen 6 had no physical ghost stab besides shadowclaw, so it was a bad mon and the meta progressed without it.

we shouldn't keep around broken moves and abilities just because there's no balanced alternative.
That’s like, not my point at all.

I brought up the Calcs first and foremost to say that is why they are bannable. Power.

I showcased how even the bulkiest of Defensive mons, like Doublade are 2HKOed at worst.

Then I highlighted that I didn’t want to spend the post simply repeating points already discussed. I.e. Redundant.

Lastly, I threw in the question of “why do we need them?” To pose as contrast to “why do we need to ban them?”

Since the answer is, we don’t really “need” them, it then goes back to how the moves are bannable due to power.

So this is how I feel a question can be used to ask people thinking “but we shouldn’t ban them”. I wanted them to consider if we have a valid reason to ban them, power, I posed the question “why do we need them?”

Thus, for anyone who was hesitant about what would happen without them, we have the Bolt Strike and Crab Hammer options. As some people don’t want to lose something without an alternative. I’m not that person, but someone may vote in a suspect bc of that.

Some people fear what happens after the possible ban, I don’t, I just thought acknowledging the next best thing would help those people. But that isn’t my justification, power is. That’s why I said “I don’t find it healthy for them to stay.”

Afterall, I never thought people banned Octolock because we have other trap moves. I thought it was banned because it is simply too powerful to have at all.

Edit: Mega Metaboss also uses the alternative point to make his case: Pyro Ball would replace V-Create... why only bring it up when I do it?
]
I’m not entirely sure about what you are trying to explain here, tho I agree how Fishious Rend destroys V-Create checks. Actually it happens the other way round too, it’s just that Mold Breaker DarmGZ with V-Create is so dominant and forces Primordial Sea on almost every team so Fishious Rend users take full advantage of it. With rain teams flooding the ladder currently thanks to some particular people, Desolate Land is starting to become more popular and now DarmGZ can take advantage of the free 1.5x boost. I think this point suggests that V-Create and Fishious Rend are making each other even more powerful, but neither of them are broken on their own, including Bolt Beak. Although all of them has Terrain/Weather to boost their power level even higher, they all have immunity abilities and immunity type for Bolt Beak too. V-Create has stat drops and Beak/Rend are useless when outsped. Dimrah’s post above already explains clearly about that.

With Beak being the easiest to handle with Ground/Dragon/Ferrothorn, that leaves a debate between V-Create and Fishious Rend, and the answer is pretty obvious. VC is abused by DarmGZ which has one of the highest attack and speed stat in the meta, while Fishious Rend is mostly abused by Barraskewda, whose attack stat is nothing compared to the bouncy snowman. V-Create’s next alternative, Pyro Ball, is perfectly fine on DarmGZ. From what I explained here, I think V-Create should go. With VC gone it means less Primordial Seas so Fishious Rend would also be less broken without the auto 1.5x boost. DarmGZ could still be a dominant threat, but it’s power level would be essentially reduced by 1/3.

Considering the upcoming dlc (in june? idk) could bring back something like Giratina which just walls all three of these moves, a potential unban on VC (or Beak/Rend if council decides to ban) would also be foreseeable.

e: oops totally forgot about suspect, i’d prefer suspect on vc over qb
Giratina is still threatened by Icicle Crash from Darmanitan-Galar-Z, and Close Combat is always an option for Darmanitan-Galar-Z for a Ferrothorn: but Icicle Crash is still a 2HKO on Ferrothorn regardless.

+1 252 Atk Choice Band Abomasnow Icicle Crash vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Ferrothorn: 217-256 (61.6 - 72.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

I would say they can be broken in their own. Some people do not use all 3, or even 2 on the same set. Zacian-C can be seen with its STAB, V-Create, and often Earthquake or Close Combat to handle Steels with Flash Fire or Primordial Sea. If it opts for a set up move, it then only has space for 3 attacks, and it may prefer Bolt Beak to pair with its STAB to handle Flying/Water-type switch ins like Fur Coat Toxapex, Golisipod, and Flash Fire Corviknight. STAB SunSteel for Unaware, Fur Coat, is still viable.

I get your points, thanks.
 
Last edited:
I've seen multiple people bring up Species Clause and I fully agree with what was said.

3.-Species clause-It has been discussed in past i know but i wana propose my dumb idea.I dont know its its feasible but could it be possible to force douplicate of mons to have diferent names,for instance if u wana use double/triple eternatus u have to name them differently.I have been many times in the position where,despite having scouted the sets of an enemy mon,due to it being mutliple i dont know which set am i encountering,an issue which counters actually scouting,a very important aspect of the game

I advocate for species clause as a first obvious and crucial step to fighting the uncompetitiveness of games. There are relatively fewer viable mons especially on the defensive side, and the offensive mons we have at possess roughly equivalent strength to what was available last gen. Additionally that Imposter is a lot less viable which means you can't scout sets as easily. Hazard removal is also a good deal easier because of court change, and the fact that the defensive mons aren't as bulky, meaning offensive removers get more chances to freely remove hazards. That means you can't chip sash users with hazard damage as easily and you can't distinguish between different mons with hazard damage as easily. Because of this, it's actually more profitable to species spam than it was last gen and it's harder to prepare for. Things like Darm-GZ + Reshiram sun spam teams or just plain old dgz spam without weather support are extremely deadly, even to opposing rain teams or teams with several darm-gz checks, since those can easily be lured one time and then beaten.

Of course, even if we add a species clause, there are plenty of extremely powerful elements of the game, but species spam is pretty much impossible to prepare for and turns the game into an extremely matchup-based affair. I want to see this implemented sooner rather than later unlike last gen when we only started discussing it seriously when the generation was a few months away from ending. But this shouldn't really need much discussion. It's simply uncompetitive straight from team preview.

Species Clause is only ever a good idea. One of the biggest turnoffs in all of pokemon is facing uncompetitive strategies like spam, and I think this is the number one reason I haven't picked up this generation's BH yet. Watching games with 6-10 darmanitan spamming whatever the strongest fire or ice move is is the farthest thing from entertaining. Keeping species spam in the format limits actual strategy and replaces it with mindless low-skill no surprises games. BH should be one of the farthest formats from "just click attacking moves to win and don't really think", and no species clause is the number one thing holding BH back from being a higher skill format.

I completely, wholeheartedly agree with everything that was said. To be perfectly honest, I'm baffled at the fact that this is something that has gone on so long. Researching the topic, it appeared to have gained minor traction in gen 6 due to Imposter. But Ability Clause became a thing (max of 2 identical abilities per team) in gen 6, so it didn't catch on. I've always been in support of Species Clause. I've always considered multiple of the same Pokemon on a team uncompetitive because of what dimrah mentioned. The client simply fails to keep track of certain Pokemon, and as far as I am aware this is an intentional design decision. If that's the case then I think Species Clause would make the metagame healthier.

The lack of species clause has never been something that has really impacted the metagame in any gen until now, aside from the aforementioned gen 6 thing. It was an afterthought most of the time because it was largely unused. Most of the time you'd see it used in bad teams on low ladder or for very specific high ladder niches. At worst it would be a minor annoyance, as evidenced by some people complaining about Deoxys spam teams in gen 7. As for Gen 8, I believe Species Clause is now a necessity. The lack of Species Clause disproportionately affects offensive pokemon more than defensive ones. With all of the hugely effective breakers there are, it is very possible for a team which has multiple of a specific Pokemon to completely overrun a team with little skill or planning. This is part of the point behind stresh's post. Everything is so strong that there's little emphasis on good teambuilding. And I believe spamming the same breaker makes it even harder to teams to deal with things. Most teams are usually equipped with one wall to deal with specific Pokemon. If you can overwhelm that wall, the game can spiral out of control very, very quickly. To put it simply, species spam makes Gen 8 BH's problems worse. There's very little benefit to the metagame of keeping it around since it's already uncommon as it is.

As for other things. I am glad Octolock got quick banned, especially before it started gaining traction. Up until before it was quick banned, it wasn't really used all that much because people were still experimenting with things. Had the council not took action, I fear people would've started building teams around abusing Octolock.

I'm honestly unsure about V-create yet, but I do support a ban for fish beak. They are clearly and obviously overpowered. At worst those moves are excellent neutral coverage, there's basically no scenario where running or using them would be bad in any manner bar immunities. V-create is much easier to wall, and has more viable immunities. Now, I'm not saying there isn't a problem with V-create in particular, it's just I'm unsure if the move is the problem or the Pokemon running the move. GDZ is a top-tier Pokemon. So is Rusted Sword Zacian. But they're kinda... the only V-create users? I know my opinion regarding V-create is going to be very unpopular, but I can't make up my mind regarding that. I do support a ban for Fishious Rend and Bolt Beak, in case I didn't make myself clear.
 
Last edited:
I am somewhat of a lurker, started playing bh for the first time a bunch of months ago (probably closer to 1 year duh) with the help of my friend Aethernum. I eventually stopped playing it, I wasn't a really good player but got in the top numerous times. BH gen8 looks horrible to me and I would never ever play it in its current state. I am one of those people who just can't really find the motivation to play this offensive shitfest (being the stall lord that I am). Which is why I highly anticipated an octolock ban, and I welcome it with happiness.

I don't have enough meta knowledge, only reading this threat and suspect ones, to have a stance on any serious ban, but I too would love to voice for a species clause (if possible even a retroactive one). It's just so fucking dumb, and I hate seeing the replays, even in high ladder, of ctlr+c/f teams. It's just not fun and I find it intrinsically uncompetitive given the fact that you can't really tell the difference between the mons either, unless they have a nickname or took damage. Introduce species clause, please.
 
Talking a little about the meta and future suspect...

Just why? I know Octolock is pretty strong but it wasn't the most broken thing in BH currently.
Yes, you can counter your check with this move, but Pivot move like U-turn with passive recovery like Regenerator or Poison Heal could easly tank an Octolock and one move. Yes, it's trap, but you had also Anchor Shot to trap something (You didn't have the def drop but trapping is effective).
I don't see Octolock like a "splashable" move but more than a good lure set. You don't use a Shift Gear Zamazenta like an Octolock Zamazenta (and also I prefere SG version).The main goal of this set isn't the same, one is Set-up and sweeping and the other is eliminate his check and being a good wallbreaker.

his move alone has made some very average sets, like Normalize Dragapult and Poison Heal Zacian, into threatening wall/stall breakers.
I completely disagree with that. Normalize Dragapult is so a niche pokemon, you can destroy this set with so much way (Magic Bounce / Multi-attack / Dynamaxing / Shed Shell / Taunt), is so hard to set-up this (you need Octolock + Entrainment + Taunt, 3 turns when you can pivot with Parting shot or U-turn, you can burn it or deal damage). When you must set-up for 3 turns to kill one pokemon, it is a shitty set (like Anchor Shot + Imprison + Transform, or Perish Song + Anchor Shot). For Zacian I don't see a Octolock PH set (for me it seems good but not broken).

The most dangerous thing about Octolock is the Octolock + Spore combo, and you haven't talk about it in the explanation. I used a Mewtwo PH with that and it was pretty efficiently. But you have some counterplay with this technique like Poison Heal check or just Safety Googles! Also some pokemon check normal and Octolock+Spore versions like :
-Golisopode check the most of Zamazenta
-Mandibuzz wall Mewtwo
Also you need to Spore + Octolock your check to deal with it, if you predict wrong or you can't Spore/Octolock, you can't break your check and the check will just kill you with pivoting move / PPstall your Octolock.

So, I think Octolock is really good but doesn't deserve a quickban, at the most a suspect test, because you had counterplay with this kind of strategy (pivot, Shed Shell, natural check, passive recovery if you are afraid of this kind of trapping set).

Also I was pretty angry against the decision to QB Octolock. The meta suffers hugely from diversity of set and pokemon. You have a lot of Physical threats (Darm-ZG, Intrepid Sword Band Set, Poison Heal set-up), you need different counters for them but for Special threats (Lunala/ SF Eternatus / SF Mewtwo / PH Quiver Dance) are walled by the same pokémons, Umbreon, Snorlax, Type:Null. Octolock profit more for Special threats than Physical threats because it was one of few ways to deal with these counter if they didn't prepare to that.

So quickbanning Octolock is a wrong choice to balance the metagame for me. We need to nerf physical threats ! Octolock wasn't a priority, you have Darm-ZG who need 2 counters to wall it efficiently, Intrepid Sword is always here but Gorilla Tactics not (is kinda the same thing, just Intrepid Sword had some counterplay like Haze/Spectral Thief, and you see the ability immediatly), V-create is just a strong STAB/coverage for a lot of physical threat so you must play Primordial Sea, and Bolt Beak/Fishious Rend have some counteplay but you have some way to abuse it (Rain/Electric terrain). These cases (suspect or quickban) seems to be more urgent than Octolock was for me.

Some thoughts for suspect:
-We need to nerf physicals threats, so focus on Intrepid Sword, Darm-ZG, V-create.
-Bolt Beak/Fishious Rend must have a suspect on it, after the cases above.
-Species Clause is like Sleep Clause, it's more of a nice addition than a necessary addition, but i'm for it. Just add it without suspect, or when all of the cases above are cleared.
-Dynamax isn't broken. It is just 3 turns, for the entire match with no switch allowed if you want to keep it.
With Band/Specs, you can switch moves (for coverage) but you lose power, you have more bulk but you can't recover your health (it is nice for avoid a revenge kill), and the secondary effect are manageable in BH. Dynamax is a usefull trick in BH and require skill to use it efficiently, but doesn't deserve even a suspect for me.

I hate spitting on staff but we need to solve some troubles. We have only 3 members in the council! It is not good to have a council of 3 people! You cannot group differents opinions on a vital question on this tier like quickbanning something, seriously, they are 5 in the AAA council with a Tier Leader! Take some motivated people to fill these empty seats! I don't think you had this kind of opinion on Octolock in your council because you are only three (I'm saying that because I heard nobody talking about Octolock + Spore here, and with the explanation, I really doubt you have talk about Spore+Octolock case).Resources take a long time to being developped (the VR for exemple, some people have a lot of remarks for that and no changes, or samples (but I agree, we don't have a lot of viable samples here, the community must give some teams)

On that, I hope you understand my point of view on Octolock and the need to nerf physical threats a little (even if you don't necessarily agree on it).
I will put some replays with Octolock+Spore if i found my login for some alts.
 
Last edited:
Just why? I know Octolock is pretty strong but it wasn't the most broken thing in BH currently.
While it wasn't the most broken thing, it was the most uncompetitive thing.

The two sets I mentioned were just relevant examples of Octolock abusers, but you are right that there were various methods of using the move (like PH Mewtwo you mentioned). Zacian-C was a very solid abuser of this move, especially when combined with Taunt to deny recovery and Teleport. Mentions of Shed Shell aren't really relevant, especially in a meta where Knock Off is extremely common. I've seen this item used some, and used it some myself, but it is really niche and other items are much better and useful in almost every instance. Octolock + Spore is certainly an annoying combination (Spore makes anything annoying) but I don't think it was the worst/most dangerous thing about Octolock.

Here are some replays showcasing where Octolock helped offensive mons bypass would-be checks.
In this one, MAMP's Octolock + Taunt Zacian-C removes what looks like Prankster Hippodown and was on the way to removing PH Reshiram before being burned. These are two mons that should be able to check Zacian-C fairly well, but Octolock (combined with Taunt) made it able to bypass them.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8balancedhackmons-1064092498
Starting turn 64, will's PH Zekrom traps the opposing Prankster Melmetal and eventually wears down something that normally would be able to check it. Prankster mons are already wishing for more moveslots, so not all of them have pivot options. This means Octolock leaves them spamming Haze and recovery and that can only last so long.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8balancedhackmons-1053122931
Another instance of Taunt-olock with Zacian-C, who is able to remove a normally solid check in Fur Coat Seismitoad.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8balancedhackmons-1069261303
This is an older one, but Arkeis uses Octolock to get three kills he really shouldn't have gotten otherwise.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8balancedhackmons-1020654015
The council did not make this decision thinking it would completely "balance the metagame" but rather to help it by removing something that is uncompetitive. Sure, Octolock wasn't without counterplay, but it did not add anything positive to the meta and it needed to go. As I mentioned before, banning Octolock wasn't the only action the council was planning on taking. The next step is to find out some of the bigger issues for the meta, as others have posted about and as you mention in the latter part of your post. Octolock was just a step in the right direction for a healthier meta.

Lack of diversity and Species Clause seem to be most discussed so far. I agree that running into teams with 2+ high powered threats like Darm-GZ and Zekrom are pretty lame to see and even lamer to play against. Even defensive cores like 2+ Eternatus or Melmetal can be tough to play against and hard to scout due to how PS! works. If people agree that a Species Clause would be beneficial, now is the time to voice your agreement. Otherwise, it's also the time to voice your concerns about the metagame.
 
Back
Top