In a perfect world we can strive for a competitive battling scene with as few complaints as possible. But when you think about it, the VERY SAME reason that this discussion is going on here is the reason I am not a all inclined to strive towards such utilitarianism: much of the aforementioned complaints are coming from legitimate pokemon retards. These are battlers who haven't played for more than a month or two before crying that they are getting beaten by Garchomp all the time when their idea of a counter is an Ice Shard Weavile, or battlers convinced that U-turn by itself is a Wobbuffet counter. I'm not even exaggerating—I'm sure those of you who stomach Stark have seen such startling displays of a lack of basic pokemon mechanics and strategy. These aren't the kind of people whose complaints I am going to listen to—I would both rather and eagerly listen to smart, proven competitors like Hip.
We should, though, accept what you said in your previous post, that no tier system is going to be 100% balanced and therefore met with 100% acceptance. If we start there, we can gladly forget the (largely un- or misinformed) opinions of the masses, and attempt to determine amongst ourselves whether the banishment of Garchomp from standard play would be for the good of the game, or actually result in the "slippery slope" referenced above where Salamence and Heracross are next, and then Lucario, etc. I am much more inclined to keep Garchomp in, because, aside from the fact that I am inclined to buy into that admittedly fallacious slippery slope argument, I have been convinced since 2006 that it is impossible to counter everything in DP. All of us may be benefited by reading Surgo's treatise again, where he states that we should be building our teams with a goal in mind rather than trying to counter the myriad threats in DP, before turning our attention to whether Garchomp or Deoxys-S or Wobbuffet or Latios are indeed broken in a metagame that is more wide open than ever before simply because there are more pokemon than ever before.
We should, though, accept what you said in your previous post, that no tier system is going to be 100% balanced and therefore met with 100% acceptance. If we start there, we can gladly forget the (largely un- or misinformed) opinions of the masses, and attempt to determine amongst ourselves whether the banishment of Garchomp from standard play would be for the good of the game, or actually result in the "slippery slope" referenced above where Salamence and Heracross are next, and then Lucario, etc. I am much more inclined to keep Garchomp in, because, aside from the fact that I am inclined to buy into that admittedly fallacious slippery slope argument, I have been convinced since 2006 that it is impossible to counter everything in DP. All of us may be benefited by reading Surgo's treatise again, where he states that we should be building our teams with a goal in mind rather than trying to counter the myriad threats in DP, before turning our attention to whether Garchomp or Deoxys-S or Wobbuffet or Latios are indeed broken in a metagame that is more wide open than ever before simply because there are more pokemon than ever before.
