Yes, I did, and I stand by my words...Same can be said about DT/Minimize.
No one Pokemon is broken by DT/Minimize as a move by themselves either.
I think you're speaking of a complex ban w/ DT/Minimize + BP.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Double Team and Minimize:Broken or Uncompetitive?
- Thread starter alexwolf
- Start date
- Status
No one Pokemon is broken by DT/Minimize as a move by themselves either.
I think you're speaking of a complex ban w/ DT/Minimize + BP.
It was a hypothetical set based on the SubDD Dragonite that was brought up as 'OP' in the suspect thread. As for what its going to do, well the main goal would be to boost its evasion to +6 and then ideally sweep. It doesnt matter if the pokemon in front of you is setting up since at +6 evasion they probably wont even hit you. Hell, if you're behind a sub its an automatic gg. And btw, Whirlwind can miss. It has a 100% accuracy so that is not reliable either.
Oh really? I beg to differ. Let's take a look at a Double Teaming Thundurus for example, it has priority Double Team, priority Sub and good enough coverage to warrant the use of those moveslots. It can ideally sweep any team as long as it gets enough boosts. +1 Evasion turn 1 without fail and if the opponent cannot KO or misses then a guaranteed +2 evasion and so on. The very fact that this move was in its repertoire lead it to its victory. On the other hand, if something like Jolteon/Vaporeon just runs Baton pass as an escape move or to Wishpass it is sure as hell not broken. So again, i realy cant see how you can compare the two of them.Joel said:
As for a complex ban...no. First of all that would be a move+move complex ban which is ridiculous and pointless just to save somthing that is probably broken even without BP and there is no reason to keep something so uncompetitive in the metagame.
@Below:
It doesnt matter if they can't be 2HKOd by Dragon Claw. It was a hypothetical set. I'm sure if people actually had the chance to test it, they could find much better movesets. Btw, none of those pokemon can even hit back so aside from stalling it do death, they can do nothing while i wait for my 6.25% crit to happen.
Yeah, but Hippo/Rachi/Scizor/Reuni/Skarmory/EvoChansey never come close to being 2HKOd by Dragon Claw, and only Chansey is threatened by Outrage, and all can heal themselves.
i'll post simple replies since I dont have time to do a long one
Do you think that these 2 moves were banned because they would break the metagame or because they would make it too much luck-based?
If I were to guess, they were banned because of both. "It breaks the metagame because they caused too much luck" (as an aside: this is why I consider the Brightpowder ban one of the stupidest bans to ever disgrace the Smogon tier lists, because it did not cause either dangers and yet was categorized under Evasion Clause)
Also if you believe that they were banned for breaking the metagame,do you believe that they would break the majority of the pokemons that get it or the minority?(I am talking about relative majority and minority,so for example 35 pokes are the majority for OU)
I don't believe that Double Team is broken, due to how long it takes to set up for a consistent and useful evading, and also due to my experiences in the GBU. Double Team also takes up a valuable moveslot a Pokemon may require to perform its otherwise more useful role. Minimize may be a different story - it is incredibly potent ( Minimize/BP Drifblim can just go burn in fire) but is sharply hindered by its terrible distribution. However, if it had Double Team's distribution, it would probably be very gamebreaking.
And if they break the minority which would ideally be the best course of action for you?Banning the moves or banning each broken abuser of the moves?
Probably the moves to minimize bans. NO PUN INTENDED
Also you don't need Haze/Unaware/Foresight/Clear Smog or w/e to stop DT. Just take advantage of the fact that they aren't setting up an offense, and take them down. Unless you get really unlucky, of course. But as long as the Pokemon is throwing Double Teams, that mon is also pressing its own luck and leaving it vulnerable to its usual stops.
Do you think that these 2 moves were banned because they would break the metagame or because they would make it too much luck-based?
If I were to guess, they were banned because of both. "It breaks the metagame because they caused too much luck" (as an aside: this is why I consider the Brightpowder ban one of the stupidest bans to ever disgrace the Smogon tier lists, because it did not cause either dangers and yet was categorized under Evasion Clause)
Also if you believe that they were banned for breaking the metagame,do you believe that they would break the majority of the pokemons that get it or the minority?(I am talking about relative majority and minority,so for example 35 pokes are the majority for OU)
I don't believe that Double Team is broken, due to how long it takes to set up for a consistent and useful evading, and also due to my experiences in the GBU. Double Team also takes up a valuable moveslot a Pokemon may require to perform its otherwise more useful role. Minimize may be a different story - it is incredibly potent ( Minimize/BP Drifblim can just go burn in fire) but is sharply hindered by its terrible distribution. However, if it had Double Team's distribution, it would probably be very gamebreaking.
And if they break the minority which would ideally be the best course of action for you?Banning the moves or banning each broken abuser of the moves?
Probably the moves to minimize bans. NO PUN INTENDED
Also you don't need Haze/Unaware/Foresight/Clear Smog or w/e to stop DT. Just take advantage of the fact that they aren't setting up an offense, and take them down. Unless you get really unlucky, of course. But as long as the Pokemon is throwing Double Teams, that mon is also pressing its own luck and leaving it vulnerable to its usual stops.
It is most definitely broken and despite what people think, there is no good way of countering it. The best thing you can do if your opponent gets a DT is to just keep on attacking and hope that your now 75 acc moves don't miss. You can list all the nevermiss moves, haze, unaware all you want but none of that means a single thing because you're not taking into account the pokemon that are using the anti-DT move and the DT pokemon it is facing.
E.g.
If your anti-DT pokemon is Aura Sphere Lucario then you lose to all ghost type double teamers.
If your anti-DT pokemon is Clear Smog Weezing then you lose to all steel type double teamers.
If your anti-DT pokemon is Unaware Quagsire then you lose to any Doublt teamer with a grass move.
There's no such thing as being able to counter DT because you need to counter all the users of DT as well, and countering over 600 pokemon with a much smaller and limited pool of pokemon with anti DT capabilities is pretty much impossible.
E.g.
If your anti-DT pokemon is Aura Sphere Lucario then you lose to all ghost type double teamers.
If your anti-DT pokemon is Clear Smog Weezing then you lose to all steel type double teamers.
If your anti-DT pokemon is Unaware Quagsire then you lose to any Doublt teamer with a grass move.
There's no such thing as being able to counter DT because you need to counter all the users of DT as well, and countering over 600 pokemon with a much smaller and limited pool of pokemon with anti DT capabilities is pretty much impossible.
Comments in bold.
That can be said about almost anything though. If your only counter for Y is beaten by X, then you lose to all Y that are paired with X. That is not a double team specific thing. If you expect to defeat a top strategy with one move on one Pokemon, and fail to do so, it does not mean the strategy is broken. Do you try to stop Drizzle teams with 1 move? What about Sand Stream? If a strategy is at all good, then you have to consider it in team building for more than just one move.
The reality is, while DT might seem broken if suddenly introduced, given time, people will learn to counter it, and in all likelyhood it will lose popularity because wasting a moveslot on something everyone is prepared to counter is just not worth it. Now as its populatity drops, so will the usage of its counters, meaning someone could probably net some easy wins with it. But that is no different then using any other lesser used strategy, such as Trick Room.
As I said before, if you are losing to something because you are not prepared to face it, then you deserve to lose.
I can't believe people are still saying Double Team is broken because it's overpowered.
If you waste 1 turn using Double Team, you have a 25% chance of breaking even and making your opponent waste 1 turn, and a 75% chance of giving your opponent a free turn.
If you waste 2 turns using double team, you have a 45% of your evasion doing nothing and giving your opponent 2 free turns, another 45% chance of your opponent missing once, and just gaining 1 free turn, and a 10% of your opponent missing twice and just breaking even.
Double Team, without the RNG abuse of in-game trainers, essentially becomes a gamble on how many free turns you give your opponent.
I'm gonna come out and say DT/Minimize isn't broken. The main reason why is that you're all treating Double Team as if it were something that could augment existing sets, instead of taking up a valuable moveslot that would go to something else. DT sets that don't boost attacking stats get walled by dedicated walls. DT+boost sets get countered by just being hit. DT+Baton Pass sets are ruined by all of the other things that ruin Baton Pass, and a few other creative responses. (for example, Ghost Curse can't miss and is baton passed, Haze/Clear Smog, etc.) I'll come out and say why most people on this site want evasion to be banned:
Because they feel entitled to win.
You feel like your lures, your sets, your CBHaxorus->Lum DDNite or whatever the hell sweeper strategy you base your team around should win when it deserves to win. You complain about hax, you complain about anything luck-based that might interfere with your ability to make a strategy and win, even though Pokémon is a luck-based game, and that anything that might upset that precious balance is a bad idea by virtue that it impacts your ability to win.
Because they feel entitled to win.
You feel like your lures, your sets, your CBHaxorus->Lum DDNite or whatever the hell sweeper strategy you base your team around should win when it deserves to win. You complain about hax, you complain about anything luck-based that might interfere with your ability to make a strategy and win, even though Pokémon is a luck-based game, and that anything that might upset that precious balance is a bad idea by virtue that it impacts your ability to win.
Honestly, I agree that Double team/Minimize isn't broken or uncompetitive. I also think there are much more uncometitive things that are still allowed in standard play. for example, it takes three double teams for you to get your 100% accurate move down to 50%. so its basically a coin toss wether it will hit or not. but, in 2 of those three turns, a Jirachi can come in, Paralyse you, then start iron heading away, leaving you with a (i believe) 87% chance of not hitting. Same with Togekiss and Air slash. We should be happy they don't carry king's rocks.
This way, your chance of hitting in two turns is 13%, as opposed to 50% after three turns of double team. I'm not saying Double team doesn't have the potential to sweep a team, so does almost every pokemon. But I firmly believe that people take double team completely out of proportion. I understand why people think it should be banned, but I think, in the case that for some reason it would be un-banned, There could be a limit on how many times you could double team(maybe only one, then every 100% attack would be about as accurate as Rock slide)
This way, your chance of hitting in two turns is 13%, as opposed to 50% after three turns of double team. I'm not saying Double team doesn't have the potential to sweep a team, so does almost every pokemon. But I firmly believe that people take double team completely out of proportion. I understand why people think it should be banned, but I think, in the case that for some reason it would be un-banned, There could be a limit on how many times you could double team(maybe only one, then every 100% attack would be about as accurate as Rock slide)
You bring up a fantastic point. I think the problem people have is not completely the luck based part of Pokemon, as many people use moves such as Scald or Discharge for their luck based secondary effects. The bigger problem is that outside of things intentionally chosen for luck, people expect everything else to work out with no luck involved. People only accept luck as part of the game when they expect it.
Too many times have I won because of a crit only to have my opponent say something offensive and claim that they should have won. Well, you know what, this game is not chess, there is luck involved, and if you can't adapt to that then you are just not good. Obviously if one luck based event decides the whole battle then neither player is so much better as to claim more skill. Everyone will get lucky sometimes, but true skill is not how good you are without luck, it is how well you can play when luck isn't always fair. A skilled player may not always come up on top, but if they truly are more skilled, then in the long run, they should win more often then not.
To relate this back to this thread, even if Double Team is a good strategy, it will never be an easy win for noobs, like people try and claim. The fact is, if it is the best, skilled people will use it, and the skilled people will beat the unskilled, no matter how much luck the strategy employs. Because that is what it means to be skilled.
That being said, I doubt that would ever happen, as (as was shown above) Double Team just isn't that good.
These two moves wouldn't make competitive Pokemon a game of luck because it already is a game of luck. Double Team and Minimize will make every Pokemon that learns either of those moves broken. Evasiveness is potentially the most dangerous stat once it is raised. It's hard to really say because all of what I'm saying is theoretical.
This argument is also much like the banning of Moody. What turned Bidoof into an Uber? The ability to avoid everything of course! While Double Team does take 2 turns to set up, Minimize, like the Moody boost, only takes one. When you look at the users of Minimize, Muk is the worst one. Clefable can avoid everything and Softboiled when they hit... Plus it gets Cosmic Power -shivers-. Much of the same with Blissey. Starmie and Chandelure... it will fuck your shit sideways once you miss (Chandelure isn't top OU due to its low Speed, so why not throw Speed out the window by your oponent missing?). Qwilfish gets free hazards up. Drifblim can BP to something like Haxorus, who will just rape. I still think Double Team is broken as well, because you can take the Minimize argument and bring it to anyone with a pinch of luck (after one turn, every move bar stuff like Aura Sphere has the accuracy of Stone Edge... and we all know how much that misses). However, to the contrary, I don't find BrightPowder broken, as you drop something better like Leftovers or Life Orb for it. Is it broken and bad for the metagame? I'd say so. Teams already are mainly weather inducer + main weather sweeper + 4 others, so just take that to DT/M abuser + BP user + 4 others.
@Aura Sphere argument: Gengar used Double Team! (probably non-Scarfed)Luke: That's fine, I have Crunch. Gengar used Focus Blast/ HP Fire! Luke: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!
@Aura Sphere argument: Gengar used Double Team! (probably non-Scarfed)Luke: That's fine, I have Crunch. Gengar used Focus Blast/ HP Fire! Luke: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!
lmitchell0012
Wi-Fi Blacklisted
Personally, I prefer my metagame with the least amount of luck possible. While it's impossible to eliminate all luck from pokemon, we can at least eliminate some of it by banning moves like double team and minimize. So, for that reason, I support the Evasion Clause.
Many of you are still missing the main point. To counter Double Team, not only do you have to counter the move, but you also have to counter the potential users of Double Team as well. That means you have to counter 600+ pokemon as well, except now you're limited to using those 60 power moves, Haze, etc.
Countering DT isn't the same as countering BP or Drizzle either, because countering BP and Drizzle is countering a few specific pokemon, not 99% of all pokemon in the game. It's already pretty much impossible to counter 600+ pokemon with a team of 6 even if they don't use Double Team, and then being limited to use a bunch a specific pokemon with anti-DT capabilities and also being limited to use a specific list of moves and abilities only makes it even more impossible.
You can't even say that only the few in their specific tiers matter either. Almost every pokemon in the game can hugely benefit from having attacks miss them, so even UU and RU pokemon have to be taken into consideration as well for OU teams.
Even a team of 6 pokemon using anti-DT things like Haze, Aura Sphere, Unaware, etc. has about the same effectiveness of "countering DT" as just spamming 75 acc attacks and hoping they don't miss, if the opponent manages to use DT.
Arguing that DT can be countered is just wrong, because there will always be dozens, if not hundreds of DT pokemon that outnumber and can beat the specific pokemon that have anti-DT capabilities. The only pro DT argument that's kind of works is saying that having all your attacks' accuracy be that of Sleep Powder or lower isn't so bad, but not really
Countering DT isn't the same as countering BP or Drizzle either, because countering BP and Drizzle is countering a few specific pokemon, not 99% of all pokemon in the game. It's already pretty much impossible to counter 600+ pokemon with a team of 6 even if they don't use Double Team, and then being limited to use a bunch a specific pokemon with anti-DT capabilities and also being limited to use a specific list of moves and abilities only makes it even more impossible.
You can't even say that only the few in their specific tiers matter either. Almost every pokemon in the game can hugely benefit from having attacks miss them, so even UU and RU pokemon have to be taken into consideration as well for OU teams.
Even a team of 6 pokemon using anti-DT things like Haze, Aura Sphere, Unaware, etc. has about the same effectiveness of "countering DT" as just spamming 75 acc attacks and hoping they don't miss, if the opponent manages to use DT.
Arguing that DT can be countered is just wrong, because there will always be dozens, if not hundreds of DT pokemon that outnumber and can beat the specific pokemon that have anti-DT capabilities. The only pro DT argument that's kind of works is saying that having all your attacks' accuracy be that of Sleep Powder or lower isn't so bad, but not really
You give DT way too much credit. You ALWAYS have to be prepared to counter any Pokemon, regardless of weather or not DT is allowed. You then go on to say that if it is allowed, then you have to prepare with those weak moves. But I say, yes, you do, but I have to prepare for Pokemon who are weaker than ones without DT because they only have 3 moveslots left. Also, if they can use DT, so can I. I'm not saying I am going to, but they have to prepare for it as well. Which, of course means they have to use moveslots for those low BP moves. Suddenly those dangerous DT sweepers don't seem so bad once you realize that the very fact that DT is allowed weakens their moveset significantly.
And as has been pointed out already, the miss chance granted is not even that good. You get more done without DT than with it.
And as has been pointed out already, the miss chance granted is not even that good. You get more done without DT than with it.
Their DT pokemon being weaker doesn't matter if they still beat your anti-DT pokemon. I don't see how both players having to be prepared for a broken strategy makes it less broken.
You get more done by using other moves only if you use them once usually. Using DT 3 times in a row is usually more useful than using Earthquake 3 times in a row.
You get more done by using other moves only if you use them once usually. Using DT 3 times in a row is usually more useful than using Earthquake 3 times in a row.
You do not have to counter 600+ Pokes. What kind of crack are you smoking?
There will be, at any one time, around 70 viable Pokes per tier. I say around 70 for the lesser used Pokes from lower tiers that could still run with the higher tiered Pokes.
And even then, you will still only go up against 6 of them in any one battle.
Of the Pokes on a team that might use DT/Minimize, you will have that move, plus either a recovery move, or another stat up move. There aren't too many Pokes that will be running with only 2 attacks and being able to do stuff back to an opposing team as a whole.
Lay off the drugs. They seem tto be doing bad things to you.
If there have been arguments by people that say that unviable things like Clear Smog Amoongus can become viable in a DT metagame due to DT, then why can't the opposite be true? Even if you didn't actually have to counter as many potential DT pokemon, the number of viable pokemon with anti-DT capabilities will decrease as well for you.
The rest are just lame assumptions that you can't prove that I'm not even going to bother with.
The rest are just lame assumptions that you can't prove that I'm not even going to bother with.
I can too prove it. I play in the GBU metagame where stuff like DT/Minimize is legal...I know for a fact it's not broken.
IMO it's not broken but definitely uncompetitive. It does not ENSURE you a win, as it is always luck whether you are hit or not. Your chance of winning lies solely on the RNG, so it is not broken in this way. However, it is uncompetitive. The fact that luck can decide the game takes out an element of skill and competition. While sometimes this luck is unavoidable (80% acc. moves etc.) the fact that these moves advocate relying on luck as a strategy to help you win is thoroughly uncompetitive. The same goes for the Moody ban. It relies on you getting the right boosts to win, but if you get up enough evasion boosts and attacking boosts the other player's fucked. Same with the Garchomp ban. It couldn't be truly countered in Sandstorm as your Ice Shard or revenger that would certainly kill it could be screwed over by Brightpowder/Sand Veil. Same with the B'powder/Lax Incence ban. All these bans are to stop the uncompetitiveness of luck being a major strategy of the metagame.
So yeah, not broken, definitely uncompetitive
So yeah, not broken, definitely uncompetitive
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but what it sounds like you are saying is that while DT might make Anti-DT Pokemon viable, it might also make many other things unviable.
If that is what you are saying, then I agree. But I see nothing wrong with that. The top Pokemon should be whoever are best in the current metagame, and if a metagame includes DT, then Pokemon who don't work well there wont be used. Just because that would make it different than the the current game does not make it bad.
While I understand your position, this one sentence is the thing that I keep hearing that I disagree with more than anything else. Why? Because I believe that luck does not effect the importance of skill or effect the focus on competition. Truly skilled players should try to analyze and make choices based on luck, and hell, even manipulate luck to their advantage. All removing luck does is change what the game it, not whether or not it relys on skill.
I'll tell you like I told the other guy......
...and like I told this guy......
Nor is it competitive because DT/Minimize isn't viable. The Poke(s) using that stratagy allow themselves to become set up fodder.
Again, as I mentioned before, Double Team does not require specific countering. The move itself is difficult to counter, but let's not separate DT and the Pokemon using it as two separate entities for this, given the relatively unimpressive boosts. While said Pokemon setting up evasion, it isn't gaining any offensive boosts, giving your counter some chance to mess said Pokemon up. Unless you're really unlucky, but that could be said for just about any situation in the game (hi my name is Jirachi and I just flinchaxed your Heatran to death, etc. Probably not the best comparison but they both involve abusable luck). And again, if your opponent's trying to spam DT, he or she is also pushing said Pokemon's luck against yours.
Let's cut to the chase and have Gengar automatically murder Luke anyways. It's a lot safer than gambling for Double Team. Gengar is still hit 75% of the time with one DT, which means the odds are pretty heavily in Luke's factor in said case. Granted, if Gengar does succeed in pulling that scenario off, the aftereffect is better, but between the incredible risk taken and the moveslot wasted for Double Team (Gengar has a rather annoying 4mss to begin with...), don't expect DT Gengar to actually do well. Speaking of the 4 moveslot syndrome, just remember the Double Team user generally has to sacrifice a valuable move for it, which may or may not make the Pokemon a lesser threat in the long run.
- Status