"Easy to Play" and "Hard to Use" Movesets

[mtr]

I recently read a rate in an RMT forum by Deep Thought that stated that the team he was rating (shrang's team) resembled his archived team, but was easier to use. Deep Thought's team used several interesting movesets, such as CB Rayquaza (for you non-Ubers players, CBQuaza works a lot like CBMence in OU, but most players would use Choice Band Garchomp or MixQuaza instead). It then dawned on me that it would be interesting to discuss the merits and demerits of movesets that were easier or more difficult to use.

For example, I'm sure everyone has seen a New Mixmence...

Salamence (M) @ Life Orb
Ability: Intimidate
EVs: 16 Atk/252 Spd/240 SAtk
Naive nature (+Spd, -SDef)
- Draco Meteor
- Outrage
- Fire Blast
- Earthquake
---

Not so difficult to use, right? Just come in on a resisted or immune attack, open with a Draco Meteor, and start to rape face.

But what about the far less seen CBMence? The variant I present here is specialized for beating Salamence's checks, such as Hippowdon, Bronzong, Swampert, and Cresselia. Skarmory, rarely the initial switch-in to Mence anyways, is 2HKOed by Fire Fang (~47%), and since Fire Fang does more to Bronzong and makes it so you don't need to split EVs, I didn't see the need to use Fire Blast.

Salamence (M) @ Choice Band
Ability: Intimidate
EVs: 252 Atk/6 Def/252 Spd
Adamant nature (+Atk, -SAtk)
- Outrage
- Fire Fang
- Earthquake
- Dragon Claw
---
This set is a bit harder to use: you definitely need to use a lead like a Scarf Smeargle or an Aerodactyl to stop Stealth Rock if you aren't using a Starmie. Also, the risk of prematurely locking yourself into Outrage, or using a move that Skarmory can enter on, cannot be disregarded. Until you have gathered information on the opponent's team, you'll need to make some savvy double switches.

So what are the merits of this set? For one, it's unexpected. For another, it can help your team by pounding through counters of another Pokemon? But would you use it over MixMence?

Questions for Discussion:

1) Are hard-to-play sets merely gimmicks? Do they justify the added costs to team efficiency (like: spin support, specialized lead, revenge killer, etc) that they usually bring?

2) What exactly makes a set harder to use? Is it the additional required support? Is it just a Choice item, which increases the prediction involved? I know most of you will say yes, but then why do most people consider CB Scizor less difficult to play than SD Scizor?

3) Using a "hard-to-use" moveset arguably has in-battle costs as well, such as needing to do things like double switches to gather information, or prioritize moves such as Taunt over Stealth Rock to ensure your set's effectiveness. Is this a significant consideration for you choosing to use such a moveset?

4) What would it take for you to use a set like CBMence over a set like MixMence? Would you use one as part of a combo with another Pokemon? Give examples, like a lesser-used set alongside another Pokemon: this can be a useful resource!

 

[Coldcut]

1) I usually prefer sets that are more user friendly, so I would generally say that hard to use sets are not worth the extra support and practice necessary to make them effective. Also, nearly every set benefits from team support to some degree, so team efficiency is dependent on what sets you already have on your team no matter what set you choose.

2) In my experience, hard to play sets are mostly hard to play because they are situational. The difficulty comes in recognizing the right situations. CB Scizor is easy to use because of U-turn. Early game you can simply use it to scout counters while still doing respectable damage. Also, Bullet Punch is arguably the best revenge killing move in the game.

3) As I said before, I prefer easy sets, so I prioritize flexibility and ease of use over niche effectiveness.

4) I would consider a more difficult set over the more common set if it was necessary to cover specific weaknesses in my team. For example, I chose a TormenTran over the more standard ScarfTran when I already had a reliable revenge killer but I was weak to choiced opponents. When played correctly, the Tormentran was more often than not the difference in the match, but when mis-played or unneeded, it was more of a hindrance than a help. The final choice comes down to which outcome is more likely.

 

[Thorns]

i love cbmence, usually i use dragon claw right up and scout for the scizor/skarmory/whatever then go to magnezone. usually this doesn't work since scizor u-turns like a bitch and skarm is usually shed shell (lol) but when it does you can clean up with outrage

 

[shrang]

1) Are hard-to-play sets merely gimmicks? Do they justify the added costs to team efficiency (like: spin support, specialized lead, revenge killer, etc) that they usually bring?

I don't really think they're gimmicks, as they do well in their own right as long as your team has good synergy with it. It's not really something that beats others just by a surprise factor, it can easily be laddered, unlike stuff like MixGyara or something like that. If it works consistently, then of course it is worth it.

2) What exactly makes a set harder to use? Is it the additional required support? Is it just a Choice item, which increases the prediction involved? I know most of you will say yes, but then why do most people consider CB Scizor less difficult to play than SD Scizor?

A bit of both, as additional support restricts your team options and what you might be able to do. That is the reason stuff like Moltres are UU, because he needs SR removed to function well. Choice item makes prediction extra-important, and that is why it is harder to use. The reason CB Scizor is more commonly used is because he doesn't really need to predict as he can U-Turn out, while SD Scizor has hard counters that your team has to put effort into removing (Stuff like Rotom-A, Gyara, Zapdos)

3) Using a "hard-to-use" moveset arguably has in-battle costs as well, such as needing to do things like double switches to gather information, or prioritize moves such as Taunt over Stealth Rock to ensure your set's effectiveness. Is this a significant consideration for you choosing to use such a moveset?

Yes, however, you can easily put moves that allow you to scout your opponent's team and of course, double switch and stuff. For example, putting a move like Aqua Tail on CB Dragonite really allows you to hurt stuff while scouting for switches. Putting Dragon Claw AND Outrage together can allow you to scout more effectively.

4) What would it take for you to use a set like CBMence over a set like MixMence? Would you use one as part of a combo with another Pokemon? Give examples, like a lesser-used set alongside another Pokemon: this can be a useful resource!

Not much, I would probably look at the set and go: "Hm, this looks cool, let's build a team around it". Currently, I have an OU team that has CB Nite on it. Dragonite pretty much dents everything it touches (Provided my prediction is too off), then later in the game, I can send in SD Scizor to clean up. In a similar vein, I have also used stuff like Specs Heatran and Specs Shaymin to open up holes in the opponent's team for something like CM Latias or Suicune to late game sweep (Although it's harder to break through special walls like Blissey without using Trick).

 

[Res Ipsa Loquitur]

1) Are hard-to-play sets merely gimmicks? Do they justify the added costs to team efficiency (like: spin support, specialized lead, revenge killer, etc) that they usually bring?

I'm not sure what you are trying to bring out with this question. Obviously a Belly Pass Smeargle or a level 1 Rattata @Focus Sash with Endeavor and Quick Attack is both difficult to use and a gimmick. But sets requiring nuanced play and tight prediction, such as Anti-Lead Weavile, are not gimmicks but in fact consistently powerful tools in the right hands.

2) What exactly makes a set harder to use? Is it the additional required support? Is it just a Choice item, which increases the prediction involved? I know most of you will say yes, but then why do most people consider CB Scizor less difficult to play than SD Scizor?

Answering your final question first, I think that the difference lies in the distinction between Salamence's 120 and 140 base power STAB moves and Scizor's 60 and 70 base power STAB moves. Without the Choice Band's added juice, Swords Dance Scizor needs to set up in order to become a major threat. Salamence can hammer teams straight out of the gate by switching in repeatedly to fire off a quick Draco Meteor, even without a choice item. The Choice Band actually allows Scizor to do a similar trick by giving its low powered moves some teeth.

In general, I think that what makes a set harder to use comes down to the ease of countering it, as distinguished from raw power. For example, in Ubers, MixQuaza is far harder to play than a Mixed Dialga, despite Rayquaza's better speed and attack as well as its access to priority. This is because Dialga has much more bulk and a vastly superior type combination. Anything with Ice Shard can switch into Rayquaza, while Dialga can threaten many things with a 2HKO. This makes MixQuaza take more prediction and more care with bringing it out (due also to Stealth Rock weakness), so it's a harder set to use. A similar analysis applies to virtually any "difficult to use set," including choice builds.

3) Using a "hard-to-use" moveset arguably has in-battle costs as well, such as needing to do things like double switches to gather information, or prioritize moves such as Taunt over Stealth Rock to ensure your set's effectiveness. Is this a significant consideration for you choosing to use such a moveset?

This really goes to my previous point about ease of countering. In short, yes, it is a consideration.

4) What would it take for you to use a set like CBMence over a set like MixMence? Would you use one as part of a combo with another Pokemon? Give examples, like a lesser-used set alongside another Pokemon: this can be a useful resource!

It would take a hole in my team that CBMence answers, like a major threat that gets OHKOed by CBMence but not by the same attack from a MixMence. Because CBMence is easier to counter, MixMence (if only considering those two) will be my default option if I just need a strong, reasonably bulky attacker.

 

[respiration]

I love CBMence.

My problem with it though, like most choice users, is that it continually has to switch out. This becomes a problem when the poke is weak to SR, the most commonly used EH in the game. CBScizor and CSLati are used a lot because they don't take much from SR and are immune to TS and (in Lati's case) Spikes. If you were to use CBMence, then you would need additional support, like an anti-lead and a spinner, or something. That's what makes the sets hard to use imo. (#2)

I wouldn't consider CBMence a gimmick. As a matter of fact, it's a legitimate threat. In this instance though, I don't think it justifies the more support it needs. This is just an answer to CBMence specifically, cause I think it really depends on the poke. (#1)

 

[Lockeness]

1) I don't think that hard to play sets are gimmicks but they are only really worth using if there is a large payout for using one.

2) A set's difficulty is based on how quickly and effectively it accomplishes it's goal. Hard to use sets usually have a specific in battle use which requires them to be in the right situation in order to be successful. Choice Band Scizor can quickly come in and do damage while the SD version require more prediction and time. However if you set up correctly SD Scizor can do way more damage than the CB version. A hard to use set is just one that takes more skill and prediction to use than another set.

3) Having to play around my own team is a definite turn off to using a pokemon. What I mean by this is that if I have to alter my strategy and literally "play around" a certain pokemons role I will start to consider replacing it. However if I think a hard to use set will enhance my team and battle strategy then it would be worth it.

4) For me there is always trepedation at using something that could quickly turn gimicky. A part of this fear is the fact that I am still learning how to battle well competeively. I would rather use an easy to use set with a short term payout rather than a hard to use set that had a longer term payout.

 

[iKitsune]

I don't think there is such a thing as a hard set to play, its more likely that you are just using the wrong/bad set or supporting it in the wrong way. MixMence in this metagame is probably just better - CB Mence is so prone to revenge kills (100 base speed, locked into outrage, bullet punch) that it will only likely severely weaken one pokemon. But i wouldn't use either of these, the only MixMence worth using is probably roost mix mence if you support mence with magnezone probably better to use DD. With roost you can sit in on skarmory and gliscor and proceed to win vs stall as they eventually mispredict you. The addition of roost in its arsenal means that it is not that reliant on Spin removal, a difficult task with the prevalence of Rotom. The other thing to note is that Mence regardless of its set lures in the same pokemon and pretty much 2hkos them. So you can choose the same pokemon to benefit from the support in both sets. Finally if a set needs too much specific support to work it is probably a suboptimal set and not worth running.

All in all a very interesting question, this is a great thread mtr.

 

[DanTheMan111]

On the subject of CB Mence

With it's huge movepool and coverage, Salemence can hit a lot of pokemon for super effective damage in OU, and Fire-Ground-Dragon gives it unresisted coverage (I think?). Mence in general forces a lot of switches because of his offensive prowess, intimidate, a good amount of resistaneces, and considerable bulk. With all these switches, mence needs to be able to strike in multiple fashions. With Choiced sets this is most easily achieved by switching (which, of course, means SR damage as previously mentioned by other replies.)

Among Mence's large and useful moveset is Dragon Dance, which adds to it's ability to theaten any team, even team with so-called "counters". Put this together with the amount of switches he forces, and you have a near-guarunteed dragon dance. Back to the statement that fire-ground-dragon is such a formidable threat, salemence can outspeed and severely dent almost every pokemon in OU. A Mence with two Dragon Dances fears only steel type with quite a bit of phsyical bulk switching into outrage. In addition to the freedom to use set up moves and changing attacks, DDmence gets an Item to play around with. This could mean anything from leftovers to help it get another dragon dance or heal off priorities, or life orb, to further increase it's abilites to sweep, and things like Lum berry and the such to cure outrage confusion, thunder waves, and toxics that can ruin your sweep.

Of course this is all relying on the fact you don't care for atacking on the special side of the spectrum, in which case mix mence simply outplays banded mence, because it can whatever hard with his stab 120+ BP attacks and still gets something from not letting it die as it does not need a set up not unlike choiced sets.

 

[wavedash]

Choice item users have a tougher time predicting. Prediction is essentially chance; your opponent has a certain chance to have a certain Pokemon on his team with a certain chance of having a certain set, and there is a certain chance that your opponent with switch in that Pokemon when you send out your CBMence (as an example).

One can be reminded of a BotW match where a CBGyara OHKOed an incoming Latias with Payback. At such a high echelon of play, so-called gimmick sets are lethal in the right hands; they must therefore require more skill to use correctly, or else everyone would be using CBGyara.

Lastly, things like CBMence are very "anti-metagame", which is both good and bad. Have trouble with tough physical walls? Add a CBMence to lure them out and KO them! But is this really the best idea? Sure, your Mence beats its former counters. But it can no longer do what it formerly excelled at: repeatedly hit things really, really hard.

 

[TSPhoenix]

A lot of these sets are high-risk high-payoff. Something like Swampert is going to do its job 99% of the time, barring getting hit by an unexpected grass move. MixMence will do its job a lot of the time, CBMence is much less likely to pull off its role thanks to SR and getting locked-in, but the payoff can be worth it.

 

[Deep Thought]

I figured I'd respond to the OP since he mentioned me as inspiration for this thread

1) Are hard-to-play sets merely gimmicks? Do they justify the added costs to team efficiency (like: spin support, specialized lead, revenge killer, etc) that they usually bring?

If you have to build the team around a specific "hard-to-use" set (and I don't agree with this term as I will explain later), then it's generally not worth it. My criterion for whether a Pokémon deserves a team slot is its "net value" i.e. how much it does for the team compared to how much the team does for it. For example, CBRay on my Shadows and Dust team not only functioned as a wallbreaker that could at least put a major dent in if not outright KO almost everything by spamming Dragon Claw or Outrage (with Earthquake rarely being used for coverage), but it also was one of my principal "revenge-killers" if you will thanks to Extremespeed for weakened 'mons and Outrage for bulky stat-up 'mons like Cro-Ogre. Sure, it was a little tricky to play around the SR weakness and get it in easily so it could do its thing, but it more than justified those requirements because it was such an amazing team player. Short answer: There are plenty of sets that are often not used in favor of straightforward ones with more obvious benefits, but that are still very good (and IMO often better than the most common sets).

Here's why I don't like your terms "hard-to-use" and "easy-to-play": they are completely dependent on the skill level of the battler using the Pokémon and his/her familiarity with that specific set. If you use something more, it will seem obvious to you how it works in battle; if you've only ever talked or read about it, it won't be as simple. This is why stealing good teams does not automatically make someone a good battler. Again using my CBRay as an example, having laddered with it for a while I think that it is not any more difficult to use than a regular Choicer like ScarfChomp/SpecsOgre/etc. However, if I were to ask the average Smogonite familiar with Ubers whether putting Choice Band on a Rayquaza is a good idea, the response would almost certainly be "Dude, Chomp outclasses Ray in that department. Use a Swords Dancer or something because Choice Band is making things too hard on yourself." tl;dr: Piloting difficulty is completely relative, so usage is really the only thing by which you can compare two sets that are both good enough to be considered for a Pokémon on a given team.

2) What exactly makes a set harder to use? Is it the additional required support? Is it just a Choice item, which increases the prediction involved? I know most of you will say yes, but then why do most people consider CB Scizor less difficult to play than SD Scizor?

Like I said in my last paragraph, it's not that a set is harder to use, just that its worth on a team is less obvious and therefore it is not used as much. Choice items obviously make things harder because they increase the amount of guessing aka "prediction" that you have to do, which is why I generally shun Choiced sets unless they are really really simple to use. (How to succeed with Specs Latias: (1) Send it in. (2) Click "Draco Meteor." (3) Profit.)

3) Using a "hard-to-use" moveset arguably has in-battle costs as well, such as needing to do things like double switches to gather information, or prioritize moves such as Taunt over Stealth Rock to ensure your set's effectiveness. Is this a significant consideration for you choosing to use such a moveset?

Personally, it doesn't cross my mind when I'm building a team. However, if I am noticing on the ladder that a certain Pokémon is dead weight that I thought would work well, I'll always rework my team in favor of what produces the best results. The ends justify the means in competitive Pokémon!

4) What would it take for you to use a set like CBMence over a set like MixMence? Would you use one as part of a combo with another Pokemon? Give examples, like a lesser-used set alongside another Pokemon: this can be a useful resource!

If it works the best, I'll use it, even if I have to make up my own set(s) to get the most wins! As far as combinations go, here's another shameless plug for CBRay, again taken from Shadows and Dust:

Rayquaza@Choice Band|Air Lock
Jolly|252 Atk, 252 Spe, 6 HP
1. Dragon Claw
2. Earthquake
3. Extremespeed
4. Outrage

with

Dialga@Choice Specs|Pressure
Timid|252 SpAtk, 252 Spe, 6 HP
1. Draco Meteor
2. Dragon Pulse
3. Flamethrower
4. Thunder

This is basically a "Double Dragon" strategy for the Uber metagame (potentially outdated as I haven't used it for a while) involving a Pokémon with 150 base Attack and a 1.5x boosting item spamming 80 and 120 BP STAB moves resisted by only one type and a Pokémon with 150 Special Attack and a 1.5x boosting item spamming 90 and 140 BP STAB moves resisted by only one type. Offensive teams have no answer for this, while stall teams have nothing to switch into Rayquaza outside of Groudon (who is 2HKOd by Outrage) and nothing to switch into Dialga outside of Blissey (and if you can't beat Blissey, don't respond to this post). Balanced teams pose problems for this combination because they may have stuff like Heatran, Skarmory, Jirachi, Shedinja, etc. who can actually tank multiple hits from these two Pokémon and pose a threat in return.

If anyone has stuff to say about this post, please respond so we can start a massive quote-war!

 

[MegaKick]

personally, i think that your example is very nice. However, i think another good example would be life orb starmie vs. calm mind sweeper cune. Starmie is very easy to use, hit the right move, recover when neccesary. prediction requirement:very low. Lets look at cune - while this has the potential to beat things like bliss and hit harder, without recovery, you need good prediction, especielly if an electric type switches in on calm mind or hidden power.
as for the questions,
1. it depends on the set. is the harder moveset able to accomplish enough to make up for mispredictions? Is it able to accomplish things the other set cannot? Is it more benificial to the team? In this case, salamence may get more use out of this set, since it can punch holes through counters, but is it required by the team? Does it drag the rest of the team down?
2. This is a diffucult question to answer. It does change from poke to poke. I think it is not limited to the choice items, as in the example I gave, it really is how hard it is for the pokemon to set up, and how much danger it is in after it has set up, versus something that can set up easy and is at little risk once set up.
3. As I said before in #1, it depends on all the factors. It's a simple equation.
possible benefit-risk-team sacrifice=x. if x is high enough, like 6 or 7, base a team around it. if x is low but positive, you can just slap it on there. If x is 0, test something else. if x is below 0, trash it. This can apply to anything.
4. I think I've already answered 4 in my example, #1, and #3.

Thank you for reading my first attempt at a long, detailed, well thought out post. May god bless evolution

 

[Anachronism]

I think it is not necessarily true to say that using Mix Mence is easier when you consider that essentially the point is to connect Draco Meteor to something that doesn't resist it. Doing this can sometimes be difficult, as you never know for sure when Skarmory or Blissey will come in to take the Draco and then proceed to force you out. Since have only one chance per switch in to connect the Draco Meteor you essentially are dealing with the same scenario that CB Mence has. The difference I guess is that you have multiple opportunities to catch the opponent mispredicting if you save the Draco. Roost is also invaluable.

I am trying to think of another example but nothing is forthcoming. There are subtle nuances to using a lot of sets that you could say makes them "hard to use." Nearly every set worth using takes a bit of prediction and planning to use correctly. Even if you consider a set as simple as Restalk Rotom-A, there are all sorts of nuances involved. Do they still fear Will-o-Wisp or do they know that I am using Thunderbolt and Shadow Ball? (etc.) Simply knowing the metagame creates a lot of complications for the intelligent battler.

 

[Pika25]

Obviously a...level 1 Rattata @Focus Sash with Endeavor and Quick Attack is both difficult to use and a gimmick.

On the subject of Level 1 Endeavor, Rattata is actually outclassed: Starly is immune to Spikes; Phanpy is immune to Sandstorm. Cleffa may not have priority in its movepool, but it can use the sand or hail to finish the foe off, unless they are somehow immune (Cleffa itself is immune to both thanks to Magic Guard). Just watch out for sleepers (unless someone on your team is already asleep) and ghosts (except for Shedinja which get owned by SR/Spikes or whatever move said level 1 has) or if you're not using sand or hail, faster priority (such as Scizor Bullet Punch).

And speaking of Scizor, I agree that CB is easier to use than SD, as with CB you can just spam BP's (or U-turn out as the case may be), but with SD you need to predict a switch or something and SD on the switch, even if the switch-in is something like Mysticgar with HP fire.