It's banned from Standard. This thread probably should be moved to the ubers subforum.
-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
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.
Moody
- Thread starter Wichu
- Start date
- Status
It's banned from Standard. This thread probably should be moved to the ubers subforum.
Ubers isnt a tier its a ban list. the most you could do to "ban" something from ubers is have it converted from a ban into a clause
That is what he was saying. Since the reveal of Inconsistent, the question has always been if it will fall under the evasion clause, and the idea of Ubers being a banlist has come into question as well. If you are going to allow Ubers tiers in tourneys, why would you allow absurd, entirely luck-based or incredibly broken abilities or pokes to be used? Is ubers to be considered a metagame? I, for one, would not like to lose a tourney match because my ubers team was swept by Inconsistent Smeargle, which I know is not only possible, but almost LIKELY, from experience
If it isn't meant to be balanced or regulated we wouldnt have an Evasion Clause or a OHKO clause in ubers. Hell if its just a banlist, there shouldn't be any sleep clause or species clause either. Haxy things get banned from ubers just like any other tier.
Man, I'm so tired of the word "clause" now. People keep using it to claim that there's some magical distinction between banning evasion/OHKO moves and banning an ability or a Pokémon.
Regardless of what it was made to be, it is now a fully-fleshed-out metagame that is playable in tourneys, and it deserves the respect other metagames receive, ie, a basic attempt to make it enjoyable, and somewhat balanced, despite not being at all varied
Hey, I argued this before, got yelled at. But I totally agree. Regardless of the purpose it was made for doesn't mean it has to stick to that purpose or that it couldn't be expanded upon. And if you have legitimate uber tourneys, teams, a large group of players, etc doesn't mean it isn't a metagame all it's own. It's just semantics and tradition that people continually call it merely a "banlist". It may have been that when it was like 4 things like Mewtwo/Mew/Ho-Oh/Lugia but by now it has so many uber pokes they are a game.
Although in terms of variance, it probably is more varied slightly or about equal to OU in terms of pokemon you see over and over and over and over again.
And Smeargle is broken in that. And it really is just a matter of loopholing to have clauses instead of just calling it an outright ban according to traditional (outdated) semantics of ubers being a banlist because it doesn't make sense to ban something from something that already is a "banlist". But clauses pretty much are bans/restrictions.
It's not supposed to be a balanced tier it's supposed to be where all the things that are too broken for Standard go. That's literally all it is. It's a tier, it's played in official tournaments yadda yadda, but that doesn't stop it from being what it is and always has been: a banlist.
Also ability clauses sound really really dumb.
Also ability clauses sound really really dumb.
Inconsistent would likely fall under the umbrella of evasion clause in any case. And you can't mindlessly argue for something that just isn't current. People play in Ubers all the time, they specialize in it. Why should it not receive the care that other tiers do to make them fun to play? One can't simply mindlessly hold on to preconceptions and justify themselves with outdated philosophy
The only reason people have the mindset of ubers as a banlist is because initially it didnt have a playable metagame, what with all of 2 pokemon in it. But by the time we got to DP there was a balanced (though centralised) metagame. This metagame has evolved further in B/W, so saying its a banlist and not a tier isnt really true anymore. Its a metagame that many play and Inconsistent ruins that metagame, so it should be banned since it makes the entire tier become luck based and no (competent) uber battler would want that.
That's what Inconsistent will likely fall under. But Inconsistent is a broken son of a *****. And, the only thing that is certain is change. That is the way the world has always been and what Ubers was before and what Ubers was after 3rd-4th gen are completely different. Whether or not it is arguably balanced or not doesn't make it not a tier. This thinking is outdated by this point.
But Inconsistent is thankfully gone. But when I dabble in Ubers, I certainly don't want it their either. (Smeargle)
Oh guys, just so you know, all the pokemon you mentioned will have this ability but only in the dream world (including remoraid, octillery, etc.) also it will be called sudden impulse not inconsistent
Considering the variety of options offered by P-O, providing certain clauses to address certain issues doesn't seem particularly bad, especially when many people seem to barely consider the idea of just having a "luck based" and "non-luck based" difference in their competition.
Then again people cling to old ideas and will ban the things that make underused pokemon powerful, so eh. Enjoy your flinchhax, crits and unadaptive metagame, smogon.
Then again people cling to old ideas and will ban the things that make underused pokemon powerful, so eh. Enjoy your flinchhax, crits and unadaptive metagame, smogon.
Lolwut. Unadaptive? What? Explain please, because I don't find Smogon unadaptive. ._. Also, you clearly haven't faced anyone with Inconsistent. Why don't you go and play Pokemon Online and tear your hair out at Inconsistent users?
"Sudden Impulse" is an unofficial translation, we have no sure idea of its official name.
Speaking of adaptive pokemon, Ditto says hi.
Thank you for your infinitely helpful input. Your words are so filled with logic and overall correctness that I can't help but agree with you. Oh wait, I forgot, Inconsistent is incredibly broken even in ubers, and you either like to abuse it or never play against one of their users. Please make sure you know what you are talking about before you speak
The only luck-based things that threaten the metagame are Moody and Shaymin-S, and they were both banned.
Shaymin's Sky Forme was banned because with its speed and LOLSeedFlare, it is guaranteed to smash any wall. Even Blissey. With a special attack. The only wall it doesn't smash is Contrary Shuckle. All the Sap Sippers fall quite easily to Shaymin's other attacks.
Moody was banned because Game Freak failed to balance the ability and make the LOL-1onrandomstat mean anything in the long run when you're not even getting hurt anyway thanks to using Protect and getting a boost anyway, possibly to Evasion.
It would be bad form to ban the ability from Ubers, but I reiterate that I think there should be a clause, either part of Evasion Clause, separate from Evasion Clause or a Super Evasion Clause that has Moody and you can't turn it off and allow Moody without also turning off regular Evasion Clause, but it is also banned from play if only regular Evasion Clause is off.
Shaymin's Sky Forme was banned because with its speed and LOLSeedFlare, it is guaranteed to smash any wall. Even Blissey. With a special attack. The only wall it doesn't smash is Contrary Shuckle. All the Sap Sippers fall quite easily to Shaymin's other attacks.
Moody was banned because Game Freak failed to balance the ability and make the LOL-1onrandomstat mean anything in the long run when you're not even getting hurt anyway thanks to using Protect and getting a boost anyway, possibly to Evasion.
It would be bad form to ban the ability from Ubers, but I reiterate that I think there should be a clause, either part of Evasion Clause, separate from Evasion Clause or a Super Evasion Clause that has Moody and you can't turn it off and allow Moody without also turning off regular Evasion Clause, but it is also banned from play if only regular Evasion Clause is off.
Why would it be bad form to ban it from ubers?
Presumably because Ubers is already technically a ban list, but calling it a clause instead is really just a matter of semantics.
...Unless we banned it with the same argument we "banned" Evasion/OHKOs from Ubers ("uncompetitive" yadda yadda)? Ubers may be a "broken" metagame, but is still competitive and oh mother of god please let's not start a debate about semantics here too aaaaaa
Agreed. Especially with Locopoke's well-timed thread on whether Ubers is a banlist or a metagame over in policy review.
I personally think that it should just be.. a sub category of evasion clause
but I know saying that will incite so much arguing, so I'll just be happy that it's banned.
I kinda brought up the whole Ubers discussion in this thread in honor of that. I think it's very important to consider this when debating Inconsistent's place in the meta
- Status