NFEs in UU

[jrrrrrrr]

A little while ago, I was asking on IRC and nobody could really figure out the answer to the following question:

Why are NFEs banned from UU play?

The only answer that I have been able to find is "it would turn UU into 'OU lite'". My response to that is: isn't the whole point of UU to be OU lite? We created a UU environment so that we could use pokemon that aren't viable in OU. If pokemon like Gabite and Pupitar are not OverUsed, then aren't they UnderUsed by definition? If Rapidash and Gabite are both not powerful enough for OU, why should we ban one from UU but not the other unless one of them proves to be too strong for UU (in which case it should become BL)?

As I understand it, the current policy is that every NFE pokemon that has no major type, trait or usage differences from their evolved counterpart is banned. This gives a pretty lengthy ban list from UU, which includes all Uber, OU, BL and not fully evolved pokemon except for Vigoroth, Trapinch, Pikachu, Scyther, and Clamperl (there may be a couple more). This puts my count at 348 pokemon banned from UU (223 because of NFE status), but only 19 banned from OU.

This current blanket ban on NFEs produces some extremely odd occurences in the tier. For example, Eevee is banned from UU but Flareon isn't. Vulpix is banned but Ninetales is not. Nidoran-M is banned but Nidoking is not, etc etc.

I am posing this question to people who have more experience with UU than I, and to people who feel that NFE versions of OU pokemon would potentially corrupt UU play. What is wrong with allowing NFEs in UU? If they prove to be broken in the tier, they can just be moved to BL, which is the ban list for UU by definition. Snover and Hippopotas' auto-weather have been heralded as broken in the tier by UU enthusiasts. But, can't they just become BL pokemon? It doesn't matter if Hippopotas can't compete well in BL play, because BL is a faux tier that is meant to be a ban list from UU and not a viable metagame.

What are the actual reasons for disallowing these NFEs in UU, and what can be done to incorporate them? What better way to decentralize the UU metagame than to unban 223 pokemon?

 

[Syberia]

I thought the current policy was that a NFE has the same tier placement as its fully-evolved counterpart. So things like Eevee and Vulpix would be allowed, if someone really wanted to use them. Not that they would, when their fully evolved counterpart exists in the same tier.

The two that I would really have a problem with are Hippopotas and Snover, because besides the obvious "we don't want to see auto-weather on every team in UU," they would undoubtedly force more than two pokemon (Cradily, Walrein, Shuckle, Froslass, Glaceon off the top of my head, I'm sure there are more) into BL for the sake of unbanning two pokemon.

Stuff like Kadabra and Haunter may well be broken as well, but testing them could prove this on its own.

 

[jrrrrrrr]

I thought the current policy was that a NFE has the same tier placement as its fully-evolved counterpart. So things like Eevee and Vulpix would be allowed, if someone really wanted to use them. Not that they would, when their fully evolved counterpart exists in the same tier.

This is incorrect, since if Ninetales is UU then Vulpix would also be UU which is apparently not the case since Vulpix is banned on the UU ladder on the Smogon University ShoddyBattle server.

Also, that policy would put things with multiple evolutions in a weird spot. Eevee, for example has evolutions (Vaporeon) that are OU but others (Espeon) that are BL and even one that is UU (Flareon). Kirlia evolves into Gallade (OU) and Gardevoir (BL). How would Eevee and Kirlia/Ralts' tier status be decided on that policy?

Stuff like Kadabra and Haunter may well be broken as well, but testing them could prove this on its own.

This is perfectly fine, it is why we have the BL tier to begin with. I don't see why adding a few more pokemon to BL every time the tier list is updated is really a *bad* thing.

 

[Syberia]

This is incorrect, since if Ninetales is UU then Vulpix would also be UU which is apparently not the case since Vulpix is banned on the UU ladder on the Smogon University ShoddyBattle server.

Obi mentioned it somewhere, guess it didn't turn out to become the way things work. Though even a policy like that would place Magikarp in high OU, which is ridiculous.

The obvious thing to do is allow them all and weed out the broken ones. I'm not opposed to such an idea, in fact, I really don't know why this hasn't been done already. Most of the pokemon that fall under the "OU-lite" argument would probably end up getting themselves banned anyways (Rhydon, Dusclops, Kadabra, Haunter, maybe Chansey).

 

[Cynthia]

I agree. Certain NFE's probably need to be banned for balance reasons(Snover and Hippopotas are bad ideas), but I don't see why the majority shouldn't be allowed in. The only real reason is that it would turn UU into OU with lower stats, but obviously it would still be rather different.

Also the list of unique NFE's is quite small. Some Pokemon have a higher stat in an area than their evo, different abilities, typing etc. Shelgon is a good example, it has higher defense than Salamence, has Rock Head over Intimidate, and also is pure Dragon insread of Dragon/Flying. There is quite a bit of separation between those two. Even if people are against non-unique NFE's, the definiton of unique could definitely be reconsidered.

 

[DougJustDoug]

NFE's of UU pokemon will be unbanned on the Smogon Shoddy Server.

When I made the UU ladder, I banned all OU and Uber pokemon. I forgot to ban the NFE's of OU pokemon. As a result, we had many complaints about Snover and Hippopotas usage on the UU ladder. Since I have many other things to do, I asked for a corrected ban list, with all the NFE's excluded. Shiv was kind enough to write a script to figure out the NFE's. That list is what is currently on the Smogon Server. Unfortunately, Shiv's script picked up all NFE's. I recently asked tennisace to go through the ban list by hand and correct it, and he was nice enough to do so. That list will be implemented on the Smogon Server with the next reboot.

So, proceed to discuss the NFE's of OU pokemon, but NFE's of UU pokemon will be allowed on the UU ladder on the Smogon Server.

 

[obi]

Also consider a few cases that make the "only allow unique NFEs" argument even more complicated.

Most NFE Pokemon have a different Speed than their FE counterpart. Those that have more Speed have the obvious advantage of outspeeding their FE form. Those with less Speed have the less obvious advantage of going before their FE counterpart in Trick Room. Another advantage of being slower is that the opponent can use Baton Pass or U-turn and you can still hit the recipient more often. Pursuit is also going to be doubled in power vs. U-turners more with slower Pokemon.

If you reject the argument of less Speed sometimes being good (I don't see why, other than the vague "not important enough"), then consider the case of Unown. Unown has the same type and ability as Azelf. Its movepool is strictly inferior. Its stats are less in every place. If Azelf is OU, should Unown be banned from UU?

If Unown shouldn't be banned, the argument isn't "OU-lite", it's "the in-game status of evolvability should be given importance in our tier system", which is similar to "the in-game status of catchability should be given importance in our tier system" (a ban on legends).

If OU-lite is the real argument, Unown should be banned.

If we attempt to turn strategy into some structural / rule-based thing by saying "This difference between Pokemon isn't important enough", then we should consider banning Blaziken because of Infernape, Altaria because of Salamence, and Pinsir because of Heracross.

If we say "Allow all NFEs with any advantage, regardless of how small", then that is actually no different from allowing all NFEs. There isn't a single NFE Pokemon that doesn't have some advantage, no matter how slight, over its FE counterpart. If they are faster, that's an advantage. If they are slower, that is an advantage in some cases as I mentioned. This leaves only those NFE Pokemon with identical Speeds as their FE counterparts.

No NFE Pokemon has more HP than its FE counterpart other than Nincada and Shedinja. Nincada is a better tank than Shedinja against moves that hit Shedinja, so that's an advantage there. For those Pokemon with lower HP than their FE counterparts, that can be an advantage when facing an opponent that uses Pain Split or Leech Seed.

Using only the distinction of HP and Speed stat differences, every NFE Pokemon can be shown to have an advantage over its FE counterpart, even if it's a very slight one, as every NFE Pokemon has either different Speed or less HP (other than the aforementioned Nincada).

I have taken into account every position. If the existence of "distinctness" is the only factor, then all Pokemon are distinct and NFE Pokemon should be allowed on a case-by-case basis, just like every other Pokemon.

If we are to measure the magnitude of this distinctness, then this creates murkier tiers, is more subjective as to how much is enough, attempts to legislate good strategy (in other words, it attempts to make the tiers into a list of what you should do instead of what you can do), and is broader in its scope than just NFE Pokemon.

If we ignore distinctness altogether, the only options are to allow all NFEs on a case-by-case basis or to ban all NFEs outright (meaning no Scyther, no Vigoroth, no any Pokemon that plays completely differently than its FE form). This second option is the legend clause of UU, in that it takes information that is irrelevant to competitive battling and tries to force it to become relevant. It also has nothing to do with the main argument against NFE Pokemon, "OU-lite".

I'd like to quickly address the "legend clause" I deride in this post. A ban on legends is often justified by things like "They are generally too powerful and edge out other Pokemon.". This requires banning Articuno, Entei, and Regice because Celebi, Heatran, and Manaphy are considered too powerful. Now that I think about it, this is similar to the reasoning put forward by some proponents of an NFE ban.

Because Snover and Hippopotas have high opposition, all NFEs must therefore be banned. The auto-weather issue is irrelevant to this debate. The issue isn't "allow all NFEs" vs. "ban all NFEs". If certain NFE Pokemon are seen as a negative force in UU, they can be banned to BL just like any other Pokemon. The real issue is whether we should treat NFE Pokemon like any other Pokemon.

 

[ODDish]

(Rhydon, Dusclops, Kadabra, Haunter, DEFINITELY Chansey).

I've had the misfortune of battling all of the above with UU teams, and it was an unpleasant experience in all instances ...

However beyond them (and Snover/Hippo of course) I have no real objections to NFEs.

 

[X-Act]

NFEs should be allowed in ALL tiers. If, then, an NFE is too powerful for UU, it goes to BL. If it is too powerful for OU, it goes to Uber. That's my policy.

In other words, NFEs should be treated exactly just like any other Pokemon.

 

[Bologo]

What's the consensus on Wynaut? I remember that it was placed in Uber in ADV, but is it really all that powerful this generation to not be included in UU?

 

[Ancien Régime]

Uhhh

I'd rather not go there at all, considering how bad Wobb in OU got.

 

[darkie]

I agree with X-Act's stance on the matter.

 

[Brawley]

I agree with X-Act's stance on the matter.

Same, its only fair.

 

[Lemmiwinks MkII]

I hate to make such a pathetically short first post here in Policy Review, but I would also like to say that I agree with X-Act completely. As a long-time player of UU I would say that the addition of NFEs would be unlikely to result in an OU-Lite environment with the exception of a very select few Pokemon, and those few can be removed at a later point should we decide to do so. It is far more likely that the addition of NFEs would allow for more diversity in UU, which is a good thing.

Obviously if this comes down to a vote I'll be much more comprehensive in my argument.

 

[Syberia]

Also in agreement with X-Act.

 

[DougJustDoug]

If all the NFE's were unbanned, does that mean that there will be hundreds of new analyses written and posted on the site? That is quite a bit of work. I'm not arguing for or against NFE's. But, if they are going to be "approved" for competitive play, then we need to back it up with a full complement of Smogon research and analysis.

 

[matty]

If all the NFE's were unbanned, does that mean that there will be hundreds of new analyses written and posted on the site? That is quite a bit of work. I'm not arguing for or against NFE's. But, if they are going to be "approved" for competitive play, then we need to back it up with a full complement of Smogon research and analysis.

I don't think that would be a problem. I'm sure many of the community members would step up and help out. There would probably only be around 40ish analyses I'm guessing? Would take a few weeks of work.

 

[Syberia]

If all the NFE's were unbanned, does that mean that there will be hundreds of new analyses written and posted on the site? That is quite a bit of work. I'm not arguing for or against NFE's. But, if they are going to be "approved" for competitive play, then we need to back it up with a full complement of Smogon research and analysis.

This should not even be considered when attempting to determine a pokemon's tier status. That being said, the people who actually play UU competatively generally know what they're doing, so having them done immediately is not mandatory, plus there would be several people who "know what they're doing" to help work on them.

 

[Bologo]

Aren't the analyses for the fully evolved pokemon enough for the NFEs anyway? For instance, doesn't something like Gligar play pretty much exactly the same as Gliscor? I really don't think that we need new analyses for these NFE pokemon unless they actually play in a different way (eg. the current distinct NFEs such as Scyther or Trapinch), which very few of them actually do.

 

[Stellar]

Agreeing with X-Act.

 

[obi]

A lot of the groundwork for an NFE analysis, should it be deemed needed, has already been laid by their FE analysis.

 

[Calciphoce]

A lot of the groundwork for an NFE analysis, should it be deemed needed, has already been laid by their FE analysis.

At that point, couldn't the NFE's that aren't that different from their FE counterparts have smaller sections than most? What I'm getting at is that I don't see much of a point in writing a Charmander analysis when the Charmeleon one won't be much different anyway. Then again, if people actually want to make them, be my guest.

 

[DougJustDoug]

A lot of the groundwork for an NFE analysis, should it be deemed needed, has already been laid by their FE analysis.

The groundwork is certainly there. But, the average analysis contains many references to threats and counters in the tier in which the pokemon is expected to be played.

It would not be a monumental task to derive NFE analyses from the FE versions. But it would require a non-trivial community effort to get them all written and proofed. I think we have plenty of people ready and willing to pitch in to such an effort.

This should not even be considered when attempting to determine a pokemon's tier status.

I am not raising this issue as an objection to allowing NFE's in UU. In fact, I clearly stated that I was not arguing for or against it. I am mentioning that there could be workload consequences of making decisions like this, above and beyond posting in the forums.

It's possible that the availability of quality analyses could have an effect on the usage rates of certain pokemon in their new tiers. Access to good strategy information certainly could speed the rate in which the UU metagame "settles" with all the new changes. With all the changes being proposed, I think it would be wise to have a plan for disseminating good information about the "standard plays" for all the pokemon that get thrust into a new metagame. Distribution of information is essential to building consensus. And building consensus will be crucial to balancing the metagame after any significant experimental change.

I do not know how information about the UU metagame will be distributed after a change like this. I think the creation and and peer editing of NFE strategy analyses is one way to provide good information to the community, in a medium already familiar to the community.

 

[Toothache]

Aren't the analyses for the fully evolved pokemon enough for the NFEs anyway? For instance, doesn't something like Gligar play pretty much exactly the same as Gliscor? I really don't think that we need new analyses for these NFE pokemon unless they actually play in a different way (eg. the current distinct NFEs such as Scyther or Trapinch), which very few of them actually do.

Some of the analysis are based on the Pokemon's individual stats, which is obviously different to a prevolution. There will probably be some minor adjustment needed for Speed especially, since that is a significant change.

Something like Anorith, for example, has 95 base Att and 70 base Speed, which is significantly different to its evolved form Armaldo (125 Att/45 Speed), so it is basically a whole different Pokemon in itself rather than a 'weaker Armaldo'. Anorith has at least the Att and Speed stats to be a decent UU contender, if a bit frail, but otherwise can be viable (especially if people are unaware of the speed difference between Anorith and Armaldo).

Remember, NFEs are different Pokemon to their evolved counterparts, so we would eventually need to think of them seperately, and let the analyses reflect this too. It would be a lot more work, admittedly, but this will perhaps make Smogon unique by considering further the role that NFEs have to play in the UU environment (which is often overlooked or ignored by the majority), when they are viable alternatives.

Maybe when the NFEs are tested and people have a better understanding of them, we can look to classifying the NU tier, but thats a long way off.

 

[Great Sage]

I agree with Obi in that the "OU-lite" argument is very flawed, and I support X-Act's proposal. Additionally, I don't see why Pokemon have to be outlawed just because we -might- have to write analyses for them.