np: BW OU Suspect Testing Round 11 - Genie in a Bottle [Landorus is now Uber]

[Halcyon.]

One ladder down...God damn I hate this. The system is so messed up that I ave to forfeit so many matches towards the end, and also that I can get the win/loss ratio I did and still make requirements just because I got the right first few opponents. Also, the suspect ladder is terrible. Everyone is using one of three teams: my Conkeldurr team, Melee Mewtwo's team, and some other team that has Terrakion Keldeo Scizor and Politoed that I don't know who made. I mean, that's suspecting I guess, but it just sucks. I hope this isn't an indicator of a Landorus-less meta. Now to do OU Current...

 

[Pocket]

Lady Alex, don't brush off UltiMario's valid response to your post. Admitting that the absence of Landorus-I having little effect in the Suspect Ladder metagame disproves that Landorus-I is unhealthy for the metagame, since it has apparently made little difference. The contradiction is plain to see.

I've also seen some questionable banning reasons along the lines of, "I find Keldeo broken, but I'll ban Landorus just in case Keldeo doesn't get banned." If you find Keldeo broken you ban Keldeo, not Landorus. Save your banhammer for the next test.

 

[brizz]

Is it just me or I'm not the only one who didn't face many Landorus-I?
I mean, on thr OU current ladder (where I played ~50 matches) I encountered just 2-3 of them. I guess that means Landorus-I is not the way to "beat" the meta.
Anyway, I think I won't vote for the ban, it's just pointless to me (and so it is for Keldeo, but I'm sticking on the current suspect mon for this post n_n)

 

[Shurtugal]

I think it's silly how I've seen arguments that literally read:

"I don't think Landorus-I is broken by itself, but CB TTar and Scarf Keldeo support make it an amazing Celebi lure and I think I'll ban it!"

Since when did we start banning pokemon when they weren't broken by themselves (In BW OU)? (Bar simple support like Stealth rock support or weather, since those are easily utilized). Excadrill was broken because it only had one to two counters, Blaziken because it was virtually unwalled and had 4MSS that could take on most of all its counters after +2, Deo-S since you didn't know if was screens, LO, or hazard stacking, and so fourth.

Landorus-I is not broken by itself. Even when utilizing U-turn, Gengar can still wall it; Latias, Latios and Celebi (depending on spread) can arguably recover the damage off, Scarf Keldeo is an excellent way to RK it and check it, SpD Jellicent can manage it, Chansey can manage it, and many other Pokemon can outright outspeed it and kill it.

We didn't suspect Scizor because it paired a powerful VoltTurn core with Landorus + Rotom-W in BW1, did we?

A lot of cores in OU are strong. I don't think that a core can be the bane of something being banned. Lots of people have commented that Landorus-I is not broken by itself, and that should be the only thing that really matters. It's not too unpredictable and I didn't find it hard to scout U-turn (or judge how it was being played;after all, who willingly switches a RP Landorus-I into Celebi, right? Must be U-turn). In the OUSuspect, the only difference I found was a spike in sun, and I'm sure those are players who were testing how much Landorus-I affected the playstyle; and let me tell you, it didn't hamper it at all. It was still lackluster and just as easy to handle (at least, in my expriences) as the next team; since I prepare for OU threats.

Bottom line short, I really think this suspect is horrible. Landorus-I nor Keldeo are broken outright; this has been agreed upon by many users and commented by a lot of players voting ban. Sorry if I don't get that logic at all. The "new" metagame isn't really different, and there really isn't a need to get rid of Landorus-I because there are a lot of other threats that are just as threatening lategame if it can get +2 speeds (SR + 1 or 2 Spikes and +2 spe Thundurus-T can actually sweep without a NP boost if you did a good job using Piviots, band, specs, etc. teammates to wear down counters, which is not so different from Landorus-I since his counters also have to be belittled and whittled down for a RP sweep; the only difference are really coverage and a SR weakness, but those aren't as concerning as they seem on paper).

My point is this: I am voting no ban for Landorus-I. I can't find any justification for its ban. The u-turn set may lure you into a teammate that can crush its counters and checks, but hell; it's not the Landorus set that is beating these counters: its teammates. Baton Pass Celebi escapes, Latios could utilize Earthquake, Gengar's FB can kill CB TTar if you can whittle it, Scarf Keldeo still checks and RK's, numerous of Pokemon can still outspeed and outright KO it (hell, Terrakion's SEdge is doing like 60% at +0). Chansey can still wall it, Bronzong can still Gyro, another Pokemon that raises its speed (DubDance ThundyT) can check it, Sun's Venusaur can stomp it, Keldeo actually takes Earth Power for 87%, if I'm not mistaken, so it too can technically counter Landorus. Mamoswine can still KO with Ice Shard.

Landorus has trouble setting up early / mid game as well; it has to wait until endgame, and that's the entire purpose of a Landorus-I check: it prevents him from mindlessly spamming RP. You should be able to play well enough as to where your win condition can win.

Someone please give me an argument, without mentioning Keldeo and Tyranitar (or Scizor) as a means on why we should ban him. The U-turn argument works both ways as well, which has been pointed out by many users, as well as Landorus-I struggling to find a good opp. to Rock Polish. (Also, I think Earth Power doesn't OHKO Sdef TTar, whom gets Ice Beam, and I've seen people run SashTar too with Ice Beam, so it can serve as a mediocre check, while things like Scarf Toed and Scarf / Pivot Abamasnow also smack it, while SDef Politoed outright checks / counters (debatable) Landorus-I.)

I see no reason, on the basis of Landorus-I with any weather support, with SR and 1 layer of Spikes, broken enough to ban. Sorry.

 

[reyscarface]

the momentum this guy gives is unrivaled tbh

 

[Shurtugal]

@Reyscarface:

A lot of things in OU have fast momentum. Can you be more specific, perhaps give us example how it compares with other OU offensive threats and explain how the momentum given is in amounts to where it needs to be banned, please.

 

[Lavos]

Lady Alex, don't brush off UltiMario's valid response to your post. Admitting that the absence of Landorus-I having little effect in the Suspect Ladder metagame disproves that Landorus-I is unhealthy for the metagame, since it has apparently made little difference. The contradiction is plain to see.

actually no thats not a contradiction check it out

- the metagame w/landorus-i is bad
- the metagame w/o landorus-i is bad
- therefore landorus-i isnt bad for the metagame

thats your syllogistic argument and it is fallacious in that just because the metagame is bad both before and after landorus-i's presence does not mean that landorus-i is entirely neutral in its effect on the metagame, just means the metagame is so shitty that even banning landorus-i wont help it much.

tl;dr enough logical fallacies pls

@Reyscarface:

A lot of things in OU have fast momentum. Can you be more specific, perhaps give us example how it compares with other OU offensive threats and explain how the momentum given is in amounts to where it needs to be banned, please.

pretty sure "unrivaled" is about as large of an amount as it gets lol

 

[phantom]

I might as well post why I think Landorus-I is broken, seeing as no one is giving a decent response on either side.

So the whole Lando / Tar / Keld core is what everyone's annoyed with and for a good reason. The core is not only simultaneously powerful, but versatile, which is something many fail to mention. Landorus can effectively run 3 special sets: Rock Polish, U-Turn, and Substitute. Now for consistency's sake, let's say Keldeo and Tyranitar can only run three sets as well. 3x3x3=27! This core lends itself to 27 different combinations of either Band Tar + Scarf Keldeo + U-Turn Landorus; Scarf Tar + Specs Keldeo + Substitute Landorus, ect. This is not even including the fact that Tar and Keldeo have many more sets, which makes this core even more unpredictable. Now, while countering a three mon core isn't very difficult, this one has the surprise factor on its side. You don't know which Pokemon is carrying what set because almost all of them can be effective. Oh, you want to switch Celebi into Keldeo? Eat HP Bug. You want Celebi to BP away from Ttar? Well Scarf outspeeds and kos you with Crunch. This is the freaking problem here, the core has so many different ways to pound on the tier it's absurd. Now, I don't think removing Landorus will solve everything, it will definitely help. Keldeo needs to be removed too. Also, the affect it has on sun teams is quite detrimental. You guys remember the genesect era and what happened if Landorus got a RP up on a sun team? It meant you were 6-0'd. That's not as bad now, but it's still evident that Landorus's effect on the tier deteriorates the performance of sun teams (as evident by how much more common they are on the suspect ladder) and stall teams with the help of Tar and Keldeo. In my personal opinion, I'd rather ban the catalyst (Tyranitar) not the reacting enzymes (Keldeo, Landorus). Seeing as how that won't happen, banning Keldeo and Landorus is really the only thing that can be done to improve OU. And lol @the people saying stall and sun will dominate. It's not like Kyurem-B, Thundurus-T, Heatran, Latias, and a bunch of other shit that takes over half a page of listing doesn't exist!

The thing about suspecting a Pokemon is that you don't look at it individually, you have to see how it reacts with the things around it. Ignoring that fact and saying shit like, "but zapdos counturs landorus, dur!!!", is basically choosing to say ignorant on the bigger picture. Landorus creates a stale ass environment in OU and encourages nothing but brainless play with that stupid core and desperate measures to counter it. That's why it and Keldeo need to gtfo.

 

[Pocket]

Lavos, if Landorus-I is one of the reasons that the metagame is "bad," then removing it would have some sort of a positive change. To say that the removal of Landorus-I did not bring this change means that its ban would NOT be beneficial for the metagame, other than removing another relevant OU threat.

We can certainly ban something non-broken (ie removing them wont improve the meta) like Gyarados or Gengar if we want to, but this ban wont improve the metagame outside of not needing to deal with this threat anymore. This is what I consider a bad ban.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

I think you are kind of ignoring the reality of Landorus Shurtugal, a good player will use Landorus in the sand, with rocks, and if it doesn't have U-turn, it is going to be paired with something using pursuit. These are things that really happen in battle, its kind of hard just to ignore them and go to theorymon. If a Pokemon is broken with the right support, than it should be banned IMO, especially if that support is common with it.

I might post something later justifying my reasons for feeling it should be banned, without considering common support, but I just want to say that these restrictions in this argument are obtuse.

 

[Lavos]

Lavos, if Landorus-I is one of the reasons that the metagame is "bad," then removing it would have some sort of a positive change. To say that the removal of Landorus-I did not bring this change means that its ban would NOT be beneficial for the metagame, other than removing another relevant OU threat.

nobody said removing landorus did nothing, the guy said that the metagame was bad before and bad after. i dont know how to quantify "bad" but the issue shouldnt be the state of the metagame before/after since we know its gonna be shit either way, it should be focused on landorus itself and whether or not landorus is broken in the context of the current metagame.

 

[Lady Alex]

Lady Alex, don't brush off UltiMario's valid response to your post. Admitting that the absence of Landorus-I having little effect in the Suspect Ladder metagame disproves that Landorus-I is unhealthy for the metagame, since it has apparently made little difference. The contradiction is plain to see.

No Pocket, that reasoning is terrible. The fact that it didn't show up frequently, thus the teams I saw were similar on both ladders, doesn't mean that Landorus isn't broken. It's general absence isn't even a great reason to not ban it. I had the same experience during the Deoxys-D suspect test. Its absence absolutely did not change the fact that it was an unhealthy part of the meta, just like Landorus's doesn't.

 

[reyscarface]

ppl keep saying landorus gets the support in order to sweep but i dont buy it, my experience in bw so far tells me that landorus is the one bringing extreme amounts of utility to the team.

the problem with landorus in my opinion is the shit that you need to use to beat it. for example, ill use scarf politoed. if you bring scarf politoed in to revenge me youre pretty much telegraphing me your set. if you switch in on one of my moves i can easily do a damage calc, get your ev spread, and determine if youre scarf or not. since you had to use politoed, which doesnt even secure a kill on landorus because i can simply switch out lol, that just means i get to bring soemthing in and god knows its easy as fuck to switch in on scarf politoed lol, it doesnt do jack opposed to specs politoed (2hkod if you bring it in on earth power).

this is just one example of the mons youre using to beat landorus. the main problem of landorus is uturn. normally youd have to do a double switch in order to gain momentum but fuck landorus can just uturn (AND this move gives it a way to fuck celebi, latis, and others up). Lets go through a list of uturn mons:

Flygon - hes piss weak, would take LO recoil, doesnt get an ability as powerful as sheer force, and is slow by BW OU standards.

Scizor - coverage not nearly as good as what you get from ice / ground / fighting, doesnt have the freedom that landorus has

celebi - nowhere near as strong, easily trapped

gliscor - weak, walled super easily

infernape - this one gets great coverage, would be comparable except for the fact he has to take full layers everytime it uturns plus LO recoil, so its much inferior.

jirachi - great coverage but suffers from the same as celebi in that its weak and "slow", if used in a scarf set a magnezone will fuck you up

actually you know who comes in mind to me when i see landorus? a guy who was banned from OU, genesect. this guy is as close as landorus as it gets. he had absolutely insane coverage like landorus, had some sort of builtin boost in power in its ability just like landorus, and was pretty much untrappable due to his ability to deal with the trapper. genesect and landorus are really similar in my opinion because they both bring a ton of utility to its team. they both became a "okay, lets do a 50/50, if you stay you die, if you switch you just gave me sick momentum" and this is especially true in the infamous uturn teams.

simply put, you have to get lucky to beat landorus. lucky why? because when hes out its always a 50/50. id go as far to say if landorus didnt have uturn he would be ok.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Lavos, if Landorus-I is one of the reasons that the metagame is "bad," then removing it would have some sort of a positive change. To say that the removal of Landorus-I did not bring this change means that its ban would NOT be beneficial for the metagame, other than removing another relevant OU threat.

We can certainly ban something non-broken (ie removing them wont improve the meta) like Gyarados or Gengar if we want to, but this ban wont improve the metagame outside of not needing to deal with this threat anymore. This is what I consider a bad ban.

To be honest, what bans have made the metagame "good" after the Pokemon was banned and done away with? Every time we have banned something (especially in BW2), the metagame was still bad afterwards. It may get a little better, but that's about it. The only ban that made a somewhat significant difference in my eyes was Genesect, and that was mainly just because of how good it was as a whole (and how popular it was on the suspect ladder). Every other ban has made the metagame a tiny bit better and put a little less stress on teambuilding, but the metagame still stinks afterwards. This is honestly what I'm seeing now; the non-Landorus ladder seems a little better, but it's still not great. That's no reason not to ban Landorus, nor is it evidence that Landorus isn't broken.

 

[Pocket]

Lady Alex, then you should have said that, lol. This is what you wrote

I only saw 2 Landorus-I on the OU Current ladder lol. Nonetheless, I'm going to vote to ban it. In the suspect ladder, the metagame looked largely the same as it does now, imo. I mostly saw the same generic sand and rain offense teams that you'd find in the current meta. Can't wait to get rid of Keldeo. Maybe with those two gone, we'll have a somewhat less terrible metagame.

- nowhere in that post did you say that the metagame was "unhealthy" and when you meant "the metagame looked largely the same" in the suspect ladder
"as it does now," I logically thought you were comparing the suspect meta to the current meta, NOT solely the "OU Current Ladder" meta (unless that's the only meta experience you have of this current meta)

Anyways, now that the confusion has been cleared up, I guess we can move on now. My (and Ultimario) point still stands - "if the removal of a suspect does not bring a positive change to the metagame, then it should NOT be banned."

EDIT: Agent Gibbs - that's exactly what I'm saying. Even if the metagame has remained "bad," after a ban, the metagame has improved. Most of us would agree that BW2 meta has gotten better after every ban (ie Genesect), which can be seen by the reduced number of complaints we hear these days (relatively speaking).

EDIT 2:

Anyway, no one has implied that landorus's removal wouldn't create a positive change

You sure didn't state any reasons why removing Landorus would create a positive change in the post I'm referring to. For all we know, banning Keldeo would solve the problem without banning both. Also, thank you for finally giving a reason why Landorus may be "unhealthy" for the metagame n_n

 

[Lady Alex]

Lady Alex, then you should have said that, lol. This is what you wrote



- nowhere in that post did you say that the metagame was "unhealthy" and when you meant "the metagame looked largely the same" in the suspect ladder
"as it does now," I logically thought you were comparing the suspect meta to the current meta, NOT solely the "OU Current Ladder" meta (unless that's the only meta experience you have of this current meta)

Anyways, now that the confusion has been cleared up, I guess we can move on now. My (and Ultimario) point still stands - "if the removal of a suspect does not bring a positive change to the metagame, then it should not be banned."

EDIT: Agent Gibbs - that's exactly what I'm saying, even if the metagame has remained "bad," after a ban, the metagame has improved. Most of us would agree that BW2 meta has gotten better after every ban (ie Genesect), which can be seen by the reduced number of complaints we hear these days (relatively speaking).

I would venture to say that my statement about removing Keldeo and Landorus might make the metagame less terrible, it's clear that I find the metagame unhealthy.

Anyway, no one has implied that landorus's removal wouldn't create a positive change. As lavos said, just because the metagame after it still sucks doesn't mean that banning it isn't a step in the right direction. Landorus does almost exactly what Tornadus-T/Genesect did when they were around. It's a monster that's very difficult to switch into, and the few things that can generally switch into it are royally fucked over by pursuit users (Dugtrio in Tornadus-T 's case)

 

[Agent Gibbs]

EDIT: Agent Gibbs - you're wrong there, even if the metagame has remained "bad," after a ban, the metagame has improved. Most of us would agree that BW2 meta has gotten better after every ban (ie Genesect), which can be seen by the reduced number of complaints we hear these days (relatively speaking).

Actually, that's exactly what I was saying. Of course, that's largely moot now that you got what Lady Alex and Lavos were saying, but I was essentially agreeing with what they were saying. If the metagame is bad before and after, that doesn't mean that a Pokemon isn't broken nor that it shouldn't be banned. Like the other bans, I have seen a slight improvement in the non-Landorus metagame. Of course, since the confusion was cleared up, it appears that you don't have a problem with that line of thought.

The main question at this point is still whether or not Landorus is broken and whether or not the improvement is noticable enough to help encourage a ban.

 

[MikeDawg]

Lavos, if Landorus-I is one of the reasons that the metagame is "bad," then removing it would have some sort of a positive change. To say that the removal of Landorus-I did not bring this change means that its ban would NOT be beneficial for the metagame, other than removing another relevant OU threat.

We can certainly ban something non-broken (ie removing them wont improve the meta) like Gyarados or Gengar if we want to, but this ban wont improve the metagame outside of not needing to deal with this threat anymore. This is what I consider a bad ban.

I think that using the data collected from personal experience on a single run of the suspect ladder as proof of anything is absolutely absurd.

The suspect meta SUCKS. Not neccesarily because of its inhabitants but because of the fact that everyone is either non-competitive and using a stupid team or is just trying to get reqs, so they are just using the same cookie cutter teams that will give consistent ladder progress.

MikeDawg, read my later post, since I clarified my point further

That wasn't a point directed towards you specifically, Pocket. Your particular post just happened to bear host to that idea. It's more the idea itself, which seems to be floating around, that I was targeting.


Another point I'd like to comment on is not banning lando because its core, rather than it, is broken. Well why the hell not? if there is a broken entity in ou, whether that be conprised of 3 pokemon or 1 pokemon, leaving it in the meta is not a good choice. Tradition or policy or whatever, the point of testing, as I understand it, is to remove broken things. Period. By looking at lando or keldeo solely in a vacuum rather than with the support they are most always paired with is to ignore one of those broken things and let it thrive. If we do nothing to the core, are we not just leaving something broken in the meta?

tl;dr: suspect ladder sucks, one ladder experience is not proof of amything, common sense > tradition

And also, @whoever incorporated this in their argument, when did usage start equating to brokenness?

 

[Pocket]

lol Agent Gibbs, I guess we are all on the same page then.

MikeDawg, read my later post, since I clarified my point further

LMAO reyscarface, I suggested a test on Uturn to the council only a week ago! VoltTurn is a truly brainless and tactless strategy of BW2, and it's what pushed most of the recent suspects to be broken - but we're going off tangent, so let's redirect our discussion back to Landorus.

One of the questions I would like to pose to my fellow tiering contributors - would you believe Landorus-I will remain broken without Keldeo forming the LandoKeldTar trio? Which of the two sweepers, Keldeo or Landorus, are the bigger offenders of this core?

 

[MMII]

I'm personally on the fence on this one with the big thing pushing me closer to a ban is that I can fake out my opponent in expecting a special RP set when in reality I could be an almost equally dangerous physical RP. I suppose I should take a break from Gyarados in Ubers and actually test the thing some myself but in the mean time I want to just sum up what I feel is Landorus's effect on the metagame in regards to two playstyles.

-Essentially zero counters means that it is one of the most devastating threats to Stall. The U-Turn set just decimates and not just because it can pass to an ally but because U-Turn actually hits previous checks/counters for solid damage. (Celebi, LatiTwins)

-Relatively slow to the very fast paced metagame means it serves mostly as a win condition against offensive teams. It won't really be much of a team player since it isn't difficult to limit the number of free turns you give it and short term checks are sufficient in the quick OU matchs.

So because Landorus is something that is very difficult/impossible to switch into, 101 becomes a significant tier to speed creep so as to minimize the potential damage. Although this isn't metagame shifting for the OU metagame it is still noticeable. Furthermore, Landorus is an incredibly powerful wallbreaker that is clearly dampering Stall. It may not be the only culprit but it is clearly one of the top.

In the end I can either vote to:

-Unban; the overall effect on the metagame isn't drastic and isn't a major difficulty for typical OU teambuilidng.

The con to this stance is that it justifies his OU status because he doesn't disrupt the norm. Sadly, the norm is very tilted and unbalanced in OU so it's sorta like red herring where we point fingers at others (like Keldeo) for being guilty of the same.

-Ban; removing Landorus greatly helps the heavily disadvantaged playstyle, Stall. (and to an extent, Balance/Sun as well)

The con to this stance is that can we really salvage Stall? Landorus may be one of the biggest but it is certainly not the only absurd threat this playstyle has to deal with (Gothitelle, Keldeo, Hydreigon, Kyurem-B, etc). Are we really solving the problem or just chasing after dreams of a more traditional metagame? It almost seems like the ban is made out of favoritism for a certain playstyle than for the metagame itself (although an ideal metagame would have a reasonable balance between the playstyles).


This is tricky for me as I want to avoid the bias of banning from the perspective of my personal favorite playstyle and judge more on what actually helps the metagame. This is where the ability to run a surprise Sand Force sweeper set pushes me towards a ban. Being able to feign another dangerous set when checks to the typical Sheer Force are already somewhat difficult to maintain means that Landorus can pose a significant threat to even offensive playstyles in OU.


(Lol, essentially the decision to ban or unban comes down to a preference of ideals (metagame where even Stall is viable) vs a preference for realism (Stall is dead, let's not sink the rest of the metagame with a bunch of bans). Just like the games BW!)

 

[Tassa]

And your suggestion was very good Pocket, I was speaking about that with a friend. U-Turn is a fantastic momentum stealer, which decreases a lot the skill level required and punishes switch. Switch, which one of the fundamental bases of strategy.
But are we still in the topic speaking about that ?
I would give proof of the brokeness of Lando but I don't see where to start beside the power of the KeLanTar core and the incredible pressure it creates by destroying so many pokemon. Mmm... :/

 

[Lady Alex]

One of the questions I would like to pose to my fellow tiering contributors - would you believe Landorus-I will remain broken without Keldeo forming the LandoKeldTar trio? Which of the two sweepers, Keldeo or Landorus, are the bigger offenders of this core?

Keldeo is easily the bigger offender, but even if Keldeo were to be banned first, Landorus-I would still pose the same overbearing sweeping/momentum stealing potential. Landorus and Keldeo don't rely on each other to do their job, since neither of them check something the other is walled by (bar chansey, I guess, who is never used anymore). They're both just amazingly strong and easily fit together on the same team.

 

[Erico9001]

I might as well post why I think Landorus-I is broken, seeing as no one is giving a decent response on either side.

So the whole Lando / Tar / Keld core is what everyone's annoyed with and for a good reason. The core is not only simultaneously powerful, but versatile, which is something many fail to mention. Landorus can effectively run 3 special sets: Rock Polish, U-Turn, and Substitute. Now for consistency's sake, let's say Keldeo and Tyranitar can only run three sets as well. 3x3x3=27! This core lends itself to 27 different combinations of either Band Tar + Scarf Keldeo + U-Turn Landorus; Scarf Tar + Specs Keldeo + Substitute Landorus, ect. This is not even including the fact that Tar and Keldeo have many more sets, which makes this core even more unpredictable. Now, while countering a three mon core isn't very difficult, this one has the surprise factor on its side. You don't know which Pokemon is carrying what set because almost all of them can be effective. Oh, you want to switch Celebi into Keldeo? Eat HP Bug. You want Celebi to BP away from Ttar? Well Scarf outspeeds and kos you with Crunch. This is the freaking problem here, the core has so many different ways to pound on the tier it's absurd. Now, I don't think removing Landorus will solve everything, it will definitely help. Keldeo needs to be removed too. Also, the effect it has on sun teams is quite detrimental. You guys remember the genesect era and what happened if Landorus got a RP up on a sun team? It meant you were 6-0'd. That's not as bad now, but it's still evident that Landorus's effect on the tier deteriorates the performance of sun teams (as evident by how much more common they are on the suspect ladder) and stall teams with the help of Tar and Keldeo. In my personal opinion, I'd rather ban the catalyst (Tyranitar) not the reacting enzymes (Keldeo, Landorus). Seeing as how that won't happen, banning Keldeo and Landorus is really the only thing that can be done to improve OU. And lol @the people saying stall and sun will dominate. It's not like Kyurem-B, Thundurus-T, Heatran, Latias, and a bunch of other shit that takes over half a page of listing doesn't exist!

The thing about suspecting a Pokemon is that you don't look at it individually, you have to see how it reacts with the things around it. Ignoring that fact and saying shit like, "but zapdos counturs landorus, dur!!!", is basically choosing to say ignorant on the bigger picture. Landorus creates a stale ass environment in OU and encourages nothing but brainless play with that stupid core and desperate measures to counter it. That's why it and Keldeo need to gtfo.

This. No one responded to this? I guess people could not find their 'obvious flaws' to argue against so it was just ignored. If people ignore the posts that may actually broaden their thinking, how can their perspectives be changed; what's even the point in posting here? Honestly, the posts I see getting the most attention in this thread are the arbitrary ones.

More on topic to landorus, there are so many threats to account for in making teams and so few, specific checks to landorus, that the tier would be bettered by its removal. Very few pokemon can switch in and counter landorus, and of those I have a hard time thinking of some that are very ou viable. It goes against the spirits of the game when a few specific pokemon must be on your team else you suffer. It limits the creativity and potential for fun in this metagame. Each banning of a broken pokemon brings a little bit more purpose in playing the ou.

 

[Drako]

Just attained reqs on current which means I'm done. Gotta say that was boring as hell. I just spammed a brainless Tyra/Keld/Lando team and basically lost no match without counting the couple forfeits I had to do in order to lower my deviation.
This core is simply flawless. If you play it right you beat every single core out there.

When it comes to banning Lando though, I'm really on the fence atm. I just think we need to ban both Keldeo and the current suspect but I see no particular and "overwhelming" reason why I should vote for ban on Lando as an individual.
Idk, gotta think about this a little more and play with different teams on the suspect ladder. I loved my Archeops team though that I used to get reqs there, which would never work with Landorus in OU haha

 

[-Sparkbeat-]

I'm thinking no ban atm. Individually, Landorus is a threat, but its not more overwhelming than other 'S' or even some 'A' ranked threats. I find it's difficult to set-up a rock polish with its RP set, if you run U-turn then so many things outspeed you, and the physical set, which I didn't see once on the Current ladder, has numerous counters. I feel Landorus is suffereing from Genesect syndom here, but the power decrease is so large. Even with Sheer Force it misses out on some KO's that it would really like to have. It makes a fantastic late-game cleaner, but so do so many other things. It has nice coverage, but once again, so do many other things that we don't think as broken. The main thing that makes Landorus overwhelming is the power of its team support, and the ease that comes with using Pokemon that support it. When looking only at Landorus, not it's team, I feel that it is not broken. Keldeo on the other hand, will hopefully be handled next round.

If/when banned: Landorus-I can work in Ubers anyway since it has a great 101 speed. Physical sets will better though since fuck Dialga and the same reason physical Genesect is better

Deciding whether to ban it or not has nothing to do with its performance in Ubers. We only look at its effect on the OU metagame, and whether it is broken in it or not.