np: ORAS OU Suspect Process, Round 2 - Spider Man [Metagrossite remains OU]

Status
Not open for further replies.
HP Fire ? you are giving Ice Punch or Grass Knot for that? even worse if you have the crazy idea of changing it for Zen Headbutt or for Hammer Arm, it only hits one pokemon, does not even OHKO, also the fact that makes all the 110 speed tier to outrun you, good luck with Lando-T,M-Diancie,Suicune,Slowbro,etc.

This is like trying to run Fire Blast on a M-Gyarados to not be walled by a Ferrothorn, sure it is a good surprise, but if your opponent is not carrying one you will be basically with just 3 moves.

It is the same case with Megagross, he has no room to run HP Fire in practice, the argument of it can run HP **** so it has no counters can be applied to almost any special mon, Rhyperior cannot couner my Raikou because it will have HP Grass, neither Dragons because it will have HP Ice.

Or lets say that Megagross does not counter Clefable, because I am using an Scarf set with Fire Blast.

There are a lot of good pro-ban arguments, but surely this is not one of them.
 
Bring on the banhammer. The OU suspect ladder is by no means great, but removing M-Metagross has seen a shift in a positive direction. M-Charizard Y is such an incredible (although I don't believe bannable) threat at the moment, and various teams/playstyles have been given the chance to shine. Interestingly, fairy spam was not as much of an issue as I thought it would be (but it's not as if the metagame has been without Metagross for real yet; I guess we'll see on this one). Anyways, if other pokemon rise to assume M-Metagross' position as an overly central force of the metagame, we'll soon deal with that too. Let's vote already.
upload_2015-2-22_13-30-27.png
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure king of skycraps (kickass name btw x3) was trying to emphasize MegaGross's great coverage. HP fire is horribly gimmicky but MegaGross's brilliant coverage can't be denied. It's mega evolution may have only given it tough claws and 10+ in each attack stat to it's offenses but it is still coming of a 145 and 105 stats that give contact moves 33% more power. It doesn't seem that much but it manages to turn 3hko's into 2hko's which can make all the difference between being a check or a fodder and again, it's coverage allows it to hit almost everything exceedingly hard and combine that with lethal 110 speed and defenses fitting for a wall and there is just isn't much to argue against that answers to MegaGross are severely limited. When you start coming up with answers that depend on it's sets and moves, spikes and wallmons you are starting to grasp for straws. Also, a handful of checks and counters don't make a mon not broken. The scariest thing about MegaGross though is probably that stupid bulk and excellent defensive typing, sure it's typing ain't as good as Aegislash's, especially on the offense but MegaGross has better stats and it retains it's bulk when attacking. It resists 9 types and has 1 immunity and in return has to suffer only 4 weaknesses and none of them are 4x so it is near impossible to ohko that fat bastard. If there is any mon who runs the show it is this guy.
 
Last edited:
You are right in that Mega Metagross does not outclass any of the mons you mentioned and that they all have their uses. But, if you think about it, are they even similar enough to where you can say that there's an opportunity cost? Mega Diancie and Mega Charizard Y have very different targets than Mega Metagross since they primarily hit from the special spectrum, Mega Charizard X is more of a set-up sweeper and usually requires a turn of set-up, and Mega Sableye is primarily used either on Stall or as more of a utility mon. Assuming that you chose your Mega at the end of teambuilding as opposed to building around the Mega, none of these mons will really compete for your Mega spot because their niches are too distinct. It would be like saying that when choosing your tools for a job, the hammer is competing with the screwdriver and the drill for the job of putting a nail in a board: no one tool outclasses the other tools, but you know from the get-go that the hammer is the best tool for that job.

Ultimately, as you said, MegaGross is arguably the best physical sweeper that requires no set-up. Thus, there's no real opportunity cost because while other Megas do their jobs well, and while the jobs the other Megas do are important, few, if any, do Mega Metagross's job as well as Mega Metagross.
Yes but my point is: What if you needed both a screwdriver and a hammer? Then the mega hammer forces you into using your crappy screwdriver. A team can have more roles then only physical nonsetupping sweeper, and those roles will be executed worse by a team using Megagross.

If Rotom-Fan was the best sweeper in OU, and Rotom-Wash the best wall, then using Rotom-Wash would hinder your offensive capabilities by preventing you from using a completely different Pokemon for sweeping. This was hypothetical but in Megagross' case he really does prevent you from using what is perhaps the best physical wall, the strongest special sweeper etc.

I think that when deciding on how to vote you should at least consider this considerable downside that every mega has and that seems to keep Megagross in check if it kicks him out of the top 10 of the usage ladder. I think that this is a considerable downside and find the argument that this is not a considerable downside yet somehow people do not use him for it weird. People want to win, so either this is a considerable downside and they drop him for it or it is not a considerable downside and he is below top 10 for other flaws. To me it makes no sense to say that he is out of top 10 because he is mega yet his mega status is no considerable downside. If it is not a considerable downside then people would not care enough to not use him so often for it.
 
Yes but my point is: What if you needed both a screwdriver and a hammer? Then the mega hammer forces you into using your crappy screwdriver. A team can have more roles then only physical nonsetupping sweeper, and those roles will be executed worse by a team using Megagross.

If Rotom-Fan was the best sweeper in OU, and Rotom-Wash the best wall, then using Rotom-Wash would hinder your offensive capabilities by preventing you from using a completely different Pokemon for sweeping. This was hypothetical but in Megagross' case he really does prevent you from using what is perhaps the best physical wall, the strongest special sweeper etc.

I think that when deciding on how to vote you should at least consider this considerable downside that every mega has and that seems to keep Megagross in check if it kicks him out of the top 10 of the usage ladder. I think that this is a considerable downside and find the argument that this is not a considerable downside yet somehow people do not use him for it weird. People want to win, so either this is a considerable downside and they drop him for it or it is not a considerable downside and he is below top 10 for other flaws. To me it makes no sense to say that he is out of top 10 because he is mega yet his mega status is no considerable downside. If it is not a considerable downside then people would not care enough to not use him so often for it.
There is more to statistics than simply saying X isn't used much ergo it must have flaws that hold it back etc. The statistics just say he isn't used more but at the same time you could easily argue that among the mega-mons he is the most used one, which is just as telling in its own right. The fact is the data available is left to interpretation that doesn't necessarily only lead to one answer.

Besides, nobody is saying that the most used mon of the usage statistics isn't flawless or does not carry considerable downsides, Lando-T isn't S rank viability same with Heatran and Rotom-W. Which is another factor you'd have to consider, how the mon ranks in terms of actual viability which can be independent of usage statistics - as we see in so many cases of underused threats.

Also it is somewhat off to compare the usage of MGross to other megas in so much that he is significantly better rounded. Which in itself lends some versatility in his use, that in itself is an advantage. While he may not be the strongest wall or sweeper he is versatile enough to find more use above the other mega-mons, which is what people in the thread have brought up as to why he is difficult to handle at times (too bulky to revenge kill and too strong to wall safely). While he may not be polarized as either purely a wall or sweeper, nevertheless, he does benefit from the best of both worlds; which is why he is described as S rank in the first place.

Regardless, a direct correlation to performance and statistics is far too shaky an assumption given the myriad of potential intermediate variables to consider.

It would be far too reductive of the actual debates and points brought up to simplify it to this regard, especially when viability is far more descriptive of the threat MGross is than usage stats at best only speculate at.
 
Last edited:
Essentially
There is more to statistics than simply saying X isn't used much ergo it must have flaws that hold it back etc. The statistics just say he isn't used more but at the same time you could easily argue that among the mega-mons he is the most used one, which is just as telling in its own right. The fact is the data available is left to interpretation that doesn't necessarily only lead to one answer.

Besides, nobody is saying that the most used mon of the usage statistics isn't flawless or does not carry considerable downsides, Lando-T isn't S rank viability same with Heatran and Rotom-W. Which is another factor you'd have to consider, how the mon ranks in terms of actual viability which can be independent of usage statistics - as we see in so many cases of underused threats.

Also it is somewhat off to compare the usage of MGross to other megas in so much that he is significantly better rounded. Which in itself lends some versatility in his use, that in itself is an advantage. While he may not be the strongest wall or sweeper he is versatile enough to find more use above the other mega-mons, which is what people in the thread have brought up as to why he is difficult to handle at times (too bulky to revenge kill and too strong to wall safely). While he may not be polarized as either purely a wall or sweeper, nevertheless, he does benefit from the best of both worlds; which is why he is described as S rank in the first place.

Regardless, a direct correlation to performance and statistics is far too shaky an assumption given the myriad of potential intermediate variables to consider.

It would be far too reductive of the actual debates and points brought up to simplify it to this regard, especially when viability is far more descriptive of the threat MGross is than usage stats at best only speculate at.
A very fair and valid point. Statistics are read into so closely and true meanings are lost in the complexity and diversity of players and their preferences. To back you up in your reply, I'd like to point out that Mega usage statistics are quite complicated by playstyles and even player preference. I.e. most Mega pokemon have the team built around them. In contrast, pokemon like Rotom-W, Landorus-T and Ferrothorn are just slapped onto teams simply because they work and perform well in their gluey roles. The choice of Mega pokemon often dictates playstyle and teammates, and many of these teammates are applicable to multiple Mega-centred teams.

So while usage stats may be referenced in an anti-ban argument (e.g. if Metagross was 49th on the list, it could easily be argued that it is not a centralising force in the metagame), be wary of what they truly mean, especially when it comes to Mega pokemon. The glues of OU will always see more use because of the exclusive nature of mega evolution.
 
jpw234 Congratulations are in order, for you managed to change my mind on something. This paragraph in particular got me:

To be honest I think the big thing that makes Megagross so threatening is its STAB typing. OU is simply not well prepared to defensively handle Steel types in particular because there aren't many offensively threatening ones and the answers to more common attacking types like Water, Fighting, Ground, and Dark fall flat against powerful Meteor Mashes, which contributed to Aegislash, Mega-Mawile, and Genesect being banned (I do think all these bans were deserved). I think if we allow the meta to settle a bit things will shake out and teambuilders will start coping with stuff like Mega Metagross better.

I also think that the fact mmeta takes a mega slot is a much stronger argument now then it was in the past. It's not like megamence or mmaw where running one had virtually 0 opportunity cost because they were just that good and had bulk, wallbreaking capabilities AND sweeping capabilities in one tidy package. Other megamons can do things mmeta can't do. M-Daincie is a far better wallbreaker/sweeper at the expense of bulk, MSable is an incredible wall/stallbreaker at the expense of immediate offensive presence and speed. Zard-X is the most powerful setup sweeper while M-Gyara has cool little things like no drawbacks on STABs and Mold Breaker going for it.


While I see what you're saying, I disagree with the notion that an argument for Megagross's ban due to its impact on the metagame is boiled down to "i don't like that meta, i like this meta"

Ultimately, you just admitted that there are no objective standards regarding whether or not a mon is broken. We came as romans just listed a few qualities that could make a mon broken, yet I took those qualities and applied them to MMeta, whereas other players will take those qualities and say they do not apply to MMeta. So we can agree that there is little-to-no objectivity in the first place. So, if one player who understands a mon deeply can make an argument, a case, for whether or not a particular mon is broken, why is it that if a player who is extremely knowledgeable of the state of the meta/the meta in general makes an argument/case for whether or not the meta is stale/thriving, etc, it's inherently subjective and an unworthy argument? I consider myself to be a decent player but I do not understand the meta as deeply as some players. This is why, despite my opinion that the meta is exceedingly stale due to Megagross, I've been arguing his merits as a mon and how those merits make him broken, because I cannot make a particularly valid argument as an individual as to why Megagross's impact alone has a particular affect on that meta, what that affect is, and how his absence will change it. I don't understand the meta well enough to feel comfortable trying to make that argument. But if a player like McMeghan comes in here and can actually make that argument, and make a good one, to boil it down to "i don't like this meta, i like suspect, vote for ban because i'm a well-known and respected player", to me, is ridiculous and unfair. If a valid argument can be made, as close to objective as an argument for/or against the brokenness of a mon can get, what separates the 2 arguments? Can I get an actual reason as to why, if there are legitimate reasons, we should not vote ban for a mon that has an unhealthy impact on the meta?

You are correct in saying that my post was a horrible oversimplification, and I apologize for that. However, after reexamining McMeghan 's post, I've found that my oversimplification wasn't far off from his argument: Here's his post for reference.


I've been reading and discussing quite a bunch about OU and its current state as a competitive tier for a while now, and I want to share my thoughts on the matter.
As usual, I'd like to mention that what I'm gonna advance is only my personal point of view and I'm the only one bound by this view, I don't mean it as an established fact.

As usual, the OU tier loses its stability when we move to a new generation or when a lot of big changes are brought in at once (read: lot of new top tiers, usually due to the release of a new cartridge). The tier kinda turns upside down for some time. It's been the case with ORAS and Mega-Salamence/Greninja got pretty much unanimously and rigthfully banned because they were way too good at what they could do.

Greninja has been banned for a good month now, and I feel that ORAS is genuinely unstable right now (I repeat: this is only my opinion here). Not only did I feel it through my own experience on the tier (by playing and building in it), but I also noticed a lot of players shared my point of view on the matter, whether they are ladder heroes or tournament players. It seems that the general consensus is that ORAS is a tier where match-up is a huge issue, and that it's hard to avoid it, even if you do your best to adapt to it from a teambuilding point of view. There are also very few players who manage to get inherently better and more consistant (tournament-wise) in ORAS (unlike XY), which is typically a major problem you can observe when a tier is unstable.

This is very important, it's the main reason that pushed me to "launch" a suspect after some discussion with the Council members as well as many players beforehand. My opinion emerges from the principle that ORAS shouldn't stay in its current state, and that something must happen to cause some changes that will, hopefully, turn out to be steps in the right direction.

Where should we start though? After spending quite some time conversing on the matter, I reached the conclusion that Mega-Metagross is currently one of the most annoying Pokemon to deal with, from both a playing and teambuilding standpoint, and for a multitude of playstyles. Consequently, I -as well as the Council- thought that it deserved to be the first suspect as an attempt to fix the tier.

As for MMetagross itself, I'm 100% for its ban. However, I'd like to mention that I don't think Metagross is outright broken, like the previously banned Pokémons before it in XY/ORAS (think Mawile, Aegislash or Greninja). I just think it's one of the main culprit behind the match-up issue that I described earlier (and I'd like to to add that I personally think Sableye is absolutely not at Metagross level in this regard, but let's disgress).

I'd like to compare Metagross to Excadrill in BW1, not for their inherent traits as Pokémons, but rather for their influence on the tier and particulary its development. Excadrill was one of the best Pokémon in BW1. As such, everyone was rightfully prepared to face it. There were "classic" checks/counter which were clearly overused like Gliscor, Rotom-W or Skarmory, and there were more obscure checks/counters such as Bronzong or Virizion, to only name a few. Excadrill was still a top-notch Pokémon, but wasn't (in my humble opinion, I insist) as broken as the previously banned Pokémon. Yet, I was completely for its ban for the simple reason that it was totally blocking the metagame evolution because of its weight on the teambuilding (on top of everything else that was popular obviously) and its faculty to be amazing against pretty much every Offense and a good amount of Balance (and you could even argue Stall didn't like facing the Air Baloon SD Set at all).

I think MMetagross is one of the threat preventing the tier to evolve to a more stable state, and that's why I want to ban it (not for its individual qualities, albeit they're excellent, but many people have touched upon them already in the thread).

I'd also like to think that MMetagross leaving will increase the utilization of fairy-type, which should make people thinking Mega-Sableye is still a potential suspect think twice about it. In general, I'd like to see how the metagame and teambuilding will evolve once we will be freed from Metagross's heavy shackles (I hope, and I believe we can reach a more stable ORAS, a la XY, with some changes, even if I know some people don't share my opinion here).
So here are essentially the points he makes in the post.

1. I and a lot of other top tier players feel the tier is unstable and matchup reliant(which he made clear was his own opinion), backed up by saying that there aren't any players who are consistently better then the rest.

2. Because of 1, I feel that the current metagame is bad and therefore needs to be changed via a mon ban.

3. Mega-Metagross is currently the most difficult mon to deal with atm.

4. Mega-Metagross is not broken.

5. Mega-Metagross should be banned anyway in an attempt to make the meta more stable.

6. There is precedent for this in the ban of BW Excadrill (imo, this was a shaky comparison, as one could make a strong arguement that excadrill fit the offensive characteristic)


So that's the argument. My oversimplification basically took points 1 and 5 and mostly ignored the rest, because I felt they were mostly derived from point 1. The main weakness in this argument, imo, is that the opinion of multiple top players + the fact that there are no consistent top players in tournaments atm is enough to warrant a ban of mega metagross. Appeal to authority is not a valid argument imo and the latter issue, assuming it is in fact an issue, has so many possible causes it's not even funny. Chokes(yes, good players do that too, we're not bots after all), hax, differences in tournament participants(ie who is and is not participating in any given tournament) in addition to team matchup can all attribute to there not being any consistent tourny champions, and should not be taken as a symptom of a healthy or unhealthy meta.

Therefore, I do not think that Mega-Metagross should be banned in an attempt to make a better metagame unless he is, in fact, broken.
 

Holiday

on my best behavior
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I haven't gotten to post anything, nor do I have much time and I'm sure people have already said what I'm going to say but I'll drop my two cents.

I'm for the ban. Every since RIP Smogon Frog left us, Metagrossite (MMeta I guess) has spiked in usage. There's literally no reason not to use this Mega on Offense, honestly. It has the bulk to survive hits, can at worst 2HKO the entire tier bar all 4 of it's checks, and it forms wonderful sweeping cores.

Also I see a lot of "Fairies/MDiancie are borked if Metagrossite goes" If we look back at the Frog suspect, there were quite a few posts of "Metagrossite is borked of Greninja goes" Broken checking broken is not an argument for keeping a pokemon. We had a broke mon (Gren) check a broke mon (MMeta) and it (Gren) was banned. If it means another mon become broke we suspect it. The OU tier is trying to be as balanced as possible, and Broken checking Broken is not balanced. By individually suspecting each Pokemon/Item we determine if it's healthy. If Clefable and Diancite prove to be too much, we suspect them. Simple as that.
 
You are correct in saying that my post was a horrible oversimplification, and I apologize for that. However, after reexamining McMeghan 's post, I've found that my oversimplification wasn't far off from his argument: Here's his post for reference.




So here are essentially the points he makes in the post.

1. I and a lot of other top tier players feel the tier is unstable and matchup reliant(which he made clear was his own opinion), backed up by saying that there aren't any players who are consistently better then the rest.

2. Because of 1, I feel that the current metagame is bad and therefore needs to be changed via a mon ban.

3. Mega-Metagross is currently the most difficult mon to deal with atm.

4. Mega-Metagross is not broken.

5. Mega-Metagross should be banned anyway in an attempt to make the meta more stable.

6. There is precedent for this in the ban of BW Excadrill (imo, this was a shaky comparison, as one could make a strong arguement that excadrill fit the offensive characteristic)


So that's the argument. My oversimplification basically took points 1 and 5 and mostly ignored the rest, because I felt they were mostly derived from point 1. The main weakness in this argument, imo, is that the opinion of multiple top players + the fact that there are no consistent top players in tournaments atm is enough to warrant a ban of mega metagross. Appeal to authority is not a valid argument imo and the latter issue, assuming it is in fact an issue, has so many possible causes it's not even funny. Chokes(yes, good players do that too, we're not bots after all), hax, differences in tournament participants(ie who is and is not participating in any given tournament) in addition to team matchup can all attribute to there not being any consistent tourny champions, and should not be taken as a symptom of a healthy or unhealthy meta.

Therefore, I do not think that Mega-Metagross should be banned in an attempt to make a better metagame unless he is, in fact, broken.
Appeal to authority is not a valid argument, you're right. But here's the thing, in a truly competitive game, even one like pokemon where luck is a major factor, when given equal opportunity, the better player will more consistently come out on top. This is why in metas before the current one there were easily identifiable players that were consistent, despite the fact that all of the things you just listed still existed (chokes, hax, difference in participants, and matchup). Hax can and will happen to both sides, chokes, while present, are not something to rely on in top play, difference in participants is...a strange one to cite I feel (mind adding more detail to that one? assuming a consistent player doesn't participate in a tournament, that doesn't make him/her less consistent). Then there's team matchup. In a properly developed metagame, team matchup will still be an issue but the question is to what degree will it be an issue. In a thriving and good metagame, in my opinion, 9/10 matches will not be nearly determined from the get go. Both players will have a relatively equal chance, assuming their teams are well-constructed, if both players are of relatively equal skill. A proper metagame is one where competition can thrive and the game is not nearly decided before the match even begins. I feel that the megagross meta is like that, or at least much more so than past metagames. When looking at team matchup in a good metagame, I find that the only time wherein a player is almost guaranteed a victory is if his team matchup is abnormally good (which is rare, mind you, given the usage of the word abnormal). In a healthy meta, even if your team matchup isn't looking the greatest, there is still plenty of room for you to come out the victor and outplay.

Some might disagree that this metagame is particularly matchup based compared to others (late XY is the one I'm mainly thinking about), and some might disagree that MMeta is the cause (or as major a factor as some of us are making him out to be), and that's fine. But in my opinion, to look at the fact that there are not consistent players and say that that isn't a sign of an unhealthy metagame is untrue. A competitive and healthy metagame will result in consistent players winning, the better players, generally speaking. Let's talk Smash, Mango won't win every tournament, neither will M2K, but both of them are consistent for a reason. They can choke too, character matchup is still a thing (stages are present as well), and hell even hax can be a thing (think Armada getting consistent stitches), yet the better players consistently win.
 
trillyntruly To clarify, what I meant in citing "participation in tournaments" is that not every good player is involved in every tournament. Obviously, if a player isn't participating in a tournament, he will not win it no matter how good he is. Ergo, you will likely not see the same player winning tourny after tourny. To add to that point, Smogon is a friggen massive community containing some of the most skilled competitive Pokemon battlers on the planet (I don't even think I'm exaggerating here). While Pokemon is a very deep and complex game, when you gather that number of highly skilled players who are on eachother's level and stick them into a tourny, anything can happen, regardless of how matchup oriented the game is.

Lastly, unlike most smash games(except for maybe 64), Pokemon is actually much more punishing when it comes to misplays. In Smash, you have to get hit a solid 5-15 times(depending on who you are fighting against and the strength of the hits) to even get into KO range, and you usually have 3 or 4 stock in any given match. In Pokemon, you can easily lose a mon due to a poorly timed double switch, surprise lure set, or giving one of your opponent's more dangerous mons a free swap in(heck, this one can literally end games at times). It generally takes about 1-4 misplays before you lose a mon(from my personal experience), and unlike losing a stock in smash, losing a mon in Pokemon puts you at a perminet disadvantage for the rest of the game.

This is not to say that Smash is any more or less competitive then Pokemon (they're two entirely different genres after all), but it's very easy for a "less skilled" player to "luck out" and gain an advantage against a better player and capitalize on that advantage to win a matchup in Pokemon (ie: "Oh no, you just lost your rotom-w to a stray crit? Have fun getting swept by my mega pinsir!").

These are issues that are inherit in the game of pokemon, especially competitive pokemon, and you simply cannot fix this without redesigning the game from the ground up.

Therefore, I stand by my point that it is foolish to expect the same set of players consistently winning tournaments, and therefore it should not be used as a diagnosis of a healthy or unhealthy metagame.

*edit*

I thought of something after I posted this. One way to think of the meta of any game is Rocket Tag vs Padded Sumo Wrestler.

In the former, games are fast and unpredictable. One mistake (or hax) can lead to one someone winning. In these types of games, you really shouldn't expect any player, regardless of how good they might be, to win consistently. A good player might be able to maintain a 70% w/l ratio, but still occasionally gets screwed over just because of how unpredictable the game is.

In the latter, games are very slow. Both players have a lot of "time"(measured in turns here) to think out their strategies. Long term thinking and planning ahead is rewarded and the player with the better strategy will almost always win. Mistakes are not punished as heavily and hax rarely factors in, if ever.

The beuty of pokemon is that players can design their team to tilt the game towards one style or the other. Obviously no player has the ability to completely dictate the pace of the matchup (for example, no matter how HO your team is, a well built stall team will force you to slow down a bit). Due to power creep, however, the meta has tilted decidedly towards the "rocket tag" end of the spectrum, which causes the meta to be more offensive and therefore, as McM put it, more "volatile". However, both of these gameplay concepts are competitive, and are therefore good.
 
Last edited:
Like I said, I'm not sure that participation argument is fair, if they don't participate, they don't win, that doesn't change their consistency as a player at all though. Also, yes, this community does probably hold the largest number of some of the best pokemon players in the world, but we're not all on an equal skill level. It's true that a more consistent, "better" player will occasionally lose to someone who may be less consistent, for a number of reasons, but that doesn't change my point of consistency. It's a law of averages, so to speak. Like I said, Mango won't win every tournament. Leffen will occasionally come out on top, but who is more consistent? Who is considered to be better due to their overall performance?

Now, I don't want to get into a smash conversation (in part because it's not the most relevant topic, even though I brought it up, and in part because I understand fighting games in a very basic manner compared to my knowledge of pokemon, I'm definitely more comfortable with a pokemon conversation), but I think it's unfair to say that a misplay in Pokemon inherently puts you in a greater disadvantage than Smash/fighting games in general. From what I've seen from watching a shocking amount of high level fighting game play is that one mistake can lead you into losing a stock/round very easily. These are players that practice their combos and while they can choke and drop them, don't count on it. If you fuck up and find yourself in a combo that will net the player 90% damage or something, you could have just lost the finals of a tournament, this applies to street fighter, smash, marvel, anything. Any high level game is unforgiving of mistakes because your opponent knows how to capitalize on them. This is the same for pokemon. Hax is honestly the major difference imo, and even hax is entirely random and can happen to both sides. This is why I don't believe it affects consistency all too much. Yeah I could get a match with a top player in mons and win because of a miss or a crit, but that doesn't change how consistently we perform, nor does it change that if given 10 matches, the same is likely to happen to me, and in my case, if I get haxed, I have a smaller chance of bringing it back due to my lack of skill compared to top players. At the end of the day, even with hax in consideration, you should expect better players to perform better. This is a general rule, not an ultimate truth.

As far as your edit goes, there's something I feel I should point out:

You said in the former you shouldn't expect any one player, regardless of how good they are, to win consistently...yet admitted that they might win 70% of the time and when they lose it's to "hax". This is the same for mons, and there are players that win way more consistently than 70% of the time. Put simply, that's what GXE is. Having a GXE in the 80s is not particularly uncommon and you can expect certain players to come out on top more often than not despite hax, this happens all the time. Just because a good player loses to hax every now and then does not make that player any less consistent. Hax is still present but you can absolutely expect consistency, which does not mean winnine 98-100% of your games, just the [vast] majority.
 
trillyntruly For the participation argument, I was just citing possible reasons why you might not see the same people at the top of every tournament. Obviously it has nothing to do with how healthy or unhealthy the metagame is.

I think that would be helpful for us to take a moment to distinguish between ladder gameplay and tournament gameplay. At any given time, if you look on the ladder you'll usually see folks like Mob Barly, Cleaner Then Rotom-W, Lil' Manaphy, the top of the ladder is pretty consistent for the most part, almost regardless of the meta. This is because ladder ranking is determined not in 2 or 3 games, but hundreds of games, and over the course of hundreds of games, things like hax, the occasional choke, and even the occasional bad matchup have little to no impact on the player's overall ladder ranking. For this reason, most teams consist of "generic good mons" as opposed to random lures or lower tier pokemon because generic good mons are able to perform their role very consistently.

In tournaments however (and note that McM is primarily a tournament player), matchups are not decided in hundreds of games, but in 2 to 5 games(because we don't have all year to decide a single tourney), which greatly magnifies the effect of a single instance of hax or misplay(which are usually just failed predictions anyway).

So let's assume that given a matchup between any two players, we have some way to calculate the odds of the matchup swinging one way or another. Let us now take a tournament matchup between player A and player B, and assume player A has a 70% chance of winning over player B due to skill, team comp, and so on. If we determined the outcome using only a single game, that means that player A has a 30% chance of losing the tournament right then and there, literally banking an entire tournament on a focus blast. However, most tourneys I see do 2 out of 3 (usually for this very reason), making player A's chances of losing look something like this:

(.3 * .3 + .7 * .3 * .3 + .3 * .7 * .3) * 100 = 21.6

So even though player A has a 70:30 advantage of beating player B in a best 2 out of 3, player B still has a non-insignificant chance of beating player A. Does this mean that the meta or pokemon is uncompetetive? Imo, not really. It just makes it less likely that anyone is going to be super consistent at a tournament level.

Also worth noting is that many of Smogon's big tournaments tend to attract really, really good players, meaning that the matchup between any two players is probably closer to 45:55 then it is to 30:70, which creates even more variation and unpredictability.
 

MANNAT

Follow me on twitch!
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Mega Metagross doesn't need HP fire because he can hit Ferrothorn with hammer arm on the switch-in and put him in KO range whenever he tries to switch in. Aside from Scizor and Ferrothorn, fire type moves don't really hurt anyone but Skarmory who can't do any damage back without counter anyways. Hammer arm, ice punch, and grass knot hit a plethora of important targets more than fire moves do, so it doesn't make sense to forgo those moves.

Also, broken checking broken doesn't really apply here because Metagross can be checked and countered by many top-tier threats as seen here, and Mega Diancie can be checked by quite a few threats such as the monster that resides at the top of the usage list, so it probably won't be broken after Meta goes. Clefable surely won't be broken because Clefable wasn't broken in XY, and a few threats that check it have been introduced, and Metagross is just another top tier threat that checks it. I'm not really going to say much because I basically provided my full opinion on the matter already and you can look at my big post on it.
 
Last edited:

QueenOfLuvdiscs

Tier 3 Audino sub
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Just gonna drop my thoughts about MegaGross. I personally do not think that it is broken at all; it's just an extremely good mon with excellent bulk and typing. The most common set that I've seen is Meteor Mash / Zen Headbutt / Hammer Arm / Agility or Ice Punch or Bullet Punch, so it does have checks like Rocky Helmet Counter Skarmory, Mega Scizor and physically defensive Water-types like Slowbro, Suicune and Alomomola or can be revenged by Scarf Lando with a bit of prior chip damage.

Reading above to see HP Fire being mentioned to hit like 2 mons is a terrible argument for it to be banned, like, are you tryna lose to Gengar or other MegaGross? You have 5 other mons to deal with it's checks, and not just tryna beat them all on one set; that's really fucking stupid.
Another argument saying that Fairies will be broken without it is also stupid; there are a lot of other Steel-types than MegaGross in the tier, and they can check the Fairies pretty well.

So with that, I'm all for not banning Metagrossite
 
I didn't read all 31 pages of this and honestly don't really intend to.. but from the most recent few comments it appears the topic is sort of de-railing and just to sort of agree with QueenOfLuvdiscs's fair but somewhat simplistic argument, this isn't about whether or not Mega Metagross can form a one man team and take care of every threat. Every pokemon conceived will have a check or a counter. That's obvious.

Before I get into M-Metagross I'd like to point out that personally, I think it's unlikely that Mega Diancie will become the next broken pokemon or the next dominatrix of the meta. Sure it can do some fun stuff, like rock polish here, or get a defence boost there, but let's keep in mind that although Diancie has 4 weaknesses like M-Metagross, one of these is x4 weakness to steel and last time I checked Bullet Punch was mandatory on ANY Scizor set, Machamp and Lucario. Also whilst Diancie is resistant to 5 types and immune to dragon, Metagross is resistant to 9 types and immune to poison. The numbers speak for themselves! The way I see it here, it's like Metagross and Diancie are quite similar, especially in that some of the checks and counters to Metagross (namely bulky water pokemon) are the same ones for Dianciie. Metagross however outclasses. A bit like M-Gallade and M-Medicham. This is my opinion though, feel free to disagree :P

Now, what is a more fundamental issue that people should consider as to whether Metagrossite should be banned, is the following.
Does the presence of M-Metagross warp the meta? In the sense that either people are making teams that focus on harnessing the power of M-Metagross or they are making teams that essentially must always be ready to counter a M-MGross? This is the rationale behind whether something should be banned or not. Essentially whether M-MGross can 2HKO any other pokemon isn't necessarily a requirement. Sure, if it could then it would definitely get banned but obviously it can't.
I personally think that yes, M-MGross does have the effect of sucking in the meta around himself, because scald or some sort of burn support is now a must, but then the issue is that M-MGross also teams up bloody well with pokemon like Raikou (who otherwise wouldn't have foulnd himself making a huge appearance in OU recently). And those who say Lando-T is a good counter, get out. It fails at intimidating if Metagross hasn't Mega evolved yet, if it isn't scarfed it doesn't out-speed the classic jolly 252 Spe Mega Metagross that runs about and it gets OHKOed by Ice Punch.

So honestly, having thought about all that and realised that M-MGross is the heart of OU atm and that personally I find it necessary to bring at least two pokemon on any team that can spread burns (i.e. Rotom & Mew or something) I vote BAN METAGROSS (before the meta become any more... 'gross')
 
Um to be fair i don't think anybody goes to a bulky water to check MDiancie? And Lucario/Machamp are irrelevant in OU; The most common MDiancie checks are steel types of which the most common are Ferrothorn/Scizor, and to be fair the two are not in the least similar MDiancie's decent defensive stats are offset by its low HP in practice making it extremely frail, so I don't get how you compare something with the titanic bulk of Mega Metagross to MDiancie? Unless I'm missing something if I am feel free to point it out!
 
Um to be fair i don't think anybody goes to a bulky water to check MDiancie? And Lucario/Machamp are irrelevant in OU; The most common MDiancie checks are steel types of which the most common are Ferrothorn/Scizor, and to be fair the two are not in the least similar MDiancie's decent defensive stats are offset by its low HP in practice making it extremely frail, so I don't get how you compare something with the titanic bulk of Mega Metagross to MDiancie? Unless I'm missing something if I am feel free to point it out!
You know what, you're actually right, they're not really in the same league, and it was my mistake to consider them so. (nonetheless i wouldn't feel too bad going into a Milotic on Mega Diancie?)
Also 'Lucario/Machamp are irrelevant in OU' as of right now, but they arn't terrible, and who says that they won't become more interesting and relevant pokemon to consider if the meta drastically changes? Machamp is a fun pokemon to lead with and lucario is a fun late-game sweeper. I agree however that right now they arn't at all big players.
And I guess at the root of my comparison between Diancie and Metagross lies the fact that both can have if not actually have similar roles in their most commonly used sets, which is to come in late game when the opponents team had been whittled down and all relevant threats removed and simply wipe the board clean. Except metagross is TOO GOOD at doing this imo
 
From what I can see, Mega Metagross is a very controversial pokemon and I'm a bit on the fence about it, but I think I've reached my decision.

If we take a look at the counters and checks to mega-meta, counters would be things like Skarmory, and then it depends on the moveset of Mega Metagross. What can Skarmory do to Mega Metagross? Absolutely nothing apart from shuffling it round to rack up hazard damage or counter (which doesn't work well btw because Skarmory isn't hit hard enough by Metagross unless they run the very occasional thunder-punch. Unless Skarmory has Whirlwind, most Mega Metagross carry Hammer Arm with them, and this means that they can slowly whittle Skarmory and win 1v1 due to the speed drops. Therefore, in the metagame right now Skarmory usually isn't even a counter unless it runs whirlwind because it faints 1v1. Counters are supposed to force out the pokemon, not encourage it to stay in like Skarmory is doing.

As for the checks, Slowbro is the main one but again, with the popularity of Grass Knot (which gets the boost from Tough Claws don't forget) a single prediction usually checks Slowbro pretty well and even if they got the prediction wrong, Slowbro is forced to run Thunder Wave or hope for a Scald burn, which is kind of ridiculous. Lando-T is another possible check but it's been mentioned again and again that if not scarfed, it fails to outspeed and Intimidate doesn't work due to Clear Body before mega evolving, which everybody runs since it's the optimal ability and you can't even get it wrong, it's the first ability to appear, and don't forget, it's also been mentioned many times that Earthquake from a scarfed isn't necessarily an OHKO. The best check is Garchomp but it's only a check because of Rocky-Helmet + Rough Skin and the ability to Earthquake, but no Mega Metagross is going to stay in on a defensive Garchomp unless they have no other option or are going to KO it anyway. And there are only so many times you can switch in Garchomp because Garchomp has no reliable recovery, Rest being the only option.

I feel that OU isn't prepared to deal with Mega Metagross with the pokemon we have for the moment and although it creates the feeling of unrest because OU is taking so long to settle down, I think that Mega Metagross should be banned. The only other regret I have for this decision is that it will probably leave something else to fill the void (and that I can't use a pokemon to get easy wins :D)
 

Mr.378

The Iron Man of Ubers
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
Before this suspect test began I was pretty skeptical about banning Mega-Metagross. It didn't seem that game warping and I personally did not have that big a problem dealing with it though I used it quite a bit. Even when the suspect began I was on the fence about banning it. I could see the arguments and they did have value to them but I was still unsure. Now that I have acquired my voting reqs and have played the suspect meta I can now see what the Pro ban side was talking about. I personally like the suspect ladder a lot more because of Mega-Metagross' absence. While Mega-Metagross can be compared to a number of former OU mons, Greninja in particular, I feel as if it is in a weird position not too many others are in. It is really good because it can choose its checks. It has a very wide move pool that allows it to beat virtually everything that wants to switch in to it. It also has great speed and bulk which makes checking it hard to do as well which reminds me of Mega-Mawile. Thus in my eyes it is broken, but barely so. It is strong enough both statistically and in terms of metagame impact to gain that classification.

In terms of whether the game is better without Mega Metagross or not I feel as if it greatly is. While fairy types have gained a token boost because one of their biggest checks has been removed they themselves are still not so good that they're far away from the level of Gen 4 Dragons where they are clearly better then everything else. In fat I would still say that they are very balanced as a whole and contribute a lot to the metagame because each one adds something to certain play styles while having significant flaws. For example Mega-Diancie, which is often said to be the best of the fairies currently present, has a good niche on offensive and balanced teams because of it's decent typing, good offensive stats and speed, and great ability in magic bounce which does provides a lot of team support. At the same time it is sufficiently flawed because it is frail making revenge killing and checking it easier, it has a terrible move pool, and in that move pool it can only run three moves because it need to run protect to safely mega evolve or else its lacking bulk will lead to its death before it can mega evolve. Other fairies work in the same way. Besides even if there was a broken fairy or other pokemon that emerged by Mega-Metagross's banning it would not be a reason to keep it. We stride to create the best metagame possible. If there is something overpowering in the metagame we are to eliminate it so we can have the game state desired. So that is not a good reason to leave Mega-Metagross in OU. Overall though I feel as if the game without it is better than with it because it creates more of a balance of play styles that cannot be achieved with it in the tier because of how difficult checking it is.

After thinking about both my reasoning and experiences I can say that the tier is better off without Mega Metagross. It is just a bit too strong with its great stats and move pool, and the game around it just sifts to an overall better state without it around. It is too good and thus I am going to vote to ban Mega-Metagross.
 

Clone

Free Gliscor
is a Tiering Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Might as well say why Im voting to keep Metagross now that Ive gotten reqs.

the metagame is not different enough to the point where banning Metagross is something I consider necessary. Once I got past the lower ladder, and started playing players who knew what they were doing, I saw the same trends that I saw with Metagross in the tier. Balance was still the dominant playstyle, with the only notable difference being that Clefable was more prominent. I still saw Lando T. I still saw Slowbro. I still saw Gliscor, Heatran, Ferrothorn, and Scarf TTar. This so called "extreme strain" on teambuilding is really hard to believe when the mons that check gross are still on every team. If Gross made it an absolute necessity to have these mons on a team to check it, yet they are still present in abundance, then I see no reason to ban a mon from the Metagame when its presence isnt a negative one. Am I saying that Gross being in the tier doesnt affect anything? No. Im saying that Gross being in the tier does not affect the meta to the point where I would consider it an unhealthy presence. Therefore, I will vote no ban when its time to vote.
 
After getting reqs, I have decided that I will be voting No Ban on this one. As all of you know, Mega Metagross is the biggest threat in the metagame in terms of combined ability to tank strong hits and hit hard back, while also possessing a very good speed tier. It obviously also has a very solid typing and good coverage combined with its powerful STABs. At this point many of you reading this post will be wondering why I have chosen to vote against a ban, considering my very high opinion of the Pokemon in question.

The main reason is that Mega Metagross isn't broken imo is because it has many viable checks/counters(which some people are seemingly oblivious to). There are several 100% Mega Metagross counters, and every team archetype has a combo of two Pokemon that can beat Mega Metagross, i.e. Skarmory+Mega Sableye on Stall, any bulky Ground + a way to deal with ice punch/ grass knot on balance, any two speedy Pokemon on HO, Weather setters + Weather sweepers on weather teams, etc. Building around Mega Metagross definitely isn't as restricting as building around Greninja.

Although Mega Metagross does have ways to deal with most of its counters, running moves to do so comes at the price of severe opportunity cost. If Mega Metagross had 6 slots it probably would be quick banned, but it definitely can't cover everything with its STABs plus 2 coverage moves. Running anything besides the standard Hammer Arm/ Grass Knot to beat potential counters comes at a hefty price that most players cannot afford, whereas broken stuff like Greninja and Mawile could afford to switch up coverage moves and still hit 90% of the meta hard, without losing much opportunity cost. This means that Mega Metagross has only one top tier set, whereas broken Pokemon like Mega Mawile and Mega Lucario had multiple. On the topic of opportunity cost, just using Megagross comes with some sacrifice, mainly your Mega Slot. Even with Mega Metagross around, there a lot of other viable Megas to run. This is a major factor to consider, especially when you consider stuff like Aegislash, where you have virtually no reasons not to use it. People saying Mega Metagross is over centralizing have to realize that using it comes with a price, unlike Aegislash, which could fit on team archetype whatsoever. Metagross only fits well on HO and balanced builds.

I also would like to point out that before Mega Evolving, Metagross doesn't have the best special bulk or speed, meaning it is quite susceptible to taking a hefty chunk of damage, definitely enough to the point where it can be revenged. A lack of boosting moves doesn't help it either. Thanks for reading :]
 
Last edited:
After getting reqs, I have decided that I will be voting No Ban on this one. As all of you know, Mega Metagross is the biggest threat in the metagame in terms of combined ability to tank strong hits and hit hard back, while also possessing a very good speed tier. It obviously also has a very solid typing and good coverage combined with its powerful STABs. At this point many of you reading this post will be wondering why I have chosen to vote against a ban, considering my very high opinion of the Pokemon in question.

The main reason is that Mega Metagross isn't broken imo is because it has many viable checks/counters(which some people are seemingly oblivious to). There are several 100% Mega Metagross counters, and every team archetype has a combo of two Pokemon that can beat Mega Metagross, i.e. Skarmory+Mega Sableye on Stall, any bulky Ground + a way to deal with ice punch/ grass knot on balance, any two speedy Pokemon on HO, Weather setters + Weather sweepers on weather teams, etc. Building around Mega Metagross definitely isn't as restricting as building around Greninja.

Although Mega Metagross does have ways to deal with most of its counters, running moves to do so comes at the price of severe opportunity cost. If Mega Metagross had 6 slots it probably would be quick banned, but it definitely can't cover everything with its STABs plus 2 coverage moves. Running anything besides the standard Hammer Arm/ Grass Knot to beat potential counters comes at a hefty price that most players cannot afford, whereas broken stuff like Greninja and Mawile could afford to switch up coverage moves and still hit 90% of the meta hard, without losing much opportunity cost. This means that Mega Metagross has only one top tier set, whereas broken Pokemon like Mega Mawile and Mega Lucario had multiple. On the topic of opportunity cost, just using Megagross comes with some sacrifice, mainly your Mega Slot. Even with Mega Metagross around, there a lot of other viable Megas to run. This is a major factor to consider, especially when you consider stuff like Aegislash, where you have virtually no reasons not to use it. People saying Mega Metagross is over centralizing have to realize that using it comes with a price, unlike Aegislash, which could fit on team archetype whatsoever. Metagross only fits well on HO and balanced builds.

I also would like to point out that before Mega Evolving, Metagross doesn't have the best special bulk or speed, meaning it is quite susceptible to taking a hefty chunk of damage, definitely enough to the point where it can be revenged. Thanks for reading :]
You argue that being one-dimensional is a bad thing for Mega Gross, but this really would not affect its viability if it could play its one role superbly well. Again, taking up a Mega Slot has never been an argument towards keeping something unbanned; if it was an argument, then we could use it to argue that Mega Kanga / Mega Gengar / Mega Salamence were not broken, and yet their presences were considerably overwhelming in the OU metagame. Mega Gross may not be as overwhelming as Greninja or Aegislash, yet it still has potential points of conflict that are the reason this entire suspect exists. You are also downplaying its opportunity cost in selecting moves: Mega Gross' coverage depends on what your team needs most. If Mega Gross' teammates are fully capable of pressuring Ferrothorn, Hippowdon, etc. to the point where Mega Gross can run something instead in their place, then what is to stop it? Coverage is mostly dependent on what your team needs and what that particular Pokemon wants to hit. 4MSS would more apply to a Pokemon like Ferrothorn, who is really strapped for slots due to wanting to be able to support its team to the fullest. Greninja did not have to hit everything, and neither does Mega Gross; this is mostly dependent on the structure of the team and what defensive Pokemon it is more susceptible to.
 
Major post time, and since I'm probably not going to be able to get to reqs (got papers and exams over past/next few weeks, didn't have the time), so this doesn't really bear much water in terms of a vote. But I did get around to having ~60 battles (and ~2300 coil), so I've seen a reasonable bit of the ladder. I've gone from completely pro-ban to kind of moderately pro-ban.

Laddering Thoughts:
Suspect ladder OU isn' all that different from regular OU. Sure fairys are on the rise, but why wouldn't you use them they're great pokemon and you now don't give a free switch-in to Metagross with defensive fairys. I'm still using the same sort of teams I used before, I still need to prepare for most of the same threats, and really the only difference is that I've got one less sweeper/wallbreaker to account for. Fairys are more of a threat than they were before, but maybe its because I use Jirachi on most teams I build, they don't really terrify me as much at Metagross did. (The old fairys are pretty much the same, Diancie has average defenses for an offensive pokemon at best so it can barely switch in on neutral hits, and Altaria isn't very hard to force out). I don't really know if banning Mega-gross will be the best move at "fixing" the OU metagame (you could argue we haven't had enough time to really deal with MegaGross as the domineering threat), but to be fair the suspect meta has been on for a few weeks now so its not really an accurate representation of a "settled" metagross-less metagame either. So I don't know, ladder was really meh to me.

More on Metgross:
I'm still leaning ban in spite of the ladder experience part because Metagross is pretty much on a completely different level than a lot of OU offensive threats. A lot of the bulkier options have speed issues (Azumarill and Heracross) or aren't very powerful without setup (Clefable and Sableye), and the really offensive options either need significant team support or are frail enough that all it takes is a powerful neutral hit or an uninvested SE one to put them into danger zone (Talonflame and M-Gallade). Pretty much, they almost all have notable flaws that can hinder their ability to do their jobs. Metagross has almost none of these problems, its resistant to Stealth Rock, has excellent bulk for an offensive pokemon, and hits extremely hard right off the bat. All of these points have been argued over and over again over the past 30 pages (also I went into more detail in this post 2 pages back), but I will only hit the bulk one because its what breaks Metagross for me. When a fully offensive pokemon (ie: zero bulk investment) can avoid an OHKO from a super effective, invested, STAB Earthquake from Lando-T (regardless of how much HP Metagross has left that's a super effective, STAB, base-100 move coming off of invested base-145 attack and that doesn't guarantee an OHKO) that just hits too bulky for me. Granted, this is a completely arbitrary definition of "too bulky", and you could find another calc to dispute this point, but the fact remains that it can avoid an OHKO from scarf lando-t on a SE move which is really impressive. None of Metagross's individual positive traits are necessarily 'broken', but I think that the combination of bulk, immediate power, and speed is a bit too much if you're comparing it to the rest of OU.

I will not deny that Metagross has its flaws/downsides. It would love recovery to prevent it from being worn down doing its job, and it would appreciate another moveslot to be able to deal with a lot of its checks and (dare I say) counters. It also doesn't really have much variation in its sets, so you have a pretty good idea of what to expect (STABS and a combination of GK, Ice Punch, Hammer Arm/EQ), meaning it relies on team support to get past the more defensive answers to it if it opts for one coverage move over the other (Offensive answers will crumble after a few hits on the switch). I can understand how these make Metagross more manageable, and in turn why people do not believe it deserves to go.

so, TL;DR suspect ladder was mostly meh in terms of 'being better without metagross', I still think Metagross should go because its got excellent bulk for an offensive pokemon, hits really hard uninvested/unchoiced and has useful coverage (I elaborated more on this in this post, second and third paragraphs), and has great speed to add to this. Metagross may immediately be 'broken' when looking at it alone, but comparing all of its traits to the other dominant OU pokemon, it blows pretty much everything out of the water with the combination of bulk, speed, and power that these other threats lack. It does have its share of flaws however, so I can see why people don't find it unhealthy/broken/banworthy.

edit: ironed out some wordy parts
 
Last edited:
You argue that being one-dimensional is a bad thing for Mega Gross, but this really would not affect its viability if it could play its one role superbly well. Again, taking up a Mega Slot has never been an argument towards keeping something unbanned; if it was an argument, then we could use it to argue that Mega Kanga / Mega Gengar / Mega Salamence were not broken, and yet their presences were considerably overwhelming in the OU metagame. Mega Gross may not be as overwhelming as Greninja or Aegislash, yet it still has potential points of conflict that are the reason this entire suspect exists. You are also downplaying its opportunity cost in selecting moves: Mega Gross' coverage depends on what your team needs most. If Mega Gross' teammates are fully capable of pressuring Ferrothorn, Hippowdon, etc. to the point where Mega Gross can run something instead in their place, then what is to stop it? Coverage is mostly dependent on what your team needs and what that particular Pokemon wants to hit. 4MSS would more apply to a Pokemon like Ferrothorn, who is really strapped for slots due to wanting to be able to support its team to the fullest. Greninja did not have to hit everything, and neither does Mega Gross; this is mostly dependent on the structure of the team and what defensive Pokemon it is more susceptible to.
The issue with Mega Kanga and Megamence in particular was that they were so good that they had no opportunity cost. When you can sweep the entire meta after a turn of setup AND have enough bulk to make setup easy AND(in case the first two weren't enough) having a decent speed tier on top of that, you have a mon that not only outclasses every other megamon, but outclasses every mon in general.

Mega Metagross does not flat out outclass every other megamon, as a setup sweeper he actually kinda sucks, He makes a decent revenge killer, but 110 speed isn't amazing as far as revenging goes, he can't wall, and even as a tanky bruiser(which is the area he excels in) he has competition from bulky megazard(both X and Y have been known to run bulky on occasion), mega alteria, mega venusaur, and megados.


The opportunity cost argument didn't work in the past because the megamon in question was so good that there was no reason to use any other mega. Mega Meta, to put it bluntly, is not on that level.
 
The issue with Mega Kanga and Megamence in particular was that they were so good that they had no opportunity cost. When you can sweep the entire meta after a turn of setup AND have enough bulk to make setup easy AND(in case the first two weren't enough) having a decent speed tier on top of that, you have a mon that not only outclasses every other megamon, but outclasses every mon in general.

Mega Metagross does not flat out outclass every other megamon, as a setup sweeper he actually kinda sucks, He makes a decent revenge killer, but 110 speed isn't amazing as far as revenging goes, he can't wall, and even as a tanky bruiser(which is the area he excels in) he has competition from bulky megazard(both X and Y have been known to run bulky on occasion), mega alteria, mega venusaur, and megados.


The opportunity cost argument didn't work in the past because the megamon in question was so good that there was no reason to use any other mega. Mega Meta, to put it bluntly, is not on that level.
In what world is M-Gross an opportunity cost by all of these you mentioned WebBowser >_>? Also classify a set up sweeper exactly because M-Gross has access to Hone Claws along with Agility / Rock Polish so it's silly to actually argue that he sucks as a set up sweeper when in reality it really doesn't unless you're running like 3 of the shaky checks to it all at once to combat it, making you weaker to the archetypes M-Gross will fall under. This isn't a case for anything specifically but I must be misinterpreting something if you're seriously considering that there is some sort of huge competition for a mega slot with M-Gross v everything else cause I must be seriously missing the logic you're presenting here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top