• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

np: OU Suspect Testing Round 3 - So Long and Thanks for all the Fish

Status
Not open for further replies.
That would be all fine and dandy if Evasion and OHKO moves' bans didn't directly restrict a Pokemon's usage. Also, as I have said numerous times, a complex ability ban is not justified in the case of Sand Veil + SS or Snow Cloak + SW. Additionally, if Sand Veil was only available on Maggyo, do you think anyone would be advocating for a ban under the Evasion Clause?

If it's not broken don't fix it. Does anyone here really have such a huge problem with Sand Veil or Snow Cloak because you are consistently losing battles that you "shouldn't have" because of it? I personally do not have any issue whatsoever. If we start making bans "purely on principle" (and flawed principle at that), do you have any idea what kind of doors that would open up?

That door has not been opened by Evasion Clause, nor is the Evasion Clause fundamentally wrong in any way. The Evasion Clause prevents the use of moves that decrease the competitiveness of the game. Do you lose battles pretty much every time SDSub Garchomp shows it's face? Any hax in the game can be abused and relied on to win games, but most teams that abuse hax generally do not win consistently.
 
bans dont happen only on overpowered mons/strategies...
evasion and ohko moves are not overpowered,they are too luck based,and their only purpose is to introduce pure luck,which as a competitive community we don't want.that's why they are banned!
incosistent teams weren't winning on average but they still got banned!why?because either way you had to endure 32 turns of yout opponent not doing anthing but only trying to get lucky boosts...
everything that is unhealthy enough to make the metagame,to a degree,less enjoyable can get banned!
unhealthy doesn't equal to overpowered!
so no i don't think that garchomp is broken in this metagame but yes i think that his ability should be banned 'cause it makes the metagame unhealthy with the examples i stated earlier and it's only purpose is the introduction of luck,which i and i believe that most of us as a competitive community don't want...
 
How does one pokémon abusing an ability 20% (or 28% with Brightpowder) of the time while having had one of two obligatory partners already sent out at least once in battle is detrimental to the metagame enough to make the ability banned?
 
alexwolf said:
bans dont happen only on overpowered mons/strategies...
evasion and ohko moves are not overpowered,they are too luck based,and their only purpose is to introduce pure luck,which as a competitive community we don't want.that's why they are banned!
incosistent teams weren't winning on average but they still got banned!why?because either way you had to endure 32 turns of yout opponent not doing anthing but only trying to get lucky boosts...
everything that is unhealthy enough to make the metagame,to a degree,less enjoyable can get banned!
unhealthy doesn't equal to overpowered!
so no i don't think that garchomp is broken in this metagame but yes i think that his ability should be banned 'cause it makes the metagame unhealthy with the examples i stated earlier and it's only purpose is the introduction of luck,which i and i believe that most of us as a competitive community don't want...
Click to expand...
1)OHKO moves are broken. Many people have gone over this in extreme detail in the second round thread. If you need the reasoning, please check there. Same with Evasion.
2)Inconsistent teams require such a minute amount of luck to win that the majority of the time an Inconsistent team will win. Ever used Assist Power Smeargle? It is far from being not broken
3)Many things in the meta are unhealthy, like Serene Grace or even Effect Spore, if you want to go down that road, but we do not have the right nor adequate reason to ban them just because we don't like them
 
Mario With Lasers said:
How does one pokémon abusing an ability 20% (or 28% with Brightpowder) of the time while having had one of two obligatory partners already sent out at least once in battle is detrimental to the metagame enough to make the ability banned?
Click to expand...

Because people like to whine and complain and want to ban things that they find annoying.
 
Well, he is right, but not in the sense that his argument wishes to be. Bans also occur on unreleased things such as Hidden Abilities and event mons. But that doesn't really count for what he was trying to say.
 
Nanoswine said:
That would be all fine and dandy if Evasion and OHKO moves' bans didn't directly restrict a Pokemon's usage. Also, as I have said numerous times, a complex ability ban is not justified in the case of Sand Veil + SS or Snow Cloak + SW. Additionally, if Sand Veil was only available on Maggyo, do you think anyone would be advocating for a ban under the Evasion Clause?

If it's not broken don't fix it. Does anyone here really have such a huge problem with Sand Veil or Snow Cloak because you are consistently losing battles that you "shouldn't have" because of it? I personally do not have any issue whatsoever. If we start making bans "purely on principle" (and flawed principle at that), do you have any idea what kind of doors that would open up?

That door has not been opened by Evasion Clause, nor is the Evasion Clause fundamentally wrong in any way. The Evasion Clause prevents the use of moves that decrease the competitiveness of the game. Do you lose battles pretty much every time SDSub Garchomp shows it's face? Any hax in the game can be abused and relied on to win games, but most teams that abuse hax generally do not win consistently.
Click to expand...
A Sand Veil + Sand Stream ban only restricts the usage of Sandslash and Garchomp. All other Pokemon with Sand Veil have other abilities they can also access outside of DW. If you want to use a Gliscor with Roost and Stealth Rock, you can give it Hyper Cutter.

And really, I don't think anyone's going to complain about a team of Sandslash and Tyranitar not being allowed. So that only leaves Garchomp, a Pokemon known to run sets that abuse the Evasion bonus granted by Sand Veil.

No more doors will be opened by this than by the bans that are currently in place. Without Evasion Clause, you shouldn't be losing battles every time a Pokemon with Double Team or Minimize shows up, but it shouldn't be permitted to happen any more than it has to, which is never. And unlike Double Team or Minimize, a team doesn't have to be relying on hax to make use of this. Any sand team with Garchomp can abuse Evasion without giving up any moveslots or turns, and if they spend just one moveslot on Substitute, a move that's good in its own right, they can greatly increase the chance of Evasion hax granting them free turns on a crucial sweep. If SubSD Garchomp runs Leftovers, it can make 5 Substitutes in a row, which gives it a 67.2% chance of getting a free additional Swords Dance and Substitute while sweeping, which can easily decide the battle.
 
If no one cares about Sandslash, then why are people suggesting to ban/restrict Sand Veil? How about banning/restricting Garchomp then? If Garchomp is the only problem, then why don't people focus on it? Are we playing favourites now?

It seems like you want to ban it just for the sake of banning and trying to achieve some ideal metagame. Hint: it's a matter of preference. I voted for no banlist back in October, the majority preferred all 670+ BST banned. We don't want anything "perfect", we want what's broken/uncompetitive banned. Inconsistent was deemed uncompetitive, it got banned. Darkrai was deemed broken, it got banned. Sand Veil+Sand Stream is not broken nor uncompetitive; actually, it may be either of them, but they affect only one pokémon, Garchomp. So, discuss Garchomp, not a complex ban neither a blanket ban of an ability and its clone when all the other abusers are as good as Super Luck Absol or Serene Grace Dunsparce (unless you want both banned).

TorchicBlaziken said:
Well, he is right, but not in the sense that his argument wishes to be. Bans also occur on unreleased things such as Hidden Abilities and event mons. But that doesn't really count for what he was trying to say.
Click to expand...

...Could you be a *bit* less pedantic, please.
 
I get that people have already basically said what I'm about to say, but this is kind of pissing me off now because the misunderstanding of Evasion Clause is just so obvious and blatant that I have to say it.

The use of "more luck vs less luck" arguments for banning something under the Evasion Clause is completely invalid. We need not look much further than Jirachi to show this. Think about it. Iron Head has a 60% probability of causing a flinch; this is equivalent to a 60% reduction in accuracy for the opponent, the kind of effect that a Double Team user needs FIVE TURNS to surpass. Jirachi clearly induces much more luck than Double Team ever could; therefore, it should be banned by this logic. Hell, even paralysis is better than +1 evasion; maybe it should be banned, too.

Now, the key point here that clinches the validity of the Jirachi analogy is this: The purpose of the Evasion Clause is to ban options whose obvious sole purpose is to induce lucky turn skips (i.e. misses). Due to legality issues, this cannot be applied to Sand Veil. The point is not in viability, but in intent. If I use defensive Garchomp with Stealth Rock on my sand team, you can't say that I did that solely to abuse Sand Veil. It's far more valid (albeit still flawed, which is the point) to, say, accuse a physical Choice Scarf Jirachi user of using physical as opposed to special, just to abuse Iron Head flinches. If you can't ban based on intent then honestly you have to ban quite a few things from the game to justify banning Sand Veil of all things...

I'd also like to address the runaway comment that Sub+SD Garchomp is bad for the metagame due to Sand Veil. But how is this different from SubRoost Zapdos praying for Stone Edge misses? I'd sure love to remove an opponent's Stone Edge from the picture if that meant an easier time for something like Thundurus. The principle of it is heavily flawed, and clearly Sub+SD Garchomp hasn't taken the metagame by storm so there's little to suggest that it's actually effective enough to be broken, either.
 
^^^ I was just about to use a Jirachi analogy. ninja'ed

Anyway, I completely agree with capefeather.

We shouldn't ban something just for luck. This whole "introduces luck" argument could apply to many things. Thunderbolt, for instance. Yes, people are smart enough to know the difference. But my point is that so many things introduce luck, many of which are worse than Sand Veil (paralysis, flinch chance, etc.). I honestly can't see the possible purpse of such a ban. I see no benefit that it would bring.
 
capefeather said:
I get that people have already basically said what I'm about to say, but this is kind of pissing me off now because the misunderstanding of Evasion Clause is just so obvious and blatant that I have to say it.

The use of "more luck vs less luck" arguments for banning something under the Evasion Clause is completely invalid. We need not look much further than Jirachi to show this. Think about it. Iron Head has a 60% probability of causing a flinch; this is equivalent to a 60% reduction in accuracy for the opponent, the kind of effect that a Double Team user needs FIVE TURNS to surpass. Jirachi clearly induces much more luck than Double Team ever could; therefore, it should be banned by this logic. Hell, even paralysis is better than +1 evasion; maybe it should be banned, too.

Now, the key point here that clinches the validity of the Jirachi analogy is this: The purpose of the Evasion Clause is to ban options whose obvious sole purpose is to induce lucky turn skips (i.e. misses). Due to legality issues, this cannot be applied to Sand Veil. The point is not in viability, but in intent. If I use defensive Garchomp with Stealth Rock on my sand team, you can't say that I did that solely to abuse Sand Veil. It's far more valid (albeit still flawed, which is the point) to, say, accuse a physical Choice Scarf Jirachi user of using physical as opposed to special, just to abuse Iron Head flinches. If you can't ban based on intent then honestly you have to ban quite a few things from the game to justify banning Sand Veil of all things...

I'd also like to address the runaway comment that Sub+SD Garchomp is bad for the metagame due to Sand Veil. But how is this different from SubRoost Zapdos praying for Stone Edge misses? I'd sure love to remove an opponent's Stone Edge from the picture if that meant an easier time for something like Thundurus. The principle of it is heavily flawed, and clearly Sub+SD Garchomp hasn't taken the metagame by storm so there's little to suggest that it's actually effective enough to be broken, either.
Click to expand...

Legality issues are irrelevant. If an event DW Octillery got released with Shell Smash, would you protest that banning inconsistent causes legality issues with Shell Smash? And on the side of a whole pokemon, say we got a pokemon with only inconsistent as an ability next gen. Does that mean we shouldn't ban inconsistent next gen (assuming no really good new counters for the strat appear).

In the Zapdos case, your opponent is choosing to use a less than 100% accurate move, and is then paying the consequence as more turns = misses. With evasion, of any kind, you take away that choice. The only reason why one could say it has any validity is that even rock slide only has 90% accuracy.

And as I said in the penultimate post in the last page, the problem is when something introduces only luck and has no other purpose, like evasion. Flamethrower can burn, but it always deals damage, and that's it's main purpose. True, when you get to the likes of Iron Head Jirachi and Dynamic Punch Machamp this does get somewhat shaky, but for the purposes of evasion moves and the like it is obvious that their sole purpose is introducing new dice rolls.
 
Arc Tech said:
Legality issues are irrelevant. If an event DW Octillery got released with Shell Smash, would you protest that banning inconsistent causes legality issues with Shell Smash? And on the side of a whole pokemon, say we got a pokemon with only inconsistent as an ability next gen. Does that mean we shouldn't ban inconsistent next gen (assuming no really good new counters for the strat appear).

In the Zapdos case, your opponent is choosing to use a less than 100% accurate move, and is then paying the consequence as more turns = misses. With evasion, of any kind, you take away that choice. The only reason why one could say it has any validity is that even rock slide only has 90% accuracy.

And as I said in the penultimate post in the last page, the problem is when something introduces only luck and has no other purpose, like evasion. Flamethrower can burn, but it always deals damage, and that's it's main purpose. True, when you get to the likes of Iron Head Jirachi and Dynamic Punch Machamp this does get somewhat shaky, but for the purposes of evasion moves and the like it is obvious that their sole purpose is introducing new dice rolls.
Click to expand...
1)Inconsistent is just plain broken. That's why it is banned. It doesn't matter if it causes legality issues, because it is too powerful
2)Confuse Ray. Confuse Ray's only purpose is to elicit hax. Are you going to ban that too? No matter what you find irritating or not worthy of a place in the metagame is irrelevant. Is something broken, or is it not? That is what matters.
 
Arc Tech said:
Legality issues are irrelevant. If an event DW Octillery got released with Shell Smash, would you protest that banning inconsistent causes legality issues with Shell Smash? And on the side of a whole pokemon, say we got a pokemon with only inconsistent as an ability next gen. Does that mean we shouldn't ban inconsistent next gen (assuming no really good new counters for the strat appear).
Click to expand...

The thing about the issues with compatability of Shell Smash on Oct as opposed to SR on Chomp is that Inconsistent has been proven to be broken/imbalanced/whatever, whereas SV has not, and therefore we are simply removing something not ideal from the meta at the cost of removing other viable aspects - and unless SV is truly inherently broken or imbalancing there is no justification for doing so. Not saying SV isn't broken, just that in order to apply this logic we would need it to be proven as such, as far as I can see anyway.

And as I said in the penultimate post in the last page, the problem is when something introduces only luck and has no other purpose, like evasion. Flamethrower can burn, but it always deals damage, and that's it's main purpose. True, when you get to the likes of Iron Head Jirachi and Dynamic Punch Machamp this does get somewhat shaky, but for the purposes of evasion moves and the like it is obvious that their sole purpose is introducing new dice rolls.
Click to expand...
Arguably, SV Chomp can have other purposes, like using SR, in a similar manner. Not all users of it will choose to use SR, but it is a valid other purpose, only in the context of another pokemon, not a move. The sole purpose of SV Chomp is not always to introduce dice rolls given it can run sets other Chomps cannot.

Just thought I'd weigh in on this at last to say that I agree with Capefeather almost wholeheartedly on the issue.
 
Mario With Lasers said:
If no one cares about Sandslash, then why are people suggesting to ban/restrict Sand Veil? How about banning/restricting Garchomp then? If Garchomp is the only problem, then why don't people focus on it? Are we playing favourites now?

It seems like you want to ban it just for the sake of banning and trying to achieve some ideal metagame. Hint: it's a matter of preference. I voted for no banlist back in October, the majority preferred all 670+ BST banned. We don't want anything "perfect", we want what's broken/uncompetitive banned. Inconsistent was deemed uncompetitive, it got banned. Darkrai was deemed broken, it got banned. Sand Veil+Sand Stream is not broken nor uncompetitive; actually, it may be either of them, but they affect only one pokémon, Garchomp. So, discuss Garchomp, not a complex ban neither a blanket ban of an ability and its clone when all the other abusers are as good as Super Luck Absol or Serene Grace Dunsparce (unless you want both banned).



...Could you be a *bit* less pedantic, please.
Click to expand...
Sandslash and Garchomp are not the only Pokemon that are affected by this. They're just the only ones that would be restricted from doing something other than abuse Evasion. Gliscor, Cacturne, and Dugtrio are also affected, and if their DW abilities are ever released, Golem, Donphan, and Stunfisk will also be affected.

Sand Veil + Sand Stream is indeed uncompetitive, as it induces an increase in Evasion. In order to solve this problem, some complex ban must be made. The only ways to change this without a complex ban would result in the removal of Garchomp from the metagame completely, or at least until its DW ability was released, and even then, it would lack its Gen 4 moves in all scenarios. That ban would not be justified.
 
Thorhammer said:
Sandslash and Garchomp are not the only Pokemon that are affected by this. They're just the only ones that would be restricted from doing something other than abuse Evasion. Gliscor, Cacturne, and Dugtrio are also affected, and if their DW abilities are ever released, Golem, Donphan, and Stunfisk will also be affected.

Sand Veil + Sand Stream is indeed uncompetitive, as it induces an increase in Evasion. In order to solve this problem, some complex ban must be made. The only ways to change this without a complex ban would result in the removal of Garchomp from the metagame completely, or at least until its DW ability was released, and even then, it would lack its Gen 4 moves in all scenarios. That ban would not be justified.
Click to expand...
You seem to be ignoring the fact that a ban like this is neither necessary nor prudent. Unless you can prove that it is, your argument is invalid
 
Garchomp is not broken and if it was, Sand Veil wouldn't be the reason. There is absolutely nothing broken about it. We vote to ban things that are too powerful for the metagame. An ability that makes moves miss 20% of the time under the correct weather is nowhere near powerful. There is no "problem" to solve here.
 
Do not use this thread to discuss evasion or OHKO clauses, dropping Uber Pokemon into OU, etc. Use other discussions threads for those.

This Garchomp topic has to do with evasion right ?
 
I think the people here are discussing the wrong move. Obviously the real problem is Heart Stamp. Errant users of the move, such as Jynx, Swoobat, and Miltank are obviously abusing the 30% chance to flinch. That is making and breaking games, right there. I mean, flinch is just preventing your opponent from taking a turn. There's nothing fair about that.

I say we ban all moves and abilities that restrict the battle on a percent-based chance of occurence. That way, we remove all luck from the game. Also, all moves that don't have perfect accuracy. That leaves us with the moves on this list to work with (plus Flame Charge, since that always works).

Now, to prevent critical hits, we need to make sure all Pokemon have either Shell Armor or Battle Armor, so we can only use Pokemon from either this list or this list. Remember, this is a 0.0625% activation chance we're talking about here!

Ta-da! We've removed all luck from Pokemon, while keeping the gameplay almost exactly the same!
 
When Deoxys-S was banned in Gen 4 after being tested, what was the reason for it?

I do not see what added checks were added to stop Deoxys-S to be honest. I was informed a while back that he was banned due to his role in the lead position. Sure, this generation, we have pokemon with priority taunt and two magic mirror pokemon. But priority taunt does not stop deoxys-S from bouncing back your attempts to stop it with magic coat, and espeon and xatu do not stop deoxys-S from setting up screens (not as big a deal as flawlessly setting up hazards).

Quite frankly, this pokemon is a huge pain. It does not have paper thin defenses and does not need to run max speed in order to outspeed whatever it needs to. It can run an excellent support set, it can be a late game sweeper, and its movepool is massive.

After all the testing done this round and all the battles I've had, Deoxys-S is the only pokemon whom I would want ot nominate. Maybe it's just my personal annoyance though, so I'm not 100% sure if he should go. There just...isn't a feasible way to stop him from setting up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top