1)So you're saying a good player always gets one turn of set-up. No, man,m you can't argue that or use it as a legitimate point. You can't assume free turns when debating something's power, because then every single set-up sweeper is more threatening than a scarfer or banded poke by your proclamation.
2) THERE WAS NO OTHER WAY. Drizzle offense and Drizzle stall both exist. If you can preserve playstyles while sacrificing a few pokes nearly no people were using, then that is a successful ban. It was not a perfect ban, but the best one with the least complexity and deviation. ou state things as proof which are not at all. Inconsistent was banned, and you wouldn't see too many people sweeping with Remoraid. It was better than banning all the pokes who were evolved and had the ability or just banning the combination, which is a large deviation from the normal metagame, and sets a very bad precedent.
3)So what? Sand veil inconveniences the opponent. That does not equal brokenness. Serene Grace inconveniences the opponent, Confuse Ray Sableye forces the opponent to use no more than 50% accuracy moves (50% chance of attacking at max, please don't argue semantics on this), BUT PEOPLE DO NOT TRY TO BAN CONFUSE RAY SABLEYE.
4)10% chance to miss is not broken. If Sand Veil isn't broken, Brightpowder isn't broken, especially since it is only slightly useful on Cacturne, and actually a WORSE option for things like garchomp. Hey, tell me how many times you have lost to a poke without Sand Veil or Snow Cloak that had Brightpowder. I doubt there is a single time that has happened to you. Brightpowder is a crap item, people won't use it because it is outclassed by nearly any other item. Hell, I would rather use Water Incense than Brightpowder, at least it's consistent.
Once again, just nom this. You are getting nowhere arguing for this, and I don't get the feeling that you care if your argument is disproven. All this does is breed frustration when we could be arguing other things that have a somewhat equal number of supporters and detractors.
1) If a player uses Chomp, or any other good set-up sweeper, properly, they should usually be able to force switches with it upon switching in, which gives it the chance to set up. That's how setting up works.
2) There were two other ways, as I have stated many times. Ban Kingdra + Drizzle, or just ban Kingdra. The same for Kabutops and/or Ludicolo, if necessary. Kingdra is the issue here, not Swift Swim, Drizzle, or anything else. Aldaron's proposal proved that the issue was not Drizzle, and basic logic proves that the issue is not Swift Swim. Now that Aldaron's proposal has proved that, it has finished its purpose, and it is now time to do away with it and deal with the individual Pokemon - either specifically under Drizzle, or entirely.
And no, it is false to say that Moody is not broken on Remoraid. Moody was banned because even Bidoof was broken with it. Anything with access to Protect, Substitute, and a decent STAB move is broken with Moody. The same cannot be said about Swift Swim + Drizzle.
3) I have explained numerous times how those are effects on the specific opponent, and that they are contingent on the opponent. I will not repeat my arguments again except to say that Evasion is fundamentally different from any of those effects, and cannot be compared with them.
4) Cease these straw man arguments. I have told you over and over again that brokenness is not the issue here. Like all other forms of Evasion, use of Brightpowder cannot have any strategic implications, and only serves to increase the luck element of the game.
As for nominations... I don't know whether or not that would even be possible at this stage. The acceptance of Aldaron's proposal should, in theory, make it possible to nominate other Ability + Ability combinations, when there is justification for a ban on such a combination. However, such a nomination might still be rejected if a proper precedent is not reached first. Ideally, this precedent would be decided by PR, but the discussion in PR on the issue was limited to a single thread that was locked for other reasons before people could even begin to discuss the legitimacy of such a nomination.
But even aside from that, there is no sense in making a nomination without discussion beforehand. This discussion gives the voters the background they need in order to vote properly, at least in an ideal situation. Ceasing discussion in favor of making a nomination won't accomplish anything, whereas this... might.
So basically you reject my "proposal" because of semantics? If we're going to be really pedantic, the obvious "problem" (if indeed there is one... I haven't been swept by very many SubChomp) is Sand Veil + Sand Stream + Garchomp. (Also, yes, I'd definitely ban the hax items before Garchomp.) Ultimately, nothing's being said here; I am simply far less willing to impose another arbitrary combo ban that's not nearly as well-supported as the Drizzle + Swift Swim combo ban was... and you are willing to do it.
---
Looks like Blaziken is surpassing Latios as well. Suddenly I'm just not seeing very many Latios anymore. What happened?
Semantics? I'm rejecting it because it causes more problems then it's worth.
The problem is Evasion. My proposed solution would isolate the problem and remove it. the fact that it's a combination ban means that we can do this, rather than removing anything that isn't the problem. As a result, when combination bans are justified and reasonable, they require far less support than other types of bans, because there is far less at stake. With that in mind, what we have is enough to justify a combination ban.
