np: SM OU Suspect Process, Round 1 - Digital Love - Genesect is now banned

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mu$$ul Man

Banned deucer.
I feel like I need to refute many useless arguments, and elaborate on why banning Gene is best for now.

I feel like I need to refute many pro-ban arguments, and elaborate on why keeping Gene for now is the right move.
...

1) Genesect is overcentralizing because you need to specifically prepare for it" - You also had to use a Keldeo or Bisharp check/counter on every ORAS team, but no one's saying they're broken.
Keldeo could not learn have a million moves and neither could Bisharp. Both 'mons had fixed sets, whereas Genesect has a plethora of coverage moves which you and I both know, meaning it was easier to play around the former two. It's harder to play around Genesect due to its unpredictability, and trying to check/counter is hard 'cos you don't know what set it could be running. Stop trying to compare them.

2) "Genesect is overcentralizing because there's no reason not to use it on every team" - I'm pretty sure Lando-T has more usage and things like Lati and Lando in ORAS still probably had more usage than Gene now. Usage aside, adding a Genesect can stack weaknesses and using a certain set can leave you weak to some styles, so it can't mindlessly be slapped onto a team.
what? Also... just adding, afaik there is no priority that can completely conk out Genesect which obv doesnt help.

3) "Genesect lacks full counters" - Well, there's also no full counters to Kyurem-B. Obviously Gene is a better pokemon but a lack of counters alone doesn't break something. You can still pivot around these mons reasonably well and revenge kill easily.
Stupid generalised statement. Genesect can easily pivot out of its counters with a download-stab boosted u-turn, and to repeat what some user up there said, Kyurem-Black can get a kill yes, but then your opponent does send in their counter, sapping your momentum.

4) "Genesect is too versatile with its coverage options" - XY Greninja had coverage to beat like any possible switchin besides Clef and Chansey (taunt aside). Greninja's Protean boost is basically equivalent to a download boost (which is less reliable). Even Greninja now has few full counters if any, with even more coverage than Gene, so this doesn't make something broken.
Protean Greninja was banned for this reason last generation.

5) "Genesect may have some walls, but it can just U-turn on them" - Any U-turn pokemon can use the move on any of its counters. Scizor using U-turn on Heatran isn't exactly a broken thing and this has more to do with U-turn as a whole rather than Genesect.
Genesect can make it through any Pokemon why don't you understand this. It's unpredictable as f**k and any popularising 'mon used to stop it, will be rendered useless when sets used to counter those will be picked up upon - like the douse drive/tbolt statement made above.

So, why exactly are people saying Gene is broken? As Finchinator said, it's something like "Similarly to Hoopa, Genesect is very tough to switch into, but it doesn't have a crippling weakness like other good breakers." What this sounds like to me is that Genesect is just a good pokemon. It may not be super frail or slow, but there is always a trade-off in using a certain Genesect set. You also aren't necessarily advantaged for using a Gene while your opponent does not.

Generally speaking, we should really only be banning pokemon that warp the tier significantly or truly are too powerful. Something like Zygarde-Complete was just too good for OU, and Aegislash definitely had a negative effect on the tier that Genesect cannot even barely compare to. In the case of Lando-I, the quickban was less clear and maybe shouldn't have happened but the council was unanimous due to its Gene-like coverage + insane power simultaneously. If we just dropped Genesect into ORAS and went by this tiering philosophy, then hell yea it would be broken. But right now we have a new Generation that is still evolving.

From this point onwards, with this test included, we need to give the meta time to settle. As we saw with Pheromosa, many people (myself included) saw it as quickban worthy early on but eventually realized it can be managed. Pheromosa's counters like Toxapex can't be used on every team, but you can still pivot into it reasonably well and revenge it even without the hard counters. Additionally, many people thought Mega Metagross was broken, but later realized it can be managed. Perhaps the same will happen with Genesect, and it won't be seen as this menacing down the road. To ban Gene at this time simply stunts the growth of the tier, as Jukain pointed out.

To suspect ANYTHING this early on is foolish. Something is either quickban worthy or it shouldn't be touched at all. Suspect tests exist to test how a metagame is with/without a given suspect. This point is rendered useless when a metagame has existed for such a short amount of time. Having a suspect test so early on was a mistake, but we can prevent consequences from this mistake by voting to not ban. If Gene turns out to still be an issue in the future, we can suspect again. Mega Sableye stayed in ou after its first test and was later banned, so please do not rush this decision and harm the tier permanently.
blah blah listen to what i say blah blah

PS - If you reply to this, don't take me on a joyride, I don't wanna read blocks of text :(

Edit: Wrote this in a rush, sorry if there are any mistakes.
 
To suspect ANYTHING this early on is foolish. Something is either quickban worthy or it shouldn't be touched at all. Suspect tests exist to test how a metagame is with/without a given suspect. This point is rendered useless when a metagame has existed for such a short amount of time. Having a suspect test so early on was a mistake, but we can prevent consequences from this mistake by voting to not ban. If Gene turns out to still be an issue in the future, we can suspect again. Mega Sableye stayed in ou after its first test and was later banned, so please do not rush this decision and harm the tier permanently.
This is the best paragraph in this entire thread. You mates can argue until you're blue in the face and your fingers start to bleed, but realistically you aren't going to convince anyone to change their opinion. But it's very early for suspect testing. Suspect testing this early is treating a common cold with chemotherapy. ABR is 100% on the nose with his post (well the latter part the first part is open to discussion).
 

playerW17

the shackles known as possibilities
is a Tiering Contributor
In regards to Genesect, after achieving reqs, the main difference that can be noticed on the ladder is that AloWak is no longer used on 50% of teams basically just to try and counterplay Genesect. There's also a lot more variety and less generic compression (at least in my opinion) in order to try and answer Genesect, which I feel is definitely a good thing overall. Although one might try to argue about how other pokemon need checks and counters on every team, the difference with Genesect is how it has 8+ viable sets (Bisharp has 1, Keldeo has ~3 that all use nearly the same moves), which means that counterplaying it and scouting it is ridiculously hard compared to nearly any other pokemon, due to how many sheer options it has.

I don't think any individual set makes Genesect broken overall, but rather the absolutely ludicrous amount of options it has means that it can fundamentally never be countered or reliably answered (as it can just change its set in any meta), which also makes scouting and trying to determine its set before it sweeps you 6-0 extremely difficult. The momentum its able to generate with U-Turn is also amazing, as its able to force a huge amount of switches, due to the player against Genesect being forced to respect Genesect's huge coverage and thus needing to scout with multiple pokemon. Its excellent typing and passable speedtier is also a large factor of this.

In the end, Genesect's brokenness can be boiled down to two factors. Firstly, its extreme constraining effect on the tier's diversity makes for an unhealthy meta, while secondly the sheer amount of options it has avaliable means that its inherently unpredictable and very difficult to scout.

For these reasons, I will be voting Ban for Genesect.
 
Last edited:
I've achieved reqs on two different accounts by now, and I'll be voting No Ban.

Genesect just isn't as strong as a lot of people in this thread seem to think. Any player can determine Genesect's set with a high level of certainty from its first move using just their brain and maybe a damage calculator. Genesect is like the fourth best Pokemon in OU behind Mega Metagross, Tapu Lele, and Greninja. In my opinion, Genesect has become less effective as SM OU has matured, which is characteristic of a Pokemon that's really not overpowered. It's both too early and irresponsible to ban Genesect right now.

Here's a list of things far less competitive than Genesect: Shedinja, Mega Sableye Stall, Trick Room, and any form of Baton Pass.

This thread feels full of mob mentality. I hope those who achieve voting reqs will think for themselves and not just acquiesce to the seemingly "popular" opinion.
 
Oh man, I was so psyched for your response.

Now, all I'm feeling is just... disappointment.

You didn't actually address any of my real points, and you still continue to waste space with words that contribute nothing to the discussion. Cut to the chase, dude.

Regarding U-turn spam, which set are you exactly referring to? Because if it's the banded set that is the easiest to check, unless we disagree on that too, you've given it away the second you click u-turn and it's tough to argue that you'll brainlessly click u-turn against something that can out-speed and kill you.
You do realize that his current meta does NOT value speed, correct? Base 99 speed is quite high. If you're talking about Pheromosa or Zygarde 10%, they were never exactly going to switch into you- and a Banded Genesect can do some mad spicy damage first with Extreme Speed, correct?


If it's LO u-turn then as I've said before I personally find that to be very sub-optimal and that's really the most controversial set in question as far as I'm concerned.
I agree- life orb U-turns are almost never a good idea, and Genesect isn't good enough to warrant it.

If it's scarf u-turn spam then my only response is that I really don't find that to be too hard to deal with, I was under the impression that most people don't either and if you feel strongly otherwise then maybe we'll just agree to disagree. I'm not saying it's universally a bad tactic but you're going about this as if it is totally un-punishable and zero-risk, which I don't think is accurate.
What you don't seem to understand is that U-turn spamming wouldn't be such a massive issue with Genesect if it wasn't for the fact it also threatens so much else. Again- it appears that most anti-ban people STILL do not realize how much threat Genesect possesses in terms of movepool and the unpredictability of Download. You stay in, you have a chance of getting crushed, and even if you stay in when it U-turns, he can still switch to an appropriate check- if you switch out, lucky you, he didn't read your switch- and if he did and U-turned out, congratulations, you're probably going to be forced to switch AGAIN. Like, do you seriously not see that (I had to revise my estimate) it's still in the Genesect player's favor? Two of those outcomes were clearly in the favor of Genesect, one was iffy but still leaning towards Genesect, and one was actually positive for the opponent. That's roughly a 67/33 in the Genesect player's favor.

You took a piece from my original post about why Genesect is not capable of sweeping a large portion of the metagame as one broken quality it could possess but does not, and you extrapolated it to mean that if Genesect lacks the coverage it needs to do so in one battle, it lacks it in its entire movepool. I never said this and I really shouldn't have to respond to this as it's just a fallacy that you're trying to use to undermine my point, but nonetheless you took it out of context so I felt the need to clear that up.
No, it's just that the concept of "Genesect lacking coverage" is utterly ridiculous- chances are very likely that it DOES have coverage for you. Maybe Swampert or even Unaware Quagsire could work as Genesect counters if they weren't so weak in other areas, or maybe Genesect will just start carrying HP Grass. It can, you know. It's flexible like that.

I don't know what is so confusing about what I said here. I took the definition that smogon agrees upon as a description of a "broken" pokemon, which is listed on the page before this one along with a few others, and I went point by point to try and give my refutation for each clause. I never said anything about pro-ban calling Genesect a gimmick, it was in the definition which I guess in hindsight I should have just reposted but despite my lengthy posts I do sometimes try to save space.
I'm not talking about Genesect being a gimmick. I'm talking about all these bullshit counters that people have scrounged up in an attempt to show that Genesect can be checked or countered if only we were more creative.

Yeah. Um. That's... pretty much a meme started by ABR now and everybody that believes Genesect is "healthy" for OU. Yeah fucking right.

If you're a fully physical set or fully special, getting the opposite raise means that you effectively have no ability at all, or at best, you have a boosted U-turn without having to invest EVs into doing so. I don't see any of this changing games.
Alright, sure. You're right.

So what happens when you get a boost in the offensive stat that you DID invest into?


It's not the term I take issue with, but rather how people perceive it. This recently happened
I don't want your war stories or your personal criterion for a good player or your subtle implications that everybody who's pro-ban just needs to git gud. I want your actual replies on this subject. You still do not deliver in any consistent fashion.

You're making the point for me in this entire example that I'm trying to get across. The only thing you can ever do in this game is to assume that your opponent is a rational actor who is trying to do everything they can to win. That includes the plays they make, how they construct their team's synergy and cover up weaknesses, or even counter-prepare for a particular opponent. Going through a totally rational analysis of a person's team only to find that your opponent brought something that wouldn't have helped them as much as something else ... says nothing about Genesect being broken. If a team needs hazard removal because they're running Charizard Y, and they're actually running LO 4 attacks Starmie because fuck it why not, is Starmie broken? Furthermore, I never said that you should know all of Genesect's set at team preview, just what it is likely to have and then work backwards from there, they're just some starting deductions that you could make. You learn about Genesect's set every single time it comes into play, whether it even clicks a move or not, because you're always free to ask yourself "if they were really X set, or had X coverage, why would they not use it / am I safe to assume it's not there?" If this sounds unreasonable to you then I don't know how better to explain it.
What point did I make for you, that Genesect is ruthlessly unpredictable? Because speed is always useful; even if it's not the most important thing, it's still useful regardless of meta, so it's completely fine for a Scarfed Genesect on my throwaway team- you have an extra U-turn user (Unless your Landorus-T isn't running it) and you still have the BoltBeam combo for great coverage. Is there something I'm missing here? And even though I went through all the motions in analyzing the team from an outsider's perspective, you conveniently forgot to mention that the example still left up in the air three sets: Life Orb, Expert Belt, and Rock Polish.

I really wish that I were, but unless you wanted me to screenshot everything that I'm told in games, see in chats and have read in this thread and past threads, I'm not engaging this any further. It wasn't a straw man.
Why would you say "if you want to play the game on autopilot" and yet claim that it's not a straw man? You are implying, in this context, that everybody pro-ban just wants to play this game on autopilot and not deal with Genesect.

Well. You're not wrong about the "not deal with Genesect" part. You are, however, miserably wrong about the autopilot part. So again, please don't put words in the mouths of other people.

Genesect may be banned but the arguments that I am trying to describe on behalf of why some people think it should stay are not going to go away. All I was trying to get across is that using the number of a pokemon's "checks and counters" should not be the only metric that determines how ban-worthy they are. I don't even think you disagree with that so I don't know why you took so much objection to what I said. Am I that off-base to suggest that perhaps we can have other forms of counterplay to fast offensive pivots that don't include hard-countering them?
You are correct- no Pokemon should be judged SOLELY on their checks and counters a tier has available to use.

However, note that due to running an absurd number of multiple distinct and viable sets, Genesect does not have real consistent checks and counters. Combine with a high BST, one of the game's best offensive abilities in Download, an incredible movepool (I'm going to beat this horse to death until you guys acknowledge that this is a real problem when coupled with Download and naturally high base offensive stats), and speed that is fast for this current meta with access to very strong priority, Genesect has plenty to be judged on- the "checks and counters" part is just a standout.

Not what I said. There are plenty of people who have posted here that have listed very well-articulated pro-ban argument, who I do not know personally but whose ability to play this game is worth respecting. I don't care if people vote pro-ban and I don't think you're promoting a skill-less metagame or that you lack skill to do so. I've never once said specifically that people need to predict better, just to use some basic rational thought in preparing their move choices, and that certain builds require you to honestly think harder than others. I mean how hard is "xtra chirps" to use, really, or speed-pass into Manaphy/etc? That's all I meant by autopilot strategies, I don't know why you get so offended.
Congratulations- you are now stumbling your way towards understanding what the word "implication" means. Just because you didn't say something outright doesn't mean you didn't mean it, and it's kind of obvious you did.

Explaining why I feel Genesect helps players analyze risk versus reward better is a major part of my argument, sorry if you didn't feel like reading more than a few lines but hey, you did.
I read your entire argument. It's you who didn't read mine. Here's all the parts that you conveniently chose to not address:

There is nothing creative about having to deal with the "which Genesect variant am I dealing with here" roulette, and once you've figured it out you still might not even be carrying the right check.
In relation to my example team:
Do you understand how many mental gymnastics you're asking people to undergo? Everybody anti-ban is, in one way or another, asking for an exception to be made for this Pokemon when literally every other Pokemon in the OU meta is relatively straightforward and has a limited number of viable sets that can be reasonably expected. You CANNOT say the same for Genesect.
Remember when you tried to say "you cannot have it both ways as a pro-ban poster and say "Genesect picks and chooses its checks" alongside "Genesect has the coverage to check whatever your team needs""?

it's very easy to say "Genesect picks and chooses its checks" alongside "Genesect has the coverage to check whatever your team needs." You pick the checks by picking your specific variant of Genesect you want to use- and if you're a good team builder, you pick a team that both handles that Genesect variant's checks and is reinforced by your chosen Genesect variant. The problem is that there are a half dozen viable Genesect variants and Genesect makes itself REALLY use. Have you seen its typing/stats/movepool lately? This makes it very, very flexible in the teambuilding process. Oh, your team has enough speed? Change your Scarfsect to Expertsect. What's this? Looks like I'm weak to speedy sweepers? I guess I can run Choice Band with Extremespeed!
And once more, since you danced around this question way too well:

What part of dealing with a Pokemon that's strong, decently bulky, has great typing, and that can become anything the player wants is beneficial to the OU metagame? Forcing us to perform extra mental gymnastics?
 

Shurtugal

The Enterpriser.
is a Tiering Contributor
I've achieved reqs on two different accounts by now, and I'll be voting No Ban.

Genesect just isn't as strong as a lot of people in this thread seem to think. Any player can determine Genesect's set with a high level of certainty from its first move using just their brain and maybe a damage calculator. Genesect is like the fourth best Pokemon in OU behind Mega Metagross, Tapu Lele, and Greninja. In my opinion, Genesect has become less effective as SM OU has matured, which is characteristic of a Pokemon that's really not overpowered. It's both too early and irresponsible to ban Genesect right now.

Here's a list of things far less competitive than Genesect: Shedinja, Mega Sableye Stall, Trick Room, and any form of Baton Pass.

This thread feels full of mob mentality. I hope those who achieve voting reqs will think for themselves and not just acquiesce to the seemingly "popular" opinion.
How is Trick Room less competitive than Genesect? How is Trick Room uncompetitive at all? "Any form of baton pass" -- are you implying any baton pass outside of scolipass is viable?

I feel like Genesect has gotten stronger in SM because of a.) the general speed tier drop, making base 99 stronger than in previous generations (and making its scarf set more viable), and b.) the fairy spam on the ladder gives Genesect even more switch in opportunities / threats it can take down as opposed to other generations.

You mention Shedinja stall as uncompetitive, but I think genesect + dugtrio is arguably more uncompetitive.

I want to see some anti-Ban posts that detail why Genesect is healthy for this metagame, because I am not an unreasonable person; I genuinely wish to see some strong arguments for keeping Genesect OU.

---

Some people bring up how the results of last genesect suspect test was close... but consider: are they implying that Genesect would be healthy for ORAS OU?? Genesect would single handedly change the bulky oras ou meta if it were to be dropped in there now. The entire meta woulr change and warp itself for one pokemon. The only thing this counterpoint proves proves to me is that I have to take this suspect seriously and vote Ban so the results aren't as close as they were in XY.
 
Last edited:
To suspect ANYTHING this early on is foolish. Something is either quickban worthy or it shouldn't be touched at all. Suspect tests exist to test how a metagame is with/without a given suspect. This point is rendered useless when a metagame has existed for such a short amount of time. Having a suspect test so early on was a mistake, but we can prevent consequences from this mistake by voting to not ban. If Gene turns out to still be an issue in the future, we can suspect again. Mega Sableye stayed in ou after its first test and was later banned, so please do not rush this decision and harm the tier permanently.
All of your other points I believe were pretty thoroughly addressed, so decided to tackle this point. Even if genesect is banned its not like the damage has to be permanent. Aegislash was retested last generation to re-enter the tier genesect could easily be retested also. The damage doesn't necessarily have to be permanent.

I prefer the idea of detecting any potential "cancer" early and removing it rather than waiting for it to grow into a problem that can no longer be ignored. Then when the body (the meta) is more stable reintroduce the potentially cancerous element to see if it can handle it when the meta is less new and in flux.

Also dugtrio + genesect is just so stupid to use. Can't ban dugtrio now though so get rid of the other part of the problem.
 
I'm unsure of how Genesect can run different sets on the same team and still be useful regardless.

Nearly all pro-ban posters are in agreement that it can sort of fill whatever hole you have in your team, but that brings the whole "it's completely unpredictable" argument to a stop, because I doubt Shift Gear/Choice Band sets can fit in Hidden Power Ground (Please stop bringing up Douse Drive, Genesect's "drive" changes color if you use it, killing any surprise factor you might have had and costing an item slot), for example. If you use Genesect to clog a hole, it should be obvious from Team Preview that if Genesect would not be running, say, Thunderbolt, Gyarados would walk all over that team (maybe not the best example, but you get the idea). And checking U-turn damage with calcs is always an option, albeit a risky one.

That being said, having to run more than 1 check/counter because of it's wide movepool does put a massive strain on teambuilding (although I'm willing to bet that there are a fair number of Pokemon that can both check Genesect and form a decent core) and I can only imagine Genesect helps a bit with the Tapu's being everywhere and being a catch all revenge killer for Offense, but outside of that, I don't see what he adds to the meta that can't be done by other mons (Pheramosa for revenge killing, a whole load of other solid Steel types for dealing with Tapu's). It adds more stress to already strained team building due the sheer amount of threats and kind of makes having anything that loses to it (read: nearly everything that's slower than it) be stuck between a rock and a hard place due it's coverage + U-turn.

Thinking about it now, doesn't Rotom-H kind of not care about Genesect at all? Granted, it's weak to SR, but being a solid check to Genesect (and some Tapu's and Steel types) should make up for it.

I don't think it's nearly as clear cut as some pro-ban posters would make you believe, but I also doubt if keeping Genesect would even be worth it. Bleh.
 
Oh man, I was so psyched for your response.
Let me try and be as absolutely succinct as possible for you so as to leave nothing up for interpretation or seemingly untouched. I don't reply to every line you state because increasingly more and more of it are throw-away lines like "you just want pro-ban to predict better" and that's really not adding anything to the discussion because it's baseless and untrue.

You do realize that his current meta does NOT value speed, correct? Base 99 speed is quite high.
I understand the basics of this point but not the conclusion you're asking me to draw here. I didn't realize base 99 suddenly became "fast" again, especially in this current metagame, so are you saying that there aren't a number of potent faster revenge-killers available to revenge Genesect? Or are you saying with the extreme-speed point that every time you might possibly be out-sped, you always have banded extreme speed, and you've always clicked it at just the right moment? See I know you'll accuse me here of putting words in your mouth but really the way you construct some of your points in such a hypothetically-favorable way makes them difficult to refute. Whatever genuine flaws Genesect has, and I feel base 99 speed being one of those in this metagame, you patch it up by saying the one possible thing it could do in some cases to circumvent that flaw, but you never duly acknowledge the many cases where clicking banded extreme-speed isn't actually an optimal play, or the consequences of getting that play wrong, and I'm not convinced that the risk vs reward is so skewed in Genesect's favor to do this that the point is moot.

What you don't seem to understand is that U-turn spamming wouldn't be such a massive issue with Genesect if it wasn't for the fact it also threatens so much else. Again- it appears that most anti-ban people STILL do not realize how much threat Genesect possesses in terms of movepool and the unpredictability of Download. You stay in, you have a chance of getting crushed, and even if you stay in when it U-turns, he can still switch to an appropriate check- if you switch out, lucky you, he didn't read your switch- and if he did and U-turned out, congratulations, you're probably going to be forced to switch AGAIN. Like, do you seriously not see that (I had to revise my estimate) it's still in the Genesect player's favor? Two of those outcomes were clearly in the favor of Genesect, one was iffy but still leaning towards Genesect, and one was actually positive for the opponent. That's roughly a 67/33 in the Genesect player's favor.
Okay, the crux of my argument is such that in my view, the extent to which Genesect forces "mental gymnastics", "50/50's" with its coverage and/or Download boosts and the threat of U-turn is very real, but also very manageable. I am not asking for anyone to "git gud", nor am I asking for any "exceptions" to be made for Genesect as you stated in your last post. You are making a lot of assumptions that aren't stated but that I don't agree with, like the fact that because Genesect has U-turn, it is always the most optimal play and that it is always going to be favorable a majority of the time (and I don't think that some arbitrary proportionality argument is a legitimate answer to this point.) If Genesect is faster, has u-turn and also has the coverage it needs to beat, say, Scarf Lando-T, then yes, whether it clicks Ice Beam or U-turn is now a case where either play results in approximately a win-win for Genesect. I totally would concede that. But do you realize how many assumptions I just had to make there to make this favorable for your argument? They never scouted for Ice Beam (which is on a ton of sets anyway), if they did scout and it was purposefully withheld then you can rule out basically every set except Scarf/E-Belt, and that they have little to no reasonable chance of determining this throughout the entire battle.

Genesect will just start carrying HP Grass
Erm, Giga Drain (didn't anyone tell you Genesect has a yuge movepool?)

That's... pretty much a meme started by ABR
I've been arguing on behalf of this fictitious bug for like, a long time. Call me anything you like, just not a band-wagoner.

What point did I make for you, that Genesect is ruthlessly unpredictable?
No, the point you made was that you came up with a team in "15 seconds", made a case why that team would benefit from having a pokemon perform a specific role, and then opted instead for a sub-optimal role as a way to say that Genesect is broken. You seem like a competent player and I really don't know why you're defending this, we have a term for players who build really crappy teams and make irrationally bad decisions, it's called "bottom ladder". If you really feel that strongly in your specific hypothetical that Scarf Gene was really an okay option then fine I guess, but my point is simply that you shouldn't assume that Genesect could be any set on any given team at any given time, carrying any given moves with no way to determine what is what. If you think that figuring this out is too burdensome then that's fine, welcome to pro-ban, but since I can't change your mind, I would at least like to change your arguments. Genesect is put on a team to fulfill some role or purpose like everything else, and so saying that a team that doesn't need speed would run Scarf Genesect just for S's & G's is not an argument that resonates with me or convinces me that Genesect is broken.

Genesect has plenty to be judged on- the "checks and counters" part is just a standout.
We agree on this part totally. The only point I have consistently made that you didn't address is the distinction between being easily checkable/counterable and easily scoutable (or not), and why I feel the latter is applicable to Genesect. You seem to feel that Genesect forces this issue worse than anything else that exists in the OU tier and theoretically this is appealing given it's movepool, the 5-6 viable S-rank sets and the passable bulk to play at least somewhat freely. I would never argue that Genesect isn't very, very good. But I would really need to see some sort of proof, beyond something you make up in 15 seconds (even if you staged a damn replay), where every single time Genesect comes into play, or even 90% of the time, the information it gives you as a player and the options you have to deal with are really pure guesswork and true "50/50s". I think you will jump at this opportunity when you read it but if you actually try and prove this, it's harder than you're estimating it to be, and that's my whole argument: Genesect is very good but very manageable.

What part of dealing with a Pokemon that's strong, decently bulky, has great typing, and that can become anything the player wants is beneficial to the OU metagame? Forcing us to perform extra mental gymnastics?
Aside from the points I have already made about pivots like Genesect allowing more freedom in teambuilding and thus reducing the emphasis on specific checks and match-up (a la ORAS, in my view), I do not see the ways in which you are forced to counterplay Genesect as going above and beyond what you should already be doing in a game. It just doesn't seem that way because on paper, it's easy to reflexively say "but Genesect has a way bigger movepool and more sets than other things", but the quantity of moves and sets it has doesn't hold a ton of weight to me because it can only ever have just 4 moves on just 1 set. I know you'll be tempted to say that this unpredictability is what makes it broken, but the number of cases in which from only a couple turns you can rule out a ton of what it's likely to have and do makes this far easier to manage in practice than on paper. If I found Genesect to be more difficult to scout then yes, there wouldn't really be a need for this suspect, it should just be banned. But everything, when it's under the microscope and overblown in these threads (see: Mega Metagross, Pheromosa to an extent, some arguments about Mega Sableye, etc.), it comes off as worse than it really is.

If we have to agree to disagree that's fine but don't make me out to be the villain of pro-ban who wants everyone to "git gud" and agonize over every turn, I just have a philosophy about playing this game that emphasizes things differently from yours.

Your experiences against a particular set does not equate to the set's performance. Not to say you're blatantly making that argument outright, but the phrasing here does imply a sense of confirmation bias. While you've been underwhelmed by LO sets using U-Turn, it has to mean something if it's the one high level players are citing among all the things Genesect is able to do.
You make really strong points and you articulate them well, which I appreciate even if we disagree on some core issues on this particular matter.

I wasn't trying to suggest that my experience leads to a set's viability and effectiveness, but merely that I don't see LO U-turn as a very good set and I wasn't aware most people did either - some pro-ban posters have even stated this already.

No one is saying U-turn is unpunishable on Genesect, or even that the idea behind its use is exclusive to Genesect, but Genesect as a mon creates a much better Risk:Reward for the move compared to other common users. If you take Risk:Reward to be comparing Sub-Optimal:Optimal outcome comparison, Genesect shifts it from a typical 40:60 to something more like 25:75. As I've noted in previous posts, his coverage and power means he forces switches often, which in turn fuels his momentum grabbing with U-Turn as an offensive option rather than reactionary as mons like Landorus tend to use it.
In a way I feel this is the hardest point to respond to simply because of how volatile it is. The argument itself is sound and is a legitimate reason to want Genesect banned, but the reason why it doesn't resonate with me is because in almost every instance, the number of factors involved in being able to objectively say "the Genesect user has benefitted favorably from this" even when making the "safer" play with U-turn seems situationally limited. I guess if you could really convince me that in a ton of salient situations in this current metagame, Genesect reasonably has some combination of speed, coverage and the freedom to predict (usually switch moves) that is greater than a ton of what is put in front of it, then I would have to concede this point, but even in this third suspect I have yet to ever view his performance in the metagame in this way that pro-ban advocates. Whatever role it chooses to fill and however it chooses to optimize its coverage within that role, it is giving up more than pro-ban is willing to concede that it does. Writing off a ton of its viable counterplay because it can bluff sets it doesn't have or has u-turn and will always be able to take advantage of this when needed is a statement that, if true, would be very damaging but I feel is way too broad to be a fair assessment.


I agree Genesect is not broken and addressed why I think the other description in my last post.

One thing, Genesect's job isn't to sweep the opponent's team in most cases, unless it's the Rock Polish/Shift Gear set, where it's waiting until lategame to go for it anyway. Genesect's job for the other sets is to use his coverage and power to wear down and break cores so proper sweepers can break the team down instead. And that's not even to say Genesect is incapable of being a sweeper, but Download is not a factor in how he's doing it.
I agree with this in its entirety, and I won't nitpick but these are points that I can very equally use to anti-ban's benefit.

While not uncompetitive in the sense of Aegislash assessments (admittedly one of the weaker times that term was thrown around), it's not a grievous or knee jerk misuse of the term: there are 4 broad scenarios that emerge if we assume Terrakion only KOs landing a Super Effective move

1. Mega + Stone Edge = Gyarados wins
2. Mega + Close Combat = Terrakion wins
3. Normal + Stone Edge = Terrakion wins
4. Normal + Close Combat = Gyarados wins

Half of these scenarios favor Terrakion, the other half favor Gyarados, hence the impression of 50/50. Regardless, the better articulated pro-ban arguments aren't simplifying the arguments to "Genesect is impossible to scout", they're discussing the fact that Genesect's coverage options and mixed power means that the cost/damage to your team in the process of scouting a reasonably played Genesect will often put you in a position where you cannot properly respond with that knowledge unless you build a team with multiple checks to account for all of Genesect's viable options, at which point your team is being pigeonholed into a certain style, or at the very least taking a hit in terms of viability against the rest of the metagame. Scouting Genesect, even for a skilled player, doesn't come cheap, and doesn't even lead to you having the means to respond.
You articulate this well and at the very least I'm glad we see this particular concept similarly enough. The point I was making by using my Gyara vs Terrak example is to say that in actuality, while the way you lay it out makes a very compelling case for it to be a true 50/50 if "terrakion only KOs landing a super effective move", the reality is that Gyarados should always stay regular form and it wins outright (with Intimidate, which is the ability I had). There are a ton of other examples of what I was trying to say here but the point is supposed to illustrate that Genesect forces players to analyze these scenarios more carefully, and because this is actual analysis and not guesswork, this is something we should encourage in a competitive metagame.

You don't necessarily learn something about Genesect just because he came in and acted, because he could be clicking U-Turn every time as much to avoid divulging more of the set as to simply pick his best response to whatever they predict you're doing. Genesect can just U-Turn often and hard-switch out of attacking options to feign a Choice Scarf, and if he leads the opponent to believe that, they may keep something in after eating a move from him: Genesect KOs something on a sac with Ice Beam, the opponent tries to threaten the locked Genesect out or use the free turn to, say, Defog with Tapu Fini, and then Genesect fries it with Thunderbolt. It's not a matter of simply getting more actions out of the Genesect, the Genesect user needs to make particular plays before any definitive or helpful information is gleaned.
I disagree a bit more with the first line than the rest of the excerpt, as if you assume your opponent is acting in their own self-interest to win the game, bringing Genesect in and switching it out without clicking any move at all has to be indicative of something, you can't write it off as just a misclick or cold-feet and say you've learned nothing. The scenario you're describing is really the Expert Belt set which can certainly net you some surprise KOs if played well, but I think the same can be said for a ton of other pokemon bluffing a choice item (Victini, Latis, Tapu Lele to name a few). Ultimately is the bluffing game really that different in terms of what you gain and what you lose between Genesect and these other cases? Sometimes yes, but imo, often no.

The issue isn't the number of checks and counters. The issue is that optimal counterplay to Genesect most often does not inhibit the Genesect player, rather it's just minimizing the benefit he creates without actually being able to negate it...It's a tall order to check and take momentum from the mon who lists "best momentum grabber in OU" as one of his consistent selling points across his multitude of sets.
This would probably be the best crystallization of pro vs anti-ban that I've seen and honestly I don't know how I could convince you that it's manageable if you don't feel that it is. It's a subjective point that you have articulated well but that comes down to how you play, how comfortable you are making predictions / deductions, how you teambuild, and most importantly, to what extent should players be responsible for managing all of these different factors. I guess I just believe that it's tough but not impossible.

It's like saying all a mon needed to have good hazard control in ORAS is the ability to set up rocks and hazards, in a metagame where that entailed competing with Mega Sableye, a utility mon with unparalleled control over the hazard field, up until the literal last days of the generation.
I agree 100%.
 
Arena trap is really the uncompetitive element with the Gene+Duggy duo.

From what I've read, it seems that the pro-ban arguments are biased around being too paper-oriented and too defense/switch-in minded.

First, not all of Gene's sets are equally possible. Gene will run certain moves over others because of the varied types of other top threats in the tier.
U-turn is a very likely move on many Gene sets for obvious reasons. It's not able to easily clean up with a 1 or 2 set thing, a la Lando-I.

Second, with calcs, or double-switching and seeing it attack even tho poke was faster than it, a player can figure out if it's choiced.
Needing power or speed, many teams will need Gene to be choiced anyways (plenty of good teams don't give gene a download boost easily)
With substantially more ways to set up in gen7 , Gene can often be setup bait, and a player can play around the gene user in many ways.

Third, switching-in is not everything in pokemon. Often a good offense is a good defense.

There aren't a ton, but here are some offense mons that not only check Gene pretty well, but also check much of the meta too (in no particular order):
Char X, Pheromosa, Tapu Koko, Serperior, Tornadus-T, scarf Lando/Chomp, Excadrill (and Ttar) , M-Gyarados, Thundurus-I, boosted Kartana/Xuritree/Nilhelgo,
boosted Mimikyu, Kingdra, boosted Scizor in Rain, Volcarona, M-Pinsir, some good Z-move mons like Manaphy, Terrakion, Garchomp.

Heck if Gene has enough pressure on it as a steel type, it gets worn down easily and will be in the range of Lele and Water Shuriken Greninja.

Take Duggy out of the equation and you have the two obvious hard checks heatran and marowak, while things like magearna, jirachi, muk, and gastrodon can give it trouble too.

Lastly, with a little creativity and stretching your team, you could do stuff like hp-fire Gross if your team hates genesect that much, and you could still own shit with gross's other three moves.

I really think our suspect process needs to center around replays showing how the mon fares against common/semi-common teams.
They reveal multiple factors and plays that are ignored by an overly paper/calc focused discussion.
 
Last edited:

baddummy

formerly I'm Rick Astley
is a Tiering Contributor
I think this discussion, primarily sparked by ABR, about exactly what makes something “too good” and the result of following a certain ban philosophy is important, and probably needed to happen very soon if it didn’t happen now.

I don’t believe keeping a powerful threat, in this case Genesect, in order to stop certain cores being annoying, or the metagame becoming stale would be “broken checking broken”. Following through with the philosophy of banning stuff that lacks hard counters and is very good against all styles, would not then lead to banning very good, hard to beat balance cores which could make the metagame stale, such as FiniSteela. Even if you argue that these cores ARE fine, you can’t suspect resulting matchup issues. Therefore the “we shouldn’t use broken to check broken” counter-argument is somewhat invalid as there is no intention or possibility of suspecting the consequential issues of removing the top dogs of the metagame. You either pull the trigger on banning centralising threats or you don’t.

Instead, I’m going to use the term “overbanning” to refer to what people say, quite rightfully, we should try to avoid. So, logically, the next question is, would banning Genesect be overbanning and lead to a stale metagame, or is it necessary?

I definitely think less is more in terms of bans, but I also think Genesect goes too far in terms of what it does for the team using it. There’s a number of aspects that separate it from other breakers. I’ll put the weakest point first, which is unpredictability - with Genesect, what can seem like a safe answer could actually be a very weak one. It is easily the best pokemon for using lures in the current metagame, which creates all kinds of mind games. It’s also not like it gives up any amount of viability for running, say, life orb over choice band. This puts the Genesect user in a very advantageous situation.

However, there are much bigger factors which mean that I think it is banworthy. There is no winning answer to Genesect, as it is both an amazing breaker and pivot. Compare this to Tapu Lele, where you can switch in your bulky Magearna, just as an example, and then volt switch, then chances are you’re in a good position. Genesect, even if you do make the correct move, will u-turn, and maintain momentum. It has the somewhat unique factor of being a pokemon which not only applies massive offensive pressure, but also hits super hard with u-turn, and as such keeps up that offensive pressure continually for no real effort on the part of the the Genesect user. Furthermore, unlike Hoopa-U, for instance, Genesect has a nice set of resistances and better physical bulk. It therefore has a decent number of switch-in chances throughout a game, rather than having to rely on team members to give it those switch-in chances.

In conclusion, I’m 100% in favour of keeping something which is very good, and potentially centralising, to reduce matchup issues or staleness. However, I’m not in favour of keeping something which comes in somewhat easily, applies massive offensive pressure easily, and then maintains that offensive pressure easiest of all. Very good pokemon which are strong against all styles are actually a good thing for the metagame, this is definitely an argument that resonates with me. But personally, I see Genesect as strong to the point where it takes skill out of the game. Due to the number of potential adaptations it has, I don’t see this situation improving. Certain pokemon do influence the tier heavily, and serve as a “healthy stimulant”, but, in my opinion, this category does not encompass Genesect, which is why I think it ought to be banned.
 
Last edited:
I'm happy people have the courage to somewhat go against ABR after Mega-Sableye wrongly got banned from ORAS OU. Definitely a step forward.


I do agree with him that the tier leaders should let OU evolve a few steps further, but wanting to get rid of Genesect before SPL starts is definitely understandable. Maybe they could've waited until week one was finished to see if the issue is there, but I believe that the council has the foresight to understand that it wouldn't be needed. While I don't think Genesect stands out like a sore thumb, the metagame will eventually reach a state where more bans will happen, and Genesect will be a part of that potential group of Pokemon that will eventually go to Ubers, so you might as well be rid of it now. However I wouldn't fret if it stays in OU, because it will be banned later in the generation anyway. Mark my words.

There's more than enough input on Genesect as a Pokemon for me to post something valuable that you haven't read earlier.
 

lyd

formerly Exploudit
is a Pre-Contributor
Im gonna be honest, Genesect is extremely fun and definately one of my fav mons, however the fact that it can literally lure the entire metagame depending on its coverage options is insane; obviously, it can't run all coverage moves at once, but its nearly impossible to successfully pivot out of Genesect and get info on what moves it has, since your team takes tons of chip damage in the process and the Genesect player can just U-turn on top of it. Also, Genesect is extremely versatile and has a huge spectrum of sets it can run, anything from CB, to Mixed EBelt, or even Specs, Shif Gear or Scarf. Finally, Genesect gets an amazing ability from Download, giving it essencially a Choice Band/Choice Specs boost every time it switches in, further increasing its unpredictability factors and overall strenght. Steel/Bug is also an amazing typing that leaves Genesect able to take a non-Fire-type move or two.

Even though I'd hate to see Gene go, I'm pretty sure that it is the right thing to do, just like in BW and XY, goodbye Genesect, this is a BAN :P
 
RE: Thread, posting and moderation quality.

This discussion is the worst serious thread I have seen on this website. I'm not sure if it's because we are in a new generation, but the quality of arguments and personal insults seen in this are really unacceptable. We really need to have some sort of protocol to ensure that this discussion remains civil and of high-quality. Locking the thread is a band-aid and doesn't actually answer the core issue of why this thread fell to such a low standard in the first place. If we are meant to be the pinnacle of competitive battling in singles we need to ensure that all forums relevant to competitive discussion are civil and intelligent. Honestly, reading this reminded me of a type of argument/discussion you'd see on Game FAQs. We need to do better.

As for genesect, I feel that there is no clear answer in this suspect; both sides have some valid points. Here are what I feel that discussion points should be going forward.


Discussion points: Where both sides stand
No ban

While Genesect may not have any true counters due to the unpredictability of its sets (band, specs, LO 4 attacks, rock polisj, scarf, etc.), this is undermined by the fact that it cannot fit all of these coverage options in one set, meaning that it will inevitably be walled by something. Therefore, when facing Genesect, you need to play around its movepool in order to assess whether or not your Alolan Marowak can check it reliably, for example. Similarly, at team preview, you can guess what their likely Genesect will be depending on the team it's on. Say I am facing a guy who has a Genesect and Tapu-Koko: there is a strong possibility that this Genesect will be a douse-drive or HP Ground variant in order to lure Alolan Marowak for Tapu-Koko. With that in mind, I will scout for that coverage move and prioritize keeping Marowak healthy.

Moreover, banning Genesect will just lead to other Pokemon becoming banned as it is no longer around to check potentially broken Pokemon (Tapu Lele). This will create a slippery slope where things will get banned to the point where the metagame will become stale.

The overarching point is that while it in theory has no counters, due to 4MMS, it will always be walled by something. Counterplay in the form of scouting its set is a necessity to deal with any Pokemon with a wide offensive movepool, and this is no different for Genesect. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to handle Genesect, as they way you'd handle it would be similar to other similar (in movepool terms) offensive threats (Hoopa, Greninja, etc.). Because of this Genesect isn't broken and does not deserve to be banned.



Ban

Handling Genesect from team preview is something that puts an immense strain on teambuilding, and is unreasonable to prepare for. Unlike other offensive threats, having one or even two hard checks is not always good enough to actually deal with Genesect reliably, as it has the potential to have a coverage move to blow back those checks. This means that it almost creates a 'lose at team preview' situation whereby the team with Genesect and an appropriate lure vs. the team with the check that loses to the lure is automatically in favour of the team with Genesect. This can, as a result, open holes for other offensive threats with Similar checks (for example removing Heatran with a HP Ground Genesect allows Tapu Lele to spam Psychic) and creates a situation where the team without Genesect essentially loses.

This is augmented by the fact that Genesect can easily pivot out of bad matchups -- regardless of whether or not it is running a lure -- with U-Turn and preserve momentum. Having access to a +2 priority move and a setup option (rock polish) also augments its versatility. Greninja and Hoopa, who have great mixed attacking stats and movepools, have no priority or access to reliable setup (NP Hoopa is garbage) unlike Genesect. Finally, its amazing defensive typing brings at least some defensive utility to offensive teams, and gives it some opportunity to switch in. All these factors in addition to its aforementioned movepool means that Genesect has no place in S/M OU and needs to be banned.



My thoughts
Both sides have some decent points. I am in agreement that having a 'ban-happy' mentality is something we as a community need to absolutely avoid. If we ban things to hastily we risk creating a stale metagame that will be centered around old threats from gen 6 that are not deemed broken (lando+lati cores; heatran+ferrothorn+rotom-w cores, etc.).
In this case, however, this argument does not outweigh the brokenness of the Pokemon in question. I'm not going to write an essay about Genesect's versatility and ability to beat all of its checks (have no counters).

Eht made a very good post comparing Hydreigon's suspect test to this one here. As a UU player at heart, I participated and voted in that test, and have noticed that there are some parallels to be made here. Hydreigon was suspected for a similar reason to Genesect: It has no counters and can easily beat any of its checks with a coverage move. However, it was deemed not broken (which I agree with) because you could easily scout its set and was always walled by something depending on its movepool (no steel move, walled by Sylveon; no fighting/ground/fire move, walled by steel types).

Genesect goes beyond this though. Not only are you forced to scout its set, but you run the risk of losing to a shift gear/rock polish variant, and Genesect packs priority which is something Hydreigon would dream of. It has better natural bulk and a better defensive typing, which gives it more switch-in opportunities. Finally, while both have U-turn, Genesect can actually do considerable damage to an incoming check with its potentially download boosted U-Turn, while Hydreigon does minimal damage and only gains its team momentum. Thus, I feel that this in addition to its versatility and lack of counters makes Genesect broken and in need of a ban from S/M OU. See the image below for what 'pushes it over the edge.'



TD;LR:
cliff.jpg


Happy discussing.
 
Last edited:
I'm not going to post an essay, but from my view this absolutely deserves to be banned. To me, Genesect is like ORAS Greninja or Landorus-T on steroids with its versatility, typing, STAB u-turn, fantastic speed and movepool. I doubt the meta will ever fully adapt to his presence because he's so adaptable. None of the counterarguments I've seen so far have convinced me otherwise.
 
I feel like I need to refute many pro-ban arguments, and elaborate on why keeping Gene for now is the right move.

1) "Genesect is overcentralizing because you need to specifically prepare for it" - You also had to use a Keldeo or Bisharp check/counter on every ORAS team, but no one's saying they're broken.

2) "Genesect is overcentralizing because there's no reason not to use it on every team" - I'm pretty sure Lando-T has more usage and things like Lati and Lando in ORAS still probably had more usage than Gene now. Usage aside, adding a Genesect can stack weaknesses and using a certain set can leave you weak to some styles, so it can't mindlessly be slapped onto a team.

3) "Genesect lacks full counters" - Well, there's also no full counters to Kyurem-B. Obviously Gene is a better pokemon but a lack of counters alone doesn't break something. You can still pivot around these mons reasonably well and revenge kill easily.

4) "Genesect is too versatile with its coverage options" - XY Greninja had coverage to beat like any possible switchin besides Clef and Chansey (taunt aside). Greninja's Protean boost is basically equivalent to a download boost (which is less reliable). Even Greninja now has few full counters if any, with even more coverage than Gene, so this doesn't make something broken.

5) "Genesect may have some walls, but it can just U-turn on them" - Any U-turn pokemon can use the move on any of its counters. Scizor using U-turn on Heatran isn't exactly a broken thing and this has more to do with U-turn as a whole rather than Genesect.

So, why exactly are people saying Gene is broken? As Finchinator said, it's something like "Similarly to Hoopa, Genesect is very tough to switch into, but it doesn't have a crippling weakness like other good breakers." What this sounds like to me is that Genesect is just a good pokemon. It may not be super frail or slow, but there is always a trade-off in using a certain Genesect set. You also aren't necessarily advantaged for using a Gene while your opponent does not.

Generally speaking, we should really only be banning pokemon that warp the tier significantly or truly are too powerful. Something like Zygarde-Complete was just too good for OU, and Aegislash definitely had a negative effect on the tier that Genesect cannot even barely compare to. In the case of Lando-I, the quickban was less clear and maybe shouldn't have happened but the council was unanimous due to its Gene-like coverage + insane power simultaneously. If we just dropped Genesect into ORAS and went by this tiering philosophy, then hell yea it would be broken. But right now we have a new Generation that is still evolving.

From this point onwards, with this test included, we need to give the meta time to settle. As we saw with Pheromosa, many people (myself included) saw it as quickban worthy early on but eventually realized it can be managed. Pheromosa's counters like Toxapex can't be used on every team, but you can still pivot into it reasonably well and revenge it even without the hard counters. Additionally, many people thought Mega Metagross was broken, but later realized it can be managed. Perhaps the same will happen with Genesect, and it won't be seen as this menacing down the road. To ban Gene at this time simply stunts the growth of the tier, as Jukain pointed out.

To suspect ANYTHING this early on is foolish. Something is either quickban worthy or it shouldn't be touched at all. Suspect tests exist to test how a metagame is with/without a given suspect. This point is rendered useless when a metagame has existed for such a short amount of time. Having a suspect test so early on was a mistake, but we can prevent consequences from this mistake by voting to not ban. If Gene turns out to still be an issue in the future, we can suspect again. Mega Sableye stayed in ou after its first test and was later banned, so please do not rush this decision and harm the tier permanently.
I find it as if there is a clear flaw in every one of the paragraphs. Also, the number of reasons to ban genesect are extremely high.

You did not need multiple Keldeo/Bisharp checks. You need multiple Genesect checks. Suppose you chose Heatran as a Genesect check. If Genesect carries Hidden Power Ground sets, your check is gone and you lose to Genesect if it clicked rock polish and sweeps. If it's toxapex, it similarly gets blown back by Thunderbolt.

The reason why Genesect can be slapped on virtually every team is because it can run a variety of sets that beat certain playstyles and can function various different roles like lure, pivot, secondary-wincondition, cleaner, sweeper. With its sets it can fulfill two of these. Also, mind to tell which weaknesses it stacks? It can fit in cores like Genesect/Dugtrio Genesect/Hoopa-Unbound, Thunderbolt Shiny Genesect/Pheromosa, Thunderbolt Genesect/ Specs Ash-Greninja.

Genesect isn't even close to Kyurem-B. It isn't weak to rocks, and Kyurem-B is nothing but a stallbreaker, without scarf sets and can't boost speed. Also Kyurem-B cannot carry U-Turn or Extreme-Speed. Also Genesect has a much solidder defensive typing.

XY Greninja had 2 counters. Genesect has 0. Even Greninja got banned in ORAS because it could easily brake through clefable with Gunk Shot. Again Greninja has few full counters, while Genesect has none. Also Greninja has close to zero bulk and can be revenge killed by Dugtrio and scarfers like lele.

Even if you predict the counters, Genesect can easily get off a U-Turn. This U-Turn hits for damage on them, and since Genesect is the strongest U-Turner, you get off more damage than other U-Turns. Genesect also has so few counters (unlike Mega Scizor) and can really pressure the Pokémon in with its much stronger U-Turn. This doesn't risk 50/50es. If the Pokémon in resists U-Turn, you shouldn't have brought it in. If it's your only answer, then it's Genesect's defensive utility pulling you through, and you give away some momentum, however if it's a good teambuild, then it should be infrequent and you can play around that happening once in a while.

Genesect is not anything close to only a breaker. Genesect is a Pokémon that can hugely pressure offensive builds, if it gets a rock polish up. Having middling bulk, and a solid typing for an offensive Pokémon, Genesect can easily pick up a rock polish and start devastating offensive teams. It's middling speed tier with its middling bulk and good offenses allow it to pressure balances and bulky offenses. Genesect also gives free momentum. Unlike Hood pa, Genesect is not trapped by Dugtrio all that easily (Dugtrio cannot directly switch into it and kill it.)

Genesect truly is too powerful. Genesect can hardly compare to Zygarde-Complete because Zygarde-Complete was extremely overpowered. It can compare to aegislash, however as there are certain flaws with Aegislash such as no reliable recovery, which isn't huge, but neither are the Genesect flaws. Genesect is certainly less broken than aegislash but is still ban-worthy this early, as we miss the time to build more teams if we don't ban it this time. Also, it is foolish to suspect a majority of things this early, but Genesect is borderline quickban worthy.

We have given one and a half month for the meta to settle. This is enough to ban a Pokémon that was bannable for two straight generations previously. Why does it stunt to the growth of the tier?

As I stated earlier, if we ban Genesect right now we will get more time for developing new sets in a meta. We already have found it problematic enough, for fullfilling not one but many aspects, and should thus be, considered to be broken.
Edit : I almost forget, I am leaning ban.
 
Just a point to disseminate. I've seen a great prevalence of stall at higher elo's on the suspect ladder. Gene doesn't exactly break stall entirely, once you've worked out its set you can easily wear it down and grind out the win, as long as you make the right plays.

I've already stated in this thread that I am pro ban but to play the devil's advocate and for the point of continued discussion, do we really want to remove something from the tier that can potentially handle some widely used stallmons?
Yes, Genesect destroys balance but if it is banned, which seems likely, do we really want a metagame where stall is arguably the best playstyle?

I think we can all expect pheromosa, greninja and tapu lele to be suspected in the coming year, if these are added to the banlist we have a tier where stall is likely to be the most effective and consistent playstyle and I'm not sure if I can really endorse that.
 
Last edited:
Just a point to disseminate. I've seen a great prevalence of stall at higher elo's on the suspect ladder. Gene doesn't exactly break stall entirely, once you've worked out its set you can easily wear it down and grind out the win, as long as you make the right plays.

I've already stated in this thread that I am pro ban but to play the devil's advocate and for the point of continued discussion, do we really want to remove something from the tier that can potentially handle some widely used stallmons?
Yes, Genesect destroys balance but if it is banned, which seems likely, do we really want a metagame where stall is arguably the best playstyle?

I expect pheromosa, greninja and tapu lele to be suspected in the coming year, if these are added to the banlist we have a tier where stall is likely to be the most effective and consistent playstyle and I'm not sure if I can really endorse that.
Huh? Stall is probably more precarious than ever with powerful Z-move users like Manaphy, Porygon-Z, Terrakion, Xurkitree, and the like running around.

Even if Stall becomes overbearing...we address that problem when/IF we get to it.
 
Huh? Stall is probably more precarious than ever with powerful Z-move users like Manaphy, Porygon-Z, Terrakion, Xurkitree, and the like running around.

Even if Stall becomes overbearing...we address that problem when/IF we get to it.

I have not seen 1 terrakion in any of the games I've played or observed. Mana, pz and xurk are all closed down by unaware clef or chansey or at least traded. I know you mean it in a general way as to say "there are a lot of Pokemon that can boost and exploit stall" but a well made stall team will have been built with these things in mind.

I would like to imagine we don't have to ever address "stall being broken in OU" but we'll see.
 
Just a point to disseminate. I've seen a great prevalence of stall at higher elo's on the suspect ladder. Gene doesn't exactly break stall entirely, once you've worked out its set you can easily wear it down and grind out the win, as long as you make the right plays.

I've already stated in this thread that I am pro ban but to play the devil's advocate and for the point of continued discussion, do we really want to remove something from the tier that can potentially handle some widely used stallmons?
Yes, Genesect destroys balance but if it is banned, which seems likely, do we really want a metagame where stall is arguably the best playstyle?

I think we can all expect pheromosa, greninja and tapu lele to be suspected in the coming year, if these are added to the banlist we have a tier where stall is likely to be the most effective and consistent playstyle and I'm not sure if I can really endorse that.
I'm confused slightly by what you're getting at. You say Genesect doesn't really break Stall, so why would his banning be a noticeable gain for the playstyle, unless you're talking indirectly by offense losing a tool?

Besides Manaphy and Z-moves gaining as things Stall needs to prepare for, things like Ash-Greninja, SubCoil Zygarde, and the still present Hoopa-U are going to add to the weight they have to endure. (Disregard most of this, I know jackshit about Stall trends and little about how some of these mons turned out or changed).
Even assuming they get past that, I don't see why a metagame where Stall is the strongest playstyle is some kind of major issue unless it is overwhelmingly and uncompetitively so, this coming from a user who doesn't care much to play the style or against it.

Obviously not everyone's going to agree on what their ideal metagame is, but unless something is deemed uncompetitive or broken, I think at times we just have to live with it. Look at the Gen 5 Weather Wars, or the overall match up state complained about for ORAS. Many didn't find them fun, but they were metagames that for what they were could be called competitive. There are just as many people who would dislike an offense dominated metagame as a (potentially) stall dominated metagame in his departure, so it shouldn't be a point of discussion as far as getting rid of Genesect, at least not before you can reasonably argue that Genesect is not an unhealthy/uncompetitive entity in the OU metagame.
 
Last edited:
Just a point to disseminate. I've seen a great prevalence of stall at higher elo's on the suspect ladder. Gene doesn't exactly break stall entirely, once you've worked out its set you can easily wear it down and grind out the win, as long as you make the right plays.

I've already stated in this thread that I am pro ban but to play the devil's advocate and for the point of continued discussion, do we really want to remove something from the tier that can potentially handle some widely used stallmons?
Yes, Genesect destroys balance but if it is banned, which seems likely, do we really want a metagame where stall is arguably the best playstyle?

I think we can all expect pheromosa, greninja and tapu lele to be suspected in the coming year, if these are added to the banlist we have a tier where stall is likely to be the most effective and consistent playstyle and I'm not sure if I can really endorse that.
Your observation is correct, but your assessment is off in my opinion.

First of all, it is definitely easier to rack up wins with stall in the lower to middle ladder. That said, the top of the ladder is dominated by stall too.

I believe this is the result of the fact that Genesect was the thing keeping overwhelming cores like lando + fini and/or ferrothorn, or Lele + pheromosa and/or mega alakazam at bay; rather than genesect being particularly potent against stall (actually it was pretty useless against stall). Now that Genesect is gone, these cores can be abused on balanced and offensive teams to no end (as I mentioned earlier you see these cores on virtually every non-stall team). That makes it relatively difficult to win consistently compared to stall teams. Each battle is now determined by matchup. It's a race of "who is going to wear down the opposing lando-T first" or "how do I become faster than a scarfed pheromosa" or "who is going to get their ash greninja first" etc.

The metagame took a step back with Genesect gone. Offense is heavily pressured by pheromosa. Scarf pheromosa is borderline untouchable to offense with psychic terrain. games with balance teams have become switch fests.

In the face of all this, why not just play stall, which doesn't have to rely on a speed crapshoot or a race to see who can beat each other's lando first? Stall is overpowered in my opinion, with the addition of Toxapex, which has ferrothorn defenses, cannot be poisoned, phenomenal typing, recover, and the incredible ability regenerator. It's borderline impossible to wear that thing down, or even pp stall, when it has the support of a full blown stall team defense, complete with M-sab's hazard control and dugtrio's trapping, behind it.

Laddering to get the requirements to vote was brutal, to say the least.
 
Last edited:
My point of view on the argument above:

I agree Stall is used a LOT on the ladder. This is because Stall is probably the most consistent archetype of team to win with in this current meta, akin to Sand Balance in BW if theres any BW players reading this. Whether it is a problem or not is yet to be seen, we probably need more time and see how the meta evolves if Stall stays present like that. The thing is this might just be for ladder, as ladder by definition rewards consistent teams, which is why its much harder to get reqs with an offensive team than with a stall team, its just the nature of it. SPL is around the corner so its a good idea to see how it goes and gauge the meta.

That being said, I think a Genesect ban definitely helps combat Stall. Contrary to what most people say here, I never saw a single mixed Genesect offensive set. The 3 most common sets I saw were Scarf, Band, and Rock Polish with any combination of special moves (Usually Douse Techno Blast, Bug Buzz and Thunderbolt). All of these suffer greatly against stall, like, really badly. And its not like Stall CANT afford to scout its set. If its Techno Blast youll see it in his name, that leaves guessing between Band and Scarf. Sending in Toxapex works just fine, it tanks even +1 Scarf Tbolt and regains HP by switching out. Then if it U-Turns you, just do a simple damage calc and now you know if its Band or Scarf. So yeah, Stall teams fuckin love seeing a Genesect in Team Preview because they abuse it hard. Skarm, Toxapex, even Chansey abuse the shit out of it by getting free layers and stuff like Chansey and Clefable get free Wishes more often than not to aid the rest of the team. So why ban Genesect if its so bad against Stall?

Because Genesect is fucking ridiculous if youre playing balance or offense. Like I said before, they (offense especially) dont have the blessing of being able to scout the Genesect set without potentially incurring in some HEAVY damage. That means offense has to have an answer to Genesect or risk getting curbstomped by it, which is fine, plenty of stuff do the same (Zard Y, Pinsir, etc). The thing is the stuff that Genesect promotes, be it Rocky Helmet Lando to wear it down from spamming U-Turn, Mantine or Tapu Fini for balanced teams, Heatran, Ferrothorn and praying for no fire move (tbh tbolt became more common than flamethrower but I digress), Hippowdon, Excadrill. Faster things help too, such as Tapu Koko, Scarf Lele, Pheromosa (scarf or not), yada yada. What do all of these have in common: They fucking suck dick against Stall. The only mon that you could make a case for handling Stall would be Taunt Magma Storm Tran I suppose, and without Lefties its not gonna enjoy switching in on U-Turns. Zard Y, Pinsir, Hoopa, all these mons that need to be taken into account dont gain free momentum by throwing a strong ass STAB at whatever switches in. Also thats for scarf and band, late game Rock Polish Genesect just completely shitstomps Offense teams.

So yeah, Genesect being gone will definitely help Offense prepare for Stall teams, since they have one less huge threat to consider. (This is my anecdotal opinion, my teams in the suspect ladder have been much better at handling stall than my pre-suspect teams).

Ban Genesect and lets see how the meta keeps evolving regarding Stall teams. We will be able to see if its just a ladder thing (which honestly has happened since the dawn of time, IPL and Earthworm would always run fat ass teams in Shoddy Ladder).

By the way:

Besides Manaphy and Z-moves gaining as things Stall needs to prepare for, things like Ash-Greninja, SubCoil Zygarde, and the still present Hoopa-U are going to add to the weight they have to endure. Even assuming they gets past that, I don't see why a metagame where Stall is the strongest playstyle is some kind of major issue unless it is overwhelmingly and uncompetitively so, this coming from a user who doesn't care much to play the style or against it.
Manaphy does nothing to Stall, Unaware Clef is one of the most common mons in such teams. Z Moves actually help in some cases, such as Lando, but if you dont drop Rock Polish to have Stone Edge + Fly Z move, then you arent gonna win with it. Skarmory hardcounters the Supersonic Skystrike set, Clef counters the Continental Crush one. If you have both then yea you can beat it but Skarm can still hit you with a Counter and boom its over.

Ash Greninja is a Genesect-like mon. It is amazing against Offensive and Balanced teams that can overwhelm Tapu Fini, Tangrowth, Mantine, etc. It blows dick against stall. Chansey hardwalls it. Toxapex hardwalls it. Heck if they run Ferrothorn it can hardwall it. Dugtrio beats it with EQ + Sucker Punch (sashed ones). Its never gonna get to transform against Stall, even.

Hoopa-U loses to Dugtrio stall. Just keep rocks away (like thats hard with Mega Sab + Defog Skarm) and bring it in whenever you want, survive with Sash, and OHKO with Reversal every single time after rocks.

SubCoil Zygarde is the closest one you pointed out to handle Stall if it has Toxic, but even then it can lose to Unaware Heal Bell Clef, plus Skarmory Whirlwinds it away every single time. If Toxapex got TSpikes up, it also straight up loses so better keep those off the field.

Stall in the hands of a good player is a complete bitch to face. Its not impossible to beat, but your team must be prepared for it and you better play your wincon perfectly cuz otherwise you lose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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