I don't have any particular brief to carry regarding this suspect; I'm personally inclined to do no ban > WP ban > Dynamax ban, but I could flip no ban and WP ban. I'd like to offer some thoughts about Dynamax though, which perhaps some people could find useful.
Unlike suspects in previous generations, where I was laddering for the most part without exposure to the suspected Pokemon at hand, in this suspect I was able to experience all of my opponents taking advantage of Dynamax. So unlike a Marshadow suspect test where I would see the Pokemon maybe 2-5 times in 45 games, I was able to experience opponents from a wide variety of skill levels using the suspected element at hand. Some of the things I was looking for included:
- Did the impact of Dynamax influence my losses against players I thought were less skilled than me?
- Did the impact of Dynamax influence my wins against players I thought were more skilled than me?
I would answer both of these questions negatively. In the losses I took, I think the majority came down to play, with a couple seeming to heavily depend more on luck elements (though I could just be biased) and one due to incorrect mechanics on the simulator. I played against several opponents I would consider to be very intelligent, like Nails, and I don't feel like a negative influence of Dynamax was impacting the result of the game.
Dynamax seems to be used in three different ways, so far as I can tell:
- Trying to get a snowball at the start of the match; attempting to punch holes in the opponents team to limit resources in the mid and lategame.
- Reacting to an opponent's Dynamax to maintain a neutral board position; using additional bulk to leverage an exchange of Max Moves that results in either player not gaining too much.
- Preserving for a lategame cleanup against a weakened team, where the opponent has limited resources to be able to handle a lategame Dynamax.
I think there is far too much emphasis on 1) as being a problematic influence on the metagame. Opening with early Dynamax may seem initially appealing, but it is often a dangerous thing to do, since the opponent generally has more HP and has more options to maneuver with Protect and switches. It also obligates that you maintain consistent pressure on the opponent; if you lose a Dynamax after just a couple hits, you're going to be in big trouble. I do find 1) to be frustrating sometimes in VGC, because there losing a Pokemon is losing a much greater % of your team, which forces a midgame and endgame sooner. But in Doubles, I quite frankly don't have that same issue, because I have more flexibility simply by having additional Pokemon. This brings me to another point:
- Certain Pokemon depend on being dedicated Dynamax users to be most effective on their team, and some Pokemon are very obviously not going to Dynamax in most games
Pokemon like Charizard, Durant, Lapras, Dragapult, Rhyperior, and others depend much more heavily on their ability to Dynamax to be successful. If you opt to Dynamax another Pokemon on your team, these Pokemon are typically significantly worse off, which forces your hand to prefer Dynamaxing those Pokemon. But that comes at the cost of being limited at Team Preview. Unlike in VGC, where I am not obligated to bring my "dedicated Dynamax user" every game, in Doubles, you are, and there's a significant opportunity cost in not Dynamaxed them. It's like bringing double Mega stones with Kang and Tyranitar in Gen 6; your Tyranitar is simply inherently worse off if you Dynamax the Kang. The trouble with these dedicated Dynamax targets in DOU is that you very rarely have option 2) available to you, to Dynamax reactively to your opponent (and most of the time you're using them to try to accomplish 1) ). Your opponent also knows it and can prepare their gameplan accordingly.
Similarly, though this is more obvious, Pokemon like Incineroar, Dusclops, and Gothitelle are not good Dynamax users. The point of this is that the options for the opponent's Dynamax are more limited. Within a good team, having multiple potential Dynamax users is important. Simultaneously, however, your opponent cannot Dynamax all of their Pokemon. I think it is healthy for the game to ask "if x Dynamaxes, these others can't; how can I take advantage of that?", etc.
It seems to me that Dynamax generally has the following weaknesses:
- Stat drop cycling
- Status
- Preferring to have a lot of HP when Dynamaxing (maxing a mon post-Focus Sash or a WP boosted mon at 30% doesn't tend to work out well)
- Pressuring unfavorable damage trades (I kill your Dynamax without my own)
- Speed control (for very hyper offense Dynamaxed Pokemon)
- Opposing Dynamax (doesn't really count for the purposes of this suspect imo)
In addition to particular weaknesses relevant to the specific Pokemon.
With respect to Weakness Policy: I think if you have a healthy Weakness Policy Dynamaxed Pokemon, like Dragapult or Necrozma, they are very, very difficult to stop. I also find it more challenging to deal with Weakness Policy + Dynamax in Doubles OU than in VGC. In VGC, your opponent is locked into their team throughout a best-of-three set, and once you find the Weakness Policy, that's the only one they can have. In Doubles OU, there are multiple viable items that Pokemon like Tyranitar, Melmetal, Excadrill, etc. can use, and you typically have much more limited means of discovering it since you're not team locked. While you can't Dynamax multiple Weakness Policy Pokemon, it's moreso that if you
happen to get a Weakness Policy boost, then you can max that. I am not particularly impressed by side-procing Weakness Policy, as it seems to obligate a commitment to 1) in your style of Dynamaxing or else risk not being able to pivot to the proper board position in the mid or lategame (an example that comes to mind is
this game from SPL). It is good, but I don't find it to be the sort of "omg if it happens I can never lose" sort of strategy I sometimes see advocated. I'm not convinced it is so good that it necessitates a ban, but certainly if I were to pick between Weakness Policy and Dynamax itself, I'd pick banning Weakness Policy.
Finally, and this is really getting out into the weeds here, but I have noticed a general trend of Doubles OU players who also frequently play VGC saying Dynamax is fine, while players who play DOU more exclusively tend to be pro-ban. I personally think this is because VGC players have been forced to learn how to deal with Dynamax in a way DOU players haven't. I remember at my first few live tournaments for VGC that I felt Dynamax was pretty overwhelming; I didn't really know how to push my advantage while I had it, and I didn't know how to beat the opponent's. I felt as if I was forced to learn how to deal with it, since for VGC, there was a 0% chance Dynamax was not being allowed. That was the new normal, so if you didn't learn how to deal with it, you simply just won't do well. After additional experience, I feel like Dynamax is perfectly fine in VGC, and that it's even more reasonably balanced in Doubles OU simply by merit of having more Pokemon. I
don't mean to imply that Doubles OU mains are lazy or incapable of utilizing counterplay, or that top Doubles OU players can't reasonably come to the conclusion that Dynamax is broken from experience or other reasons. However, I do think Dynamaxing adds a new, healthy, competitively rich depth to the game that players looking to replicate success in older generations in identical ways would prefer to do without. They just don't like having to learn this additional fundamental mechanic, and would prefer it be like it was before. This paragraph shouldn't influence whether or not you think Dynamax is broken, and it isn't a reason for or against banning it, but it's simply an observation.
