Announcement np: SS OU Suspect Process, Round 1 - Boom Boom Pow

[moocows]

We can most certainly re-suspect test Dynamaxing if it ends up staying (somehow) and gets to be (somehow) more of an obvious problem. Quite sure there's no real limit to the number of suspects it sees. I would hope we wouldn't just continue on with an unhealthy meta on the grounds of "welp, we already suspected it. Not much else we can do". Hell, we've suspected Drill like a million times in BW.

Of course, this is the councils decision ultimately, but if it is a big enough issue, and it somehow manages to skate by this suspect, we would likely be in this position again.

Consider me corrected, then! That's actually a relief to me as I was worried we'd be stuck with dynamax if we failed to ban it here.

I still support the immediate ban, though. I think we'd all prefer to avoid a protracted dynamax testing phase where we progressively eliminate the worst offenders only to end up banning dynamax in the end anyway. In that case, we could potentially spend months in an unhealthy, uncompetitive, and generally unpleasant meta, all in order to conclude that we probably should've just banned dynamax in the first place.

Also, I'm not sure this is in line with suspect testing principles, but I think we should also weigh risk/reward here. If there's a 20% chance that we can somehow finagle ourselves into a competitive dynamax meta, is that worth risking an 80% chance of possibly months of tedium and drudgery? (I'd personally put the chance of the latter at 100%, since I think dynamax is inherently uncompetitive and no number of additional bans is going to render a dynamax meta palatable.)

 

[mertyville]

My short experience with Dynamax hasn't been a pleasant one, but it was only on the National Dex Ladder (don't worry, I won't use it as means to argue). In certain situations, 1 Dynamax Move can be more devestating than having a Z-Move because you can dynamax anything and anything can have up to 4 powerful Dynamax moves.
But I have been wondering if Dynamaxing shouldn't be preserved if possible. It's been the same argument with Z-moves last gen and permanent weather in gen 5, if I recall. Correct me if I am wrong, but when we look at the pattern of some of these broken Dynamax Pokemon, they seem to be reflected by their abilities: Gyarados has Moxie, Hawlucha has Unburden, Excadrill with Sandrush/Sand Force etc. Would it be reasonable to ban these abilities or problem Pokemon instead? Perhaps even items that get exploided like the choice items?
I say this because you can use your own dynamax to check opposing dynamax more safely. Tho still with in a risk vs reward situation. I can understand that it would probably make things more inconvinient in the long run, since other Pokemon will benefit from the broken mechanic.

Personally, I dislike Dynamax.

 

[Colonel M]

My short experience with Dynamax hasn't been a pleasant one, but it was only on the National Dex Ladder (don't worry, I won't use it as means to argue). In certain situations, 1 Dynamax Move can be more devestating than having a Z-Move because you can dynamax anything and anything can have up to 4 powerful Dynamax moves.
But I have been wondering if Dynamaxing shouldn't be preserved if possible. It's been the same argument with Z-moves last gen and permanent weather in gen 5, if I recall. Correct me if I am wrong, but when we look at the pattern of some of these broken Dynamax Pokemon, they seem to be reflected by their abilities: Gyarados has Moxie, Hawlucha has Unburden, Excadrill with Sandrush/Sand Force etc. Would it be reasonable to ban these abilities or problem Pokemon instead? Perhaps even items that get exploided like the choice items?
I say this because you can use your own dynamax to check opposing dynamax more safely. Tho still with in a risk vs reward situation. I can understand that it would probably make things more inconvinient in the long run, since other Pokemon will benefit from the broken mechanic.

Personally, I dislike Dynamax.

Originally I deleted this post, but I figured now would be a good opportunity to describe why Complex Bans are, usually, a bad idea in practice. Some of the pro-Dynamax posts mention how banning Dynamax will scare and confuse new players. Complex Bans are also infamous for doing this in the process. Consider how a newer player will likely approach the game - they're not going to read the rules (no one does, even myself), and the player will become even more confused in situations as follows:

Let's entertain the idea of the complex bans of not allowing Dynamax with a Choice Item and Lower Tiers can use Dynamaxed Pokemon. These are two common arguments for Pro-Dynamax, and I think this post will help illustrate how these ideals are not as good as you think they are.

Let's start with Choice Items. Choice Items and Dynamaxing are fickle, but a newer player will likely become confused when Pokemon like their Galarian Darmanitan cannot Dynamax while holding a Choice Scarf but their Gengar holding Black Sludge can. Let's add some scenarios to the table. How would you address situations where a Pokemon receives a Choice item via Trick? They would suddenly not be able to Dynamax, correct? This means now if I use Trick Rotom-W and a player switches into Ferrothorn as a response to, say, a predicted Hydro Pump, this Pokemon suddenly cannot Dynamax in a defensive position which could be a problem if Ferrothorn suddenly comes against a Dynamaxed Gyarados and Ferrothorn is at full health. Let's also go back to Galarian Darmanitan. How would you rule this particular Pokemon, because Gorilla Tactics acts like a Choice Band? You would effectively prevent it from Dynamaxing, but you could also argue a player could be left confused on this too. Technically Darmanitan is not holding an item, though - the ability now has to come into question if it falls in line with this principle or not.

Let's talk about Lower Tiers and allowing them to Dynamax. The focal problem is how our tiers are structured - they're structured to allow usage stats to dictate what Pokemon belongs in what tier. So yeah, sure, UU Obstagoon could probably Dynamax in your OU environment. Let's suppose for a moment that Obstagoon is now considered OU by usage 3 months down the line. That would mean its an inaccurate representation of the tiers as to why Obstagoon is OU. After all, once it approaches the OU territory it would then not be able to Dynamax either. And even if you allow it, now you create a complex problem of "what qualifies as a lower tier Pokemon".

Remember these are rhetorical questions - they're not to be answered in a serious environment and I don't want people answering them either. My point is simple - Complex Bans are not the approach to a mechanic like this either. The complex bans proposed by most users create problems for the people that some argue for - newer players who look to get into the competitive scene. This is also why I do not buy into any argument of a complex ban whatsoever, and I don't think anyone should realistically entertain the idea either.

 

[mertyville]

Originally I deleted this post, but I figured now would be a good opportunity to describe why Complex Bans are, usually, a bad idea in practice. Some of the pro-Dynamax posts mention how banning Dynamax will scare and confuse new players. Complex Bans are also infamous for doing this in the process. Consider how a newer player will likely approach the game - they're not going to read the rules (no one does, even myself), and the player will become even more confused in situations as follows:

Let's entertain the idea of the complex bans of not allowing Dynamax with a Choice Item and Lower Tiers can use Dynamaxed Pokemon. These are two common arguments for Pro-Dynamax, and I think this post will help illustrate how these ideals are not as good as you think they are.

Let's start with Choice Items. Choice Items and Dynamaxing are fickle, but a newer player will likely become confused when Pokemon like their Galarian Darmanitan cannot Dynamax while holding a Choice Scarf but their Gengar holding Black Sludge can. Let's add some scenarios to the table. How would you address situations where a Pokemon receives a Choice item via Trick? They would suddenly not be able to Dynamax, correct? That would also throw the player into a confusing situation. Let's also go back to Galarian Darmanitan. How would you rule this particular Pokemon, because Gorilla Tactics acts like a Choice Band? You would effectively prevent it from Dynamaxing, but you could also argue a player could be left confused on this too.

Let's talk about Lower Tiers and allowing them to Dynamax. The focal problem is how our tiers are structured - they're structured to allow usage stats to dictate what Pokemon belongs in what tier. So yeah, sure, UU Obstagoon could probably Dynamax in your OU environment. Let's suppose for a moment that Obstagoon is now considered OU by usage 3 months down the line. That would mean its an inaccurate representation of the tiers as to why Obstagoon is OU. After all, once it approaches the OU territory it would then not be able to Dynamax either. And even if you allow it, now you create a complex problem of "what qualifies as a lower tier Pokemon".

Remember these are rhetorical questions - they're not to be answered in a serious environment and I don't want people answering them either. My point is simple - Complex Bans are not the approach to a mechanic like this either. The complex bans proposed by most users create problems for the people that some argue for - newer players who look to get into the competitive scene. This is also why I do not buy into any argument of a complex ban whatsoever, and I don't think anyone should realistically entertain the idea either.

I was confused why my comment was considered as violating the rules. Because I wasn't suggesting a Dynamax + Choice item clause. I meant removing Choice Items as a whole from standard play. What happens to the lower tiers were never interest of Smogon's ruleset. If Tornadus is broken in OU but ok in UU, it would still be banned from both, wouldn't it?
Same suggestion was going for abilities and the Pokemon mentioned. Not a Moxie + Dynamax Clause but banning Moxie OR Gyarados itself etc.
Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Weather Wars since it had a complex ban. My thoughts were on something like Tornadus or Manaphy in Gen 5 or Pheromosa in Gen 7 when I mentioned Z-Moves and Weather Wars.

 

[Colonel M]

I was confused why my comment was considered as violating the rules. My point wasn't suggesting a Dynamax + Choice item clause. I meant removing Choice Items as a whole from standard play. What happens to the lower tiers were never interest of Smogon's ruleset. If Tornadus is broken in OU but ok in UU, it would still be banned from both, wouldn't it?
Same suggestion was going for abilities and the Pokemon mentioned. Not a Moxie + Dynamax Clause but banning Moxie OR Gyarados itself etc.
Perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Weather Wars since it had a complex ban. My thoughts were on something like Tornadus or Manaphy in Gen 5 or Pheromosa in Gen 7 when I mentioned Z-Moves and Weather Wars.

The focal points are these are what people argue for bans. Even though your ban is not necessarily a complex ban, now we have items that are far older than Dynamax as a whole and have never been broken until the introduction of Dynamax. Now we have to consider questions such as what the core problem is - is it Dynamax, or is it the Choice Items? Considering that Choice Items do not necessarily break many Pokemon, whereas Dynamax breaks multiple Pokemon, the simplest conclusion that can be reached is that Dynamax is actually the problem and Choice Items are not. In your scenario it seems rather silly to ban Choice Items simply to preserve Dynamax as well when Dynamax has more problems going against it than just Choice items and Choice items break maybe one Pokemon tops with the absence of Dynamax.

I apologize for misinterpreting your post otherwise. But I figured that your post hinting complex bans was a good opportunity to explain to pro-Dynamax players why their ideas aren't as ideal as they think they are.

 

[ArcanePhoenix]

For the record, we usually write articles about things that are suspect tested. We have done this for most of SM and even ORAS if I recall correctly. This will most likely be the case with Dynamax as well, so there's no need to worry about it too much, as we will ensure that the article is of quality and clear about whatever decision was made and why.

That never stopped people from hating Smogon and spouting nonsense. Unfortunately.

To the topic at hand:

From what I have seen so far Dynamax is... bad. Very bad. One doesn't have to be a genius to figure out that the entire mechanic was not designed for singles. Most of what needed to be said has been so I see little reason to go into the details once again besides stating that I completely agree with the OP.

To the people talking about non smogon reasons to considere during the banning process: Why? Why would we care about cartridge gameplay? Why should we care about what a certain youtube ape will spout again? Haters gonna hate about decisions they do not understand and do not wish to understand. Our concern is primarily the Smogon ruleset and ensuring it is balanced and competitive, granting us an expression of skill which is pretty much not achievable in a singles metagame without such rules.

Is the next set of dynamax users likely to take the top spot if we ban only the blatantly broken abusers? Yes.
Would it take an extremely long time of instable and short metagames to reach a balanced state? Yes.
Would more than half of OU get axed in the process? Likely.
Do we have the time and patience to deal with the mess resulting from complex banning things piece by piece? I don't. I think most people here don't and in fact want a stable meta asap. Axe the damned mechanic and hope the meta settles soon so we can deal with matters which deserve attention.

 

[OrangeFluffy Sheep]

Correct me if I am wrong, but when we look at the pattern of some of these broken Dynamax Pokemon, they seem to be reflected by their abilities: Gyarados has Moxie, Hawlucha has Unburden, Excadrill with Sandrush/Sand Force etc. Would it be reasonable to ban these abilities or problem Pokemon instead? Perhaps even items that get exploided like the choice items?

There's also Pokemon with Flying STABs, Pokemon with stat-up moves, Pokemon with both, Pokemon that can benefit from the weather or terrains, tanks, it's probably easier to list the Pokemon that don't break Dynamaxing.

It's the fossils because max geyser and max lightning are weaker. But they might even use it to avoid a check and set weather/terrain and get stat-ups for later.

The snowballing tendency isn't limited to just the current top guys. Haxorus and Flygon have Dragon Dance and fighting moves. Sigilyph can sit on a burn or use Tinted Lens to ignore 1/2 resistances and has a STAB Max Airstream. Charizard can Max Flare up a sun for Solar Power fling Max Airstreams. Gmax Gengar has a trapping move and the strongest Max Ooze in the game. And some of the transfer guys who are coded but not present like Jirachi and the Swords of Justice feel like ticking time bombs.

How many times do we lop off the top of the metagame? Is Dynamax so worth preserving even though it'd just make the rest of SWSH OU a treadmill of suspects? Would TDK eventually just write "learns Bounce" as the OP? Dracovish's ability to OHKO about anything with Fishious Rend is really gross, but we'd only get around to examining it in 2025 when Diggersby finally gets its fucking due, because the Airstream/Knuckle/Knuckle fun time is very common and fundamental to the exploitation of Dynamax.

 

[Of Moose & Men]

Sigilyph can sit on a burn or use Tinted Lens to ignore 1/2 resistances and has a STAB Max Airstream.

I want to add that I've been running Magic Guard LO CM Sigilyph lately, and it is a threat after that Max Airstream. LO +1 Flying, Psychic, and fire coverage is scary.

And people have been saying Clef is scary...

Sigilyph hits hard, but being able to Dynamax and get that +1, set psychic terrain to laugh at sucker punches, and boost my STAB +1 LO boosted Psychic is just plain silly.

I'm just going to try to stop watching this thread, I feel like I either repeat myself, or addressing responses that don't really warrant a response.

 

[MastaTraina]

Sigilyph hits hard, but being able to Dynamax and get that +1, set psychic terrain to laugh at sucker punches, and boost my STAB +1 LO boosted Psychic is just plain silly.

Sigilyph is flying; you get neither of those.

 

[McCoolDude]

I'm only casually playing the meta, but so far I've won most of my matches by relying mostly on choice items and switching moves.

I wanted to write a whole post on this, but I'm reading post after post of my exact thoughts in this thread. It's good to know that I'm not insane.

There are several distinct and obvious ways that Dynamax is unhealthy for the meta. There are (essentially) two ways to handle correcting that: a complex and iterative series of bans to correct issues as they come, or a simple and direct ban of Dynamax. I can't imagine why anyone would seriously consider the former to be the desirable option here. If Dynamax is to stay, it should stay in AG with the rest of the busted mechanics.

 

[Adamant Rotom-W]

Correct me if I am wrong, but when we look at the pattern of some of these broken Dynamax Pokemon, they seem to be reflected by their abilities: Gyarados has Moxie, Hawlucha has Unburden, Excadrill with Sandrush/Sand Force etc. Would it be reasonable to ban these abilities or problem Pokemon instead? Perhaps even items that get exploided like the choice items?

So let me get this straight: Are you suggesting banning a bunch of things that would be perfectly fine in an environment without Dynamax, simply because they're broken when Dynamax is unbanned? That is backwards, it makes no sense. What's the point of keeping the mechanic in if it's the source of all these problems anyways? Are we gonna ban every Flying-type move because Max Airstream is busted?

 

[Colonel M]

No you can't. You can try, but it's not going to end well for you. What, are you just gonna Max Guard, take a hit, then Max Guard again? Defensive Dynamax is a myth, it only truly benefits offense.

That's not completely true. I'd argue your argument looks at Defensive Dynamax the wrong way. Counterpoint - one of the big reasons why things like SpD Dugtrio crept into existence was because when Dugtrio attempted to trap Toxapex the Toxapex could weigh whether it would be more beneficial to it staying alive or sacrificing to allow another Pokemon to Dynamax. Defensive Dynamax in the case of Toxapex can make Dugtrio trapping it a lot less reliable. Chople Berry Tyranitar can also Dynamax if Sash is broken somehow and prevent itself from being trapped and KOed by Dugtrio. Ferrothorn could attempt to wrestle against Gothitelle when it existed in the tier by Dynamaxing and using Max Overgrowth as a response to attempt to KO Gothitelle before it set up too many Cosmic Powers. Defensive Dynamax has two benefits - it makes your defensive Pokemon bulkier to help it withstand the trap attempt and power up its moves and / or provide various effects to make trapping it more difficult.

Defensive Dynamax exists, but the more realistic thing to say is that it has major opportunity costs associated with it and you also have to make a dangerous assumption at times if your opponent will also Dynamax in front of you. This isn't me saying this makes Dynamax healthy, by the way, but I don't want a misleading statement either even if it favors the direction of what I prefer to see (Dynamax's ban).

 

[Adamant Rotom-W]

That's not completely true. I'd argue your argument looks at Defensive Dynamax the wrong way. Counterpoint - one of the big reasons why things like SpD Dugtrio crept into existence was because when Dugtrio attempted to trap Toxapex the Toxapex could weigh whether it would be more beneficial to it staying alive or sacrificing to allow another Pokemon to Dynamax. Defensive Dynamax in the case of Toxapex can make Dugtrio trapping it a lot less reliable. Chople Berry Tyranitar can also Dynamax if Sash is broken somehow and prevent itself from being trapped and KOed by Dugtrio. Ferrothorn could attempt to wrestle against Gothitelle when it existed in the tier by Dynamaxing and using Max Overgrowth as a response to attempt to KO Gothitelle before it set up too many Cosmic Powers. Defensive Dynamax has two benefits - it makes your defensive Pokemon bulkier to help it withstand the trap attempt and power up its moves and / or provide various effects to make trapping it more difficult.

Defensive Dynamax exists, but the more realistic thing to say is that it has major opportunity costs associated with it and you also have to make a dangerous assumption at times if your opponent will also Dynamax in front of you. This isn't me saying this makes Dynamax healthy, by the way, but I don't want a misleading statement either even if it favors the direction of what I prefer to see (Dynamax's ban).

Alright, fair enough, I will admit that throwing that last part in was wrong of me and I'll be removing it because it's purely wrong information. However, I still think there's some merit to what I said, being forced to "waste" the Dynamax on defense puts you in a big disadvantage compared to your opponent because you're missing out on that nuking or sweeping potential. Even if you manage to survive the three turns, there's a big dent on at least one of your mons, a dent you can't replicate as easily because you dynamaxed defensively. It may have its merits as a damage reduction option, but outside of specific scenarios, at the end of the day the cons outweigh the pros IMO.

 

[BrothaJdogg]

Welp, my first post for the new gen.

I've been on the fence about Dynamax for the longest time, but after playing a fair share of games since SwSh came out and following the discussion, I find that there are two particular issues that make the mechanic banworthy:

1) Breaking Choice-lock: At this point, this particular clefable has been heavy-slammed to death, come back as a Gengar, then hit again with a +6 Hydreigon's dark pulse, but allow me to re-iterate. The entire purpose of choice items is to provide the user with a power boost while also creating a more competitive and thought-invoking metagame. They were designed to foster a sort of mental chess-match between the opponents, where prediction and response was key to success (and as the game progressed, as you learned what your opponents default response was to your move you would predict that or condition them to make the move while you respond accordingly; of course, they could do the same to you, but that was all part of the fun of the game). But with Dynamax breaking choice-lock that interaction is lost and replaced with an interaction that primarily favors the choice-user. For example, lets say I switch Toxapex into a G-Darm's icicle crash. Normally this would give me the momentum (by which I mean I have more options for the next move that go in my favor):

a) He switches to poison susceptible check/counter, I go for T-spikes or Toxic on the switch = Favors me
b) He switches into poison Immune check, I go for Scald to fish for a burn = Luck reliant, but in general favors me
c) He switches to his check, I predict this and double into my response to his switch = Favors me
d) He stays in and goes for it again, I stay in and go for toxic, scald, or recover = Favors me
e) I predict his switch to his check, but he stays in and goes for crash again = I just got played, fair enough

However, but with Dynamax allowing him to switch up moves I'm suddenly the one in the disadvantage state:
a) He D-Max's Darm and goes for Max Quake on me staying = Pex goes down, I lose momentum AND a key to my defensive backbone
b) I predict his D-Max --> Quake and go into my appropriate response = OK, cool, but now he can go for a different Max move, which means next turn the only two "good" realistic options I have are to either defensively D-max (which may let me survive and revenge kill properly, but I lose out on my max form for the rest of the fight) or I try to stall out by protecting or switching between mons (but then all my mons get hefty chip damage dealt that may cost me the game in the long run)

On paper this may seem like it's still technically a 50/50 since technically the first five options still exist, therefore 4 out of 7 options favor me. But in reality it forces the player to consider making non-ideal moves at any given time because of the fear that the opponents choice-locked mon could Dynamax to switchup. It's somewhat comparable to the argument against Arena Trap from the previous gen for those that remember that.

2) There will ALWAYS be "self-boosting" Dynamax abusers: Originally DD Gyara, SD Excadrill in Sand and SD Haluwcha were the main culprits, but as people started finding answers to we started to see DD Dragapult, NP Togekiss, and NP Hydreigon take its place. If dynamax stays this will continue to happen in perpetuity. Hydreigon in particular brings up a very key subpoint that I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone discuss up to this point: Mons with an extensive movepool and/or multiple boosting options are EXTREMELY dangerous Dynamax abusers. While the most popular King Ghidorah set is the Sub + Nasty Plot + Dark Pulse + Flash Cannon variant, when I saw that my Menacing Multi-Headed Mascot also got Dragon Dance I ended up experimenting with that as well. The set I've been using that's specifically designed around the self-boosting Dynamax mechanic that I've seen quite a bit of success with thus far is:


Fluffy (Hydreigon) @ Sitrus Berry
Ability: Levitate
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Adamant/Jolly Nature
- Dragon Dance
- Acrobatics
- Superpower
- Earthquake/Iron Tail

But therein lies the problem; now my opponent has to deal with the 50/50 of whether or not I'm physical or special Hydreigon ON TOP of the "50/50" of whether or not I will Dynamax it. And again, if it's not Hydreigon abusing its multiple options its Clangorous Soul Kommo-O, or Nasty Plot vs. SD Lucario, or a shell-smasher with both physical and special attacking options.

TL;DR: while it's undeniable fun to go on a power trip with a properly used/timed Dynamax, it is definitely not a competitive mechanic in a 6v6 meta. If I can make reqs its a BAN CHUNGUS-MODE for me, Dawg.

 

[teal6]

Similarly to the PR thread, I do not have a lot necessarily to write here. I do not think it is necessary. Dynamax is so outrageously broken that it cannot reasonably be considered to stay.

 

[Adamant Rotom-W]

If you've seen my previous posts then you know my stance, but I want to make a post about it anyways, if I can get reqs then I'm voting Ban.

I'm going to make an analogy to fighting games: Let's talk about neutral, advantage, and disadvantage states real quick. As the name implies, neutral occurs when neither player has an advantage and both are trying their best to get one with their moves, techniques, and stage control. Advantage and disadvantage happen when neutral ends because someone got a hit in, the player in advantage wants to push said advantage as much as possible, and the player in disadvantage is trying to reset the match to neutral, or very rarely, pull it into an advantage for him. Keep in mind that advantage doesn't always mean winning and disadvantage doesn't always mean losing, because these states can change very frequently.

Let's apply this principle to Pokémon. I feel that the only truly neutral moments are team preview and the first turn, after that the game wildly swings from semi-advantage to semi-disadvantage states because of Pokémon switching and predictions, until someone gets a correct read and makes a serious dent, gets a status effect on a key opponent, or KOs a mon, then the game truly enters the advantage-disadvantage stage. Items like the three Choice items and Life Orb increase the risk of your plays but also make it easier to get this advantage by increasing your speed or the power of your moves. Getting hazards in and Taunting/KOing the opposing Defogger/Spinner? Advantage state. Pokémon is surrounded by this very system, and every move you make, including switches or sacking a mon, affects the game via this idea.

However, Dynamax deletes this very delicate, ever-changing concept. By being able to break away from Choice locks, Encore, and avoiding phazing like Whirlwind, you can punish your opponent for what would normally be a correct play to deal with your play. Switching into a counter when something's choice-locked won't work either because now they can just Dynamax and choose a coverage move. You're essentially breaking the concept of advantage and disadvantage. Your opponent punished you for a wrong choice, and yet you're suddenly more powerful than before, your disadvantage state is basically gone for three turns. It's comparable to a character in a fighting game having a move that comes out instantly and knocks the opponent very far away from them, removing their disadvantage. Not only that, but suddenly all of their other moves have drastically increased power and a secondary effect that always benefits them for 40 seconds.

What I want to demonstrate with this analogy is, no matter if you make a right play, a lot of the time the opponent can essentially punish you for doing the right thing by Dynamaxing. This isn't even taking into consideration the most problematic Dynamax users mentioned in the OP, that can easily get in, for example, after you KO an opposing mon. They then proceed to snag the advantage you had, and make huge progress towards winning the game by forcing a switch, which is usually followed by a setup move, then Dynamaxing and KOing, on average, 2 mons. By the time Dynamax ends, they have acquired even more boosts and are harder to deal with. It's a barrage of incredibly buffed moves and stat increases that becomes increasingly harder to deal with as it goes by.

Another point that I want to make, separate to my analogy, is that I have yet to see any solid argument for keeping Dynamax in. Keeping it because "then we won't have a gen gimmick and that's boring", saying "it's only 3 turns", "we could just ban the best abusers" or "both players have it so it's balanced" are all terrible reasons to keep something like this in. I don't understand why we would do so many bans and even potential clauses just to keep the problematic mechanic, when banning it would instantly fix it all. Maybe I'm biased because I despise what Dynamax does to the competitive metagame, but I tried to be as unbiased as possible and scrolled through both threads filled with discussion on the subject and never did I say to myself "You know what? That's a good reason to keep Dynamax in". So far, this thread is filled with reasons to ban Dynamax, and all the Pro-Dynamax arguments have huge flaws or are just downright silly suggestions.

 

[Dan]

I hope you won't object to a new contributor injecting his two cents when I've had an idea that doesn't seem to be in the discussion. Probably you won't go for it, but I guess there's no such thing as too few ideas...

I was wondering if any thought had been given to limiting the circumstances in which Dynamax can be used. Specifically, as this seems to be the spirit in which the mechanic is used in the games, whether it could be restricted to when a player has only a single Pokémon remaining. (By which I mean both players can do it once that condition is met.)

This would make use of the mechanic much more predictable, and while keeping it available, and keeping it as a strategic consideration without it being too unbalanced, since I would have thought in most cases it wouldn't be enough to turn the tide in the very late game?

Other people are in a better position than me to judge the implications of this, but it seems from the discussion and my experience that the reason Dynamax is so centralising is its unpredictability, and if it could be confined to a predictable moment in a battle, especially towards the end, might that not be a way to salvage it while addressing many of the concerns raised here?

 

[termi]

I hope you won't object to a new contributor injecting his two cents when I've had an idea that doesn't seem to be in the discussion. Probably you won't go for it, but I guess there's no such thing as too few ideas...

I was wondering if any thought had been given to limiting the circumstances in which Dynamax can be used. Specifically, as this seems to be the spirit in which the mechanic is used in the games, whether it could be restricted to when a player has only a single Pokémon remaining. (By which I mean both players can do it once that condition is met.)

This would make use of the mechanic much more predictable, and while keeping it available, and keeping it as a strategic consideration without it being too unbalanced, since I would have thought in most cases it wouldn't be enough to turn the tide in the very late game?

Other people are in a better position than me to judge the implications of this, but it seems from the discussion and my experience that the reason Dynamax is so centralising is its unpredictability, and if it could be confined to a predictable moment in a battle, especially towards the end, might that not be a way to salvage it while addressing many of the concerns raised here?

this has already been discussed and rejected several times in this thread. it's ban or no ban. we're not tinkering with the inner working of dynamax just to make it manageable since we prefer simpler to more complex bans and bans that could be replicated on cartridge to bans that can't be. please people just read through the thread because this has been brought up and rejected like 6 times now.

 

[CringeMeta]

I hope you won't object to a new contributor injecting his two cents when I've had an idea that doesn't seem to be in the discussion. Probably you won't go for it, but I guess there's no such thing as too few ideas...

I was wondering if any thought had been given to limiting the circumstances in which Dynamax can be used. Specifically, as this seems to be the spirit in which the mechanic is used in the games, whether it could be restricted to when a player has only a single Pokémon remaining. (By which I mean both players can do it once that condition is met.)

This would make use of the mechanic much more predictable, and while keeping it available, and keeping it as a strategic consideration without it being too unbalanced, since I would have thought in most cases it wouldn't be enough to turn the tide in the very late game?

Other people are in a better position than me to judge the implications of this, but it seems from the discussion and my experience that the reason Dynamax is so centralising is its unpredictability, and if it could be confined to a predictable moment in a battle, especially towards the end, might that not be a way to salvage it while addressing many of the concerns raised here?

I remember this specific idea being brought up during the discussions about what should be tested. As termi said, the primary reason this will have been rejected is that it's a very complex ban, and, regardless, the suspect scope was already locked down as soon as this topic was created. However, there are other problems with this specific complex ban.

In the Sword/Shield campaign, the CPU trainers seem never to be able to switch Pokemon, and (at least the ones that can Dynamax) seem to send their Pokemon out in a specific order, with their predetermined Dynamax candidate always being used last. This predictable dynamic also enables and highly encourages the player to use their Dynamax at the same time, in case they need extra power to break through it or HP to tank a hit if the opponent survives. It is therefore very stable.

Multiplayer singles is not like this due to switching being frequently used, so although the timing of the Dynamax would become more predictable, either player could still potentially Dynamax any Pokemon on their team without making item/build sacrifices, which is one of the major criticisms of the current meta. The snowballing effect from max moves will also remain even after the final Pokemon's Dynamax has ended, and there will still be critical 50/50s (maybe even more so than currently) on the turn the final Pokemon comes out.

Beyond this, trying to control which Pokemon are in when Dynamax is unlocked will become highly incentivised, due to the large rubberbanding effect there would be if a player gets to use something like a healthy Gyrados as their final Pokemon, especially against an opposing Pokemon it can efficiently set up on. This seems like it could continue to warp and centralise the meta in bizarre ways, like encouraging the widespread use of moves like Memento to reliably control which Pokemon gets to Dynamax, or heavy use of phasing, hazards and status to try to wear down the opposing team evenly. It doesn't seem very promising at best, and conceivably could end up in an even worse state than the current meta.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

The more I play in this Suspect (and in Random Battles whenever my salt gets sky-high), the more I despise Game Freak for implementing such a poorly thought-out mechanic. The additional effects make no sense, the G-Max Moves being weaker makes no sense, the bajillion immunities Dynamons get make no sense, the HP boost being so high makes no sense, the fucking Choice lock uplifting makes no sense.

Sometimes I think we would be fine if we just banned the worst abusers and moved on, but I don't like the idea of banning, say, Dragapult (imo the most annoying Dynamon after Hawlucha) just to keep around some mechanic that's fundamentally broken, at least in 6v6 Singles. It's sad that this may be the first gen in a while with no special mechanics but if I wanted to play in a "broken" meta I'd exclusively play Battle Spot Singles.

 

[Hugin]

One thing I would like to remind everyone of: Gen V Weather. Specifically, Aldaron’s Proposal, the Drizzle+Swift Swim ban. This was decided on after a lot of debate early in the gen, when it was clear rain was broken, but people didn’t want to ban weather abilities as they were a core mechanic for the generation and honestly did seem like they might be managed with some effort and judicious banning.

And BW was never balanced after that. Any time Smogon managed to ban enough weather abusers to balance the meta, a new Legendary/moveset/game was released, leading to new bans being needed. Even after XY released, bans have continued to be necessary just to keep whatever new abuse is popular from spiraling out of control. By the time it was obvious that Weather was unsalvageable, the meta was so developed that banning Drizzle/Drought/Sand Stream was impossible.

To be clear, I’m not blaming the BW Council/Playerbase/etc, they worked extremely hard trying to maintain the mechanics developed by GF and trying to make a balanced, enjoyable, fair meta. But the games were released in 2010 and they had to ban Sand Rush last November. Let’s not do that this time around. The carts have a stupidly broken mechanic that a huge portion of the meta can abuse. Future abusers will be released by GF and new tactics will be found. Let’s not be debating whether EQ/Iron Head/Drain Punch Jirachi is broken in 2028, let’s make the cleanest possible decision now and ban Dynamaxing.

 

[Jajoken]

I've been watching a bit of VGC, which is where the mechanic was obviously balanced around. People are arguing that a Dynamax ban would dismantle the intended developer design of singles when Gamefreak clearly did not balance it around singles. In fact, they don't seem to balance anything around singles, given that they don't even offer a singles 6v6 online mode with a timer longer than 20 minutes. I don't think they really care about singles whatsoever once you beat the story. But I digress.

While watching VGC on Twitch and other places outside the reach of Smogon, the comment I keep seeing is that "If both players can use Dynamax on any Pokemon at any time, how is it broken?" At a glance, Dynamax might just seem like an equal-opportunity battle mechanic like simply using the "Switch" function. But think of it like this.

Imagine the fall 2019 season of basketball is starting, and the NBA tweaks their rule-set to allow each team the use of a jet-pack for one of their players. The jet-pack has 10 minutes of gas before it can no longer be used. The player using the jet-pack can also break certain key rules of basketball, like being able to carry the ball for as long as they're in the air.

Your first thought is probably "Wow, jet-pack basketball sounds sick," which it does. Dynamax, regardless of its faults, is still a really fun game mechanic. But then your second thought might be, on a surface level, this jet-pack is not an unbalanced mechanic, because both teams can use it for the same amount of time with any of their players. However, look at the actual implications for the game of basketball. Those 10 minutes of jet-pack time are vastly more important than anything that happens in the rest of the match, and the player that gets to use the jet-pack is vastly more important than their teammates. If you want to properly react to the opposing team breaking out their jet-pack, the only real response is for one of your players to suit up and deal with them in the air. All the technique built over decades of play has completely given way to this new gimmick that the NBA added solely as a marketing stunt, and now coaches are forced to overhaul their whole drafting and training strategy to acquiesce. Some pro players like James Gyarados have also become really strong for completely arbitrary reasons, just because they happen to be really good at using a jet-pack, even if they've been decent at best for the past few seasons when it comes to actually playing basketball.

Smogon, in comparison, is a regional basketball league far less official than the NBA and not as well-known. Nonetheless, they are well-respected by players of the sport, and they have the responsibility of setting their own rules. In this admittedly absurd scenario, are you going to just go along with the NBA's poorly thought-out gimmick for the sake of consistency, or are you going to ban the use of jet-packs for the health of the game?

 

[apesh!t]

After flirting just below 80 GXE for 50 games, I am too bored and annoyed to keep trying, so I won’t be voting, but I’ll still give my opinion.

I would be voting ban. My biggest issue is the constraint that this puts on the builder. You basically have 2 options, and that is to go hard offense with Gyarados togekiss and other fuller setups, or run Ferropex Cursola and darm and dittoand other filler BO mons. Bulky offense or balance can’t keep up with offensive Dynamax. Offense just turns into a ditto guessing game. Half of my games I just find myself thinking the following “remove 1 Pokemon then mindlessly click buttons to wait for him to set up then boom ditto” snooze fest. I don’t even want to try to build because everyone practically has the meta solved because every game is essentially a coin flip or a 100% win or loss. I have played maybe 5 out of the 50 or so games I have gotten that felt like actual competitive maneuvering was involved in winning or that the person I lost to generally outthought me. That being said, I’ll be sticking with the much more competitive dpp unless dynamax gets banned(and that is certainly saying a lot I think)

Last thing I would like to say is that I think that this meta game would be very good without dynamax. Bulky builds would obvi be very good but there is some breakers with fantastic potential (lo clef, cm hat, nphydrei, np gar, darm, vish and volt etc.) also heavy duty boots is great vs ferropex hazard stack builds and bulk up taunt Corvi 6-0s fat anyway. That’s just off the top of my head so to those saying stall and bulk would be op I don’t really think so. It would be a good number of different archetypes that are truly viable and I think offense would be good and besides balance vs balance Requires the most playing ability anyway so I would really mind it. I think that swsh could be great without dynamax

 

[teal6]

I agree with apesh!t 's post, despite him having a very terrible username, his point is good. Probably my biggest issue with Dynamax, if i have to put words to it, is that Dynamax so ludicrously inhibits team structure. I got reqs with Moody of all things which is now banned, but the core idea of the team is still fine in practice - in a Dynamax environment it is startlingly easy to engineer that "one turn" that offense loves so much to snowball. As a primarily offensive player this makes it feel more cheap to me, part of the fun of playing a high-risk, high-reward team is that you need to be clever in a lot of different aspects to get that turn to work. You need to double, bluff, predict, and when it comes off, it feels incredible, and the crowd goes wild. Dynamax will probably never have this effect, you can start a snowball basically anywhere and the only real hope your opponent has is that they can Dynamax themselves to keep up with it. It makes the game boring.

Similarly, passive nonsense that just "doesn't lose" to Dynamax seems to be en vogue as well. We are stuck with basically two archetypes, neither of which are terribly fun, and will continue to be stuck with them if we don't get rid of this mechanic.

 

[Raikaria]

One thing I would like to remind everyone of: Gen V Weather. Specifically, Aldaron’s Proposal, the Drizzle+Swift Swim ban. This was decided on after a lot of debate early in the gen, when it was clear rain was broken, but people didn’t want to ban weather abilities as they were a core mechanic for the generation and honestly did seem like they might be managed with some effort and judicious banning.

And BW was never balanced after that. Any time Smogon managed to ban enough weather abusers to balance the meta, a new Legendary/moveset/game was released, leading to new bans being needed. Even after XY released, bans have continued to be necessary just to keep whatever new abuse is popular from spiraling out of control. By the time it was obvious that Weather was unsalvageable, the meta was so developed that banning Drizzle/Drought/Sand Stream was impossible.

To be clear, I’m not blaming the BW Council/Playerbase/etc, they worked extremely hard trying to maintain the mechanics developed by GF and trying to make a balanced, enjoyable, fair meta. But the games were released in 2010 and they had to ban Sand Rush last November. Let’s not do that this time around. The carts have a stupidly broken mechanic that a huge portion of the meta can abuse. Future abusers will be released by GF and new tactics will be found. Let’s not be debating whether EQ/Iron Head/Drain Punch Jirachi is broken in 2028, let’s make the cleanest possible decision now and ban Dynamaxing.

I was someone harshly against Gen 5's case of 'bend over backwards to save Rain'. Because frankly that's what ended up happening. Rain was still busted after SS+Drizzle was banned, leading to the bans of Manaphy; Thunderus and Tornadus-T as well to save Rain. And even with all those bans; Rain still dominated OU, was suspected multiple times [and almost banned each time].

How busted was Rain? Gastrodon is OU in B/W. For reference; Gastrodon was in the lowest tier every single other generation. Why is it OU? Because it has Storm Drain to wall Waterspam; and is a Ground-type so can soak Water/Electric coverage. That's it.

I think in hindsight; it's pretty clear Drizzle absolutely should have been banned at the start of Gen 5, and Aldaron's Proposal ultimately was a failure; because even after 3 additional Bans; and the meta adopting drastic measures to try and deal with it [Hi Gastrodon] Rain was still a dominant strategy.

I mean; it goes some way to show that Drizzle was broken than Gamefreak nerfed it.

Here we are again, at a similar junction in Gen 8 with Dynamax. A potentially generation-defineing mechanic that is clearly broken. The question is how much would we have to bend over backwards to 'Balance' Dynamax. How many things would we need to ban for Dynamax to not be hilariously broken? How much of Gen 8 would be dedicated to 'saving Dynamax'.

I mean; even if you allow Gigantamax and not Dynamax [Which absolutely shouldn't happen; G-Max is still Dynamax; it just gets a special move]; you could still end up with; say; Charizard being broken because Max Airstream is a thing that exists; and Charizard gets Double HP and can set up it's own Sun. People can still run multiple pokemon that can G-Max on a team so people can't predict it. And so on.

Because right now; the main argument I see against banning Dynamax is 'We can ban the Abusers like Gyarados' or 'We can have another vote and Ban D-Max but keep G-Max',. And to arguments like that I simply say: Gen 5 Drizzle.

Gen 5 frankly serves as a pretty stark reminder of why you shouldn't try and balance a broken mechanic.