Announcement np: SS OU Suspect Process, Round 10 - Royals

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bro you are completely wrong since you are comparing OU and Ubers together and since you forget that Ubers meta is centralized to different kind of threats that can't be checked from Zamazenta-C. Also the argument of the terrible movepool is really absurd since it has a bolt beam coverage, 2 really good stabs and also howl. Ye howl is not like swords dance but it does not change a lot since this mon as already a good atk and can break a lot of OU common mons. People who say that it can't break other mons should play more games or they just have built terrible teams lmao. As every mon it has weaknesses but those can be covered so easily.
You know 130 isn't that impressive anymore in OU without a boost since...
252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 248+ Def Hippowdon: 139-165 (33 - 39.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
252+ Atk Life Orb Kubfu Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 248+ Def Hippowdon: 142-168 (33.8 - 40%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock

It absolutely needs the howl boost in order to work even with adamant. Do note that it requires adamant in order to guarantee the 2HKO on some of its defensive checks after a howl boost yet it also wants jolly to prevent being outspeed and revenged by torn-t and vile.
+1 252 Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 248+ Def Hippowdon: 189-223 (45 - 53%) -- 89.1% chance to 2HKO after Stealth Rock
+1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 248+ Def Hippowdon: 208-246 (49.5 - 58.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock

Also its 4mss is still a thing so you're still getting walled by something anyway depending on what coverage you drop. If you drop Wild Charge then bulky waters and metal birds will laugh at you. If you drop Ice Fang then Zapdos, Lando and Chomp shit on you. If you drop Bash then all fairies says fuck you and don't get me started if you choose to drop CC. Scouting what it runs isn't that hard either with regenerator and teleport being all over the place. If only it could hold a choice band so it can get a +1 equivalent and run all four of those moves...
 
252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 248+ Def Hippowdon: 139-165 (33 - 39.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
252+ Atk Life Orb Kubfu Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 248+ Def Hippowdon: 142-168 (33.8 - 40%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
This completely misses the problem the pro-ban side have with Zam-C. Everyone knows it's not that impressive unboosted lol. But try and set up to +1 with a Kubfu in front of half the tier while not being revenged by anything and tell me how it goes.
 
This completely misses the problem the pro-ban side have with Zam-C. Everyone knows it's not that impressive unboosted lol. But try and set up to +1 with a Kubfu in front of half the tier while not being revenged by anything and tell me how it goes.
Ironic that you also missed my point since i'm only comparing its power. Despite its bulk Zama isn't the hardest mon to revenge as between chip damage and CC drops its easy to worn down enough for revenge killers such as pult, koko or scarfers to revenge.
 
i used to lean to ban (if i got the ability to vote). but after using it im really thinking its fine in ou. the fact that cc and wold charge both hamper its bulk is not good and makes it surprisingly not that bulky feeling from my experience.
the breaking power is pretty ehh lets just call it questionable lol.
i get why people think it might shape the metagame to a worse side but that is something i find really hard to say because enough teams already have checks for it and with pretty small chances you are kinda fine. im curious how this will turn out.
 
This completely misses the problem the pro-ban side have with Zam-C. Everyone knows it's not that impressive unboosted lol. But try and set up to +1 with a Kubfu in front of half the tier while not being revenged by anything and tell me how it goes.
Even if Zama got a +1, it still is forced out by the very common Lando, it still has terrible coverage, meaning that it's very likely that you have a naturally bulky mon that beats it and it's still not a very good wall breaker.

Even if you take the best coverage, in CC + BoltBeam, both CC and Wild Charge cut down your bulk and Ice Fang is really weak.

Let's say you somehow set up to +1, the enemy team still has multiple common mons and scarfers that threaten Zama out since Zama has no reliable recovery.

Also, can I just say how awkward Zama's typing is? It's a Steel that doesn't resist Fairy, Flying or Psychic, meaning that if I wish to have a defensive check to either Tapu Lele or Torn-T, relying on Zama more than once is very risky
 
Here's the thing, if :Arceus: drops somehow, it will be extremely overcentralizing, similarly to :Dracovish:, which caused every team to have a water immunity, in the form of absolute garbage like :Vaporeon: and :seismitoad: , or :Spectrier:, which mandated every team to have a Ghost resist in the form of mediocre mons :Mandibuzz: or :tyranitar: or even spdef :hydreigon:.

What's the difference with :zamazenta-crowned:? It is no where as OP or threatening as :dracovish: or :spectrier: . Offence teams have adapted to :dragapult: and :rillaboom: and have retained their effectiveness. :zapdos: and :volcarona: are great on Offensive and BO teams. On top of this, :toxapex:, which is used as a defensive pivot in offensive teams, beats :zamazenta-crowned: fairly effectively. Of course, offence and balance will have to shift to include a fighting resist, but that really isn't a hard type to resist or be flat out immune to, :tapu-lele: :slowking: :landorus-therian: :tornadus-therian: :victini: and so many more resist Fighting and aren't garbage. Plus, as BehemothBash gimps coverage so much that many Fairies can check it

I don't see an issue with the argument you think is stupid, whatever you think :zamazenta-crowned: does, it isn't that effective
This is a bit off topic, but I see your posts a lot, and while the sprites make them look pretty cool, I feel like they disrupt the reading experience a bit. Would you consider lightening up on their usage? You don’t have to stop completely, but it’s a bit annoying when every single mon is in sprite form.
 
Here's the thing, if :Arceus: drops somehow, it will be extremely overcentralizing, similarly to :Dracovish:, which caused every team to have a water immunity, in the form of absolute garbage like :Vaporeon: and :seismitoad: , or :Spectrier:, which mandated every team to have a Ghost resist in the form of mediocre mons :Mandibuzz: or :tyranitar: or even spdef :hydreigon:.

What's the difference with :zamazenta-crowned:? It is no where as OP or threatening as :dracovish: or :spectrier: . Offence teams have adapted to :dragapult: and :rillaboom: and have retained their effectiveness. :zapdos: and :volcarona: are great on Offensive and BO teams. On top of this, :toxapex:, which is used as a defensive pivot in offensive teams, beats :zamazenta-crowned: fairly effectively. Of course, offence and balance will have to shift to include a fighting resist, but that really isn't a hard type to resist or be flat out immune to, :tapu-lele: :slowking: :landorus-therian: :tornadus-therian: :victini: and so many more resist Fighting and aren't garbage. Plus, as BehemothBash gimps coverage so much that many Fairies can check it

I don't see an issue with the argument you think is stupid, whatever you think :zamazenta-crowned: does, it isn't that effective
This post has got to be a joke, lele and torn are not switchins and slowking isn’t a check to zama, the only noticeable here is victini which lacks recovery and cannot keep switching in on it and isn’t splashable in any teams, Zama presence in the meta game restricts team building and offenses teams. Mons like weavile and bisharp or crawdaunt are now really bad and have to use the wack banded low kick set to even do anything. You don’t think that’s broken? Also behemoth bash is mainly used for mons like clef and a good neutral hit to anything else? None of those fairy’s can check zama even without bash. Also relying on 30% chance to even do shit to zama is extremely unreliable. Offense will have a hard time vs zama bc of this shits bulk. Good luck relying on ur 30% to even do shit :D
 
Last edited:

Finchinator

no longer Harry’s house
is a Tournament Directoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Live Chat Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnusis a Past WCoP Championis a former Tournament Circuit Champion
OU & NU Leader
Normally I dislike using my platform on here to advertise my personal content creation, but multiple others have posted their videos in this thread, so enjoy my epic Adobe Spark thumbnail skills...oh and the video with my complete thoughts on Zamazenta-Crowned:
 

Fusion Flare

i have hired this cat to stare at you
is a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributor
When it comes to Zamazenta-Crowned checks, there are quite a few. From the commonly used ones such as Corviknight, Landorus-Therian, Slowbro, Garchomp, Toxapex, Volcarona, and Zapdos. There also happen to be some good, but not as used pokemon like Tangrowth, Skarmory, Hippowdom, and Quagsire. So I want to spark a little discussion by asking: What are some good sets you’ve been using on Pokemon such as Victini, Aegislash, or Buzzwole?
:bw/victini: :ss/aegislash: :ss/buzzwole:
These are three Pokemon that I’m very interested in hearing people’s thoughts on.

Victini can provide some neat utility in being a Glide resist, a Tapu Lele check, and a very neat wallbreaker with the ability to pivot.
Aegislash can take advantage of the lack of ghost resists to utilize its powerful stats, and incredible defensive typing as well.
Buzzwole can fend off multiple physical attackers in a similar vain to Zamazenta-Crowned, but through the course of a game by way of reliable recovery. It also happens to have incredible offensive stats and coverage to deal with some switchins.

So, have any of you had success with the overlooked dog checks?
 
This post has got to be a joke, lele and torn are not switchins and slowking isn’t a check to zama, the only noticeable here is victini which lacks recovery and cannot keep switching in on it. Zama presence in the meta game restricts team building and offenses teams. Mons like weavile and bisharp or crawdaunt are now really bad and have to use the wack banded low kick set to even do anything. You don’t think that’s broken? Also behemoth bash is mainly used for mons like clef and a good neutral hit to anything else? None of those fairy’s can check zama even without bash. Also relying on 30% chance to even do shit to zama is extremely unreliable.

252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Wild Charge vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Tapu Lele: 137-162 (48.7 - 57.6%) -- 95.7% chance to 2HKO

+1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Wild Charge vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Tapu Lele: 205-242 (72.9 - 86.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

On the other hand


252 SpA Choice Specs Tapu Lele Focus Blast vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 284-336 (83.2 - 98.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

252 SpA Choice Specs Tapu Lele Psychic vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned in Psychic Terrain: 208-246 (60.9 - 72.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO


For Torn, I confused him and Lando, who does check Zama incredibly consistently

252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 95-112 (24.8 - 29.3%) -- 100% chance to 4HKO

-1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Ice Fang vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 184-220 (48.1 - 57.5%) -- 91% chance to 2HKO

252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Behemoth Bash vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 159-187 (41.6 - 48.9%) -- guaranteed 3HKO

-1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Behemoth Bash vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 106-126 (27.7 - 32.9%) -- guaranteed 4HKO


On the other hand, this is with no investment at all

0 Atk Landorus-Therian Earthquake vs. +1 64 HP / 0 Def Zamazenta-Crowned: 146-174 (42.8 - 51%) -- 2.7% chance to 2HKO

And the incredibly common Scarf Lando

252 Atk Landorus-Therian Earthquake vs. +1 64 HP / 0 Def Zamazenta-Crowned: 170-204 (49.8 - 59.8%) -- 99.6% chance to 2HKO


The issue with BBash is that running it means sacrificing either Ice Fang (making Zama against Grounds and Dragons) or Wild Charge (making Zama worse against Bulky Waters and the Metal Birds). BBash gives you a win against Clef and other Fairies, while making gimping it against much of the meta. It's a massive double edged... shield

You mention Weavile as bad due to Zama, even though it pairs up incredibly well with Zama, as both can handle each others' counters quite well. Moreover, it's not like any of the three mons you mentioned were pillars of the meta and if they were gone, the meta would collapse. No, all of them are decent at best and already have enough issues in the meta that hold them back. In fact, Rilla has changed HO more than Zama, though that's more due to Rilla's time in the meta.

Also, Volc and Zap don't have to rely on the 30% to do shit to Zama, their attacks do plenty


0 SpA Volcarona Flamethrower vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 182-216 (53.3 - 63.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

0 SpA Zapdos Heat Wave vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 122-144 (35.7 - 42.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO

0 SpA Zapdos Discharge vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 76-90 (22.2 - 26.3%) -- 10.6% chance to 4HKO


Pro-Ban players claim that Zama is broken as it forces changes onto brawlers in the meta. However, every mon/mechanic causes changes, some a lot more than others, like how Cinderace caused so many Rocky Helmets or how HDB has caused some HO teams to forgo hazards or how Koko used to run HP Ice to handle the threat to Lando who might want to absorb a Volt Switch or how every mon below 120 speed used to run a +Spd nature to have a chance against ScarfTar or how Dragon Dance TTar ran Ice Beam in ADV to hit Flygon or how Snorlax necessitated every team to have a phazer. I could go on and on and on about this, but forcing changes doesn't make a mon OP.

A mon is OP when the meta is forced to run subpar options just to have a chance against it, like Buzzwhole or Seismitoad and even if they have a chance against it, they still fail, like the case with Cinderace. Zaza doesn't force any of that. Rocky Helmet Tox or SlowTwins aren't waste of a slot. Running Volc or Zap on HO doesn't make them worse, in fact, Volc makes it better against Stall.

HO has shown that it is very adaptable and it only peeters out when stuff like Cinderace which warp the tier and force stall to the forefront. It has survived through Dragapult and Rillaboom, two mons that would otherwise devastate HO

Here are the pros and Cons of am SSOU with Zama

ProsCons
A knock-off switch inNo power boost from items available
Decent typingMassive 4MSS
Great BulkEasy to wear down with Spikes resurging
Able to stave off many HO monsNo recovery
STAB CCNeeds a Howl Boost before it even has a chance to sweep, it doesn't even OHKO Urshifu-R with a Wild Charge at +1
Great speedTwo of its strongest moves hinder its bulk (CC's defense drops and Wild Charge's recoil)
Due to its move choice, it can be forced out by things it should beat if had the right move
Due to its Steel/Fighting type, it can't handle Psychic, Flying and even Fairies if it opts to drop BBash for better coverage, meaning that teambuilding with it isn't that easy
Defensive sets are passive and easy to abuse for any stallbreakers or even Ferro, since BBash is preferred there over CC

As you can see, while Zama has its very good strengths, they are held back by the myriad of issues it has. I believe it would be a decent part of the meta at best and it could even fall down to UU if I am overstating its qualities
 
I love to play ladder, and I have played the meta of this pokemon since it came out, and I think it is completely stupid to think that this does not deserve to be uber, to begin with, His type is great, Steel fight is one of the best combinations that we could find in this metagame full of broken fairies, Then we see that it has 145 physical defense, and it is the the fourth fastest pokemon that the meta has (and 2 of the 3 fastest cant even do 50 to revenge killed), to all that add 130 attack, is a knock absorb and has a movepool that is more than decent. Like, how people think it is not broken? It completely affects the metagame and in a negative way, since they released it I have played hundreds of battles in ladder and Magically now volc is super popular again, zapdos increased in usage and even we are seeing aegislashs in the tier. The fact that you have to run Timid pult to be able to revenge killer in teams that are not fats, it is already telling you a lot, also the fact that this pokemon cancels or Revenge kills 95% of the pokemon used in offense is more than enough to ban a shit that makes the meta A whole field of Boring teams like the one we see now, where only fat is being played and it makes the game much less competitive in my opinion, but let's release it tbecause it does not hit hard enough, and using volc plus landorus and toxapex You already have to stop it.
 
Last edited:
Time for a pretty hot take. This thing is actually not that bad, its bascally kyurem black before it got both dd and icicle spear. although all this thing needs is body press. unfortunately but also fortunately it doesn't have it. now when looking at this thing's stats they are not as good as you think. yes getting a +1 in defense is good but its movepool and disappointing speed is a huge factor to take in and it only gets a boost in defense and not special attack which makes it weak to special attacks. Getting onto its movepool it could be used as stall with rest but it doesn't get any status moves which throws that out the table. It also suffers from 4 moveslot syndrome since you need howl to accomplish sweeping, close combat and behemoth bash for stab but now what? If you run wild charge you are screwed against ghost types especially aegislash, if you run crunch you are walled against toxapex, if you run psychic fangs you are useless against corviknight who can not only pp stall you out of close combat but can also heal itself. And if you run rest you are walled by toxapex, corviknight, bulky waters and ect. also intimidate is a huge weakness to zamazenta since howl only raises its attack by 1 which means you are not doing enough damage to begin with. Also its inferior to its hero counterpart because it sacrifices speed for bulk which is a horrible trade off and it cannot hold items which means it not only has zero recovery outside of rest(Which is bad considering it puts yourself to sleep) but cannot hit as hard nor outspeed. it is stuck with either 390 speed or 292. Oh and quagsire. Quagsire is the best counter to zamazenta. not only does it recover and can 2ko it consistently but zamazenta has zero ways of ohkoing it.
I will be going for Do Not Ban because it is not good enough to be uber and it is only Ok in ou. A rank sure but not prominent enough to be an actual threat.
 

Monky25

is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Smogon Media Contributor
Moderator
I wish a had a bit more to say, but right now zamazenta doesn't feel that bad. It gets worn down quite easily between rocky helmet support and recoil and has plentiful natural checks and counters in the metagame. It absolutely hates its 4MSS and it hasn't shown to be too crazy with wish support or future sight support from my own experience. Still, I sort of do not like its effect on the meta right now with HO needing volc (not like its a bad option but its pretty hard to forego right now) and provides sort of a "too good" knock absorber which means boots cant be knocked off on a team with zama, meaning progress wont be made as fast as before, not to mention the meta will shift to bulkier teams now. Nevertheless, I lean to unban zama should I get reqs but would be open to changing my mind. One last thing and sort of the main reason I made this post: for the pro-ban side, start proving replays in your arguments. We are constantly only dealing with on paper information and just words that anyone can pull out of their ass, but if replays are shared showing zama being overbearing with wish support or just walling the literal fuck out of offense on the high ladder it might change some minds. So yeah I lean toward zamazenta being unbanned, @ pro ban side try to incorporate replays in your arguments showing how zama is overbearing and I guarantee some minds will be changed.
 
My thoughts on Zama are kinda mixed. 130 attack isn't close to godlike, and both 4mss and its less that decent offensive typing hold it back more than a bit. However, the problem with zama isn't the fact that it can't effectively wallbreak, the problem is it's stellar matchup versus any sort of offensive team, the only half-answer to it being volcarona, which is often 2hkod by zama cc if it doesnt have investment, and unable to kill back with flamethrower. Not to mention that every volc that switches in allows a free heatran, who's magma storm is amazing vs offense, and nothing can heal it off that doesnt get trapped and taunted. The fact that volc is usually supposed to be a lategame sweeper that has to be constantly brought in vs zama is very inconvenient for offense. The fact that nine times out of ten zama just easily sweeps HO and often beats BO means it poses a huge threat to a meta. Playing HO in high ladder has been a huge struggle, and i had to resort to a Shedinja balance to save myself (sick team but very fat). The reason why offense struggling vs zama is such a huge deal isn't because "muh offense," it's because it turns the metagame very boring and dry, with no HO to muscle past fat thanks to zama, which means that many matches result in fat vs fat for 100+ turns(if no early forfeit). In conclusion, zamazenta isn't banworthy because of it's ability to wallbreak (let's be honest, most of the time it can't), it's banworthy because of it's effect on the meta and the overall fun to be had playing competetive.

Also here's the Shedinja balance I created, it's been having success at 1800 ladder so far. Enjoy! https://pokepast.es/f0dbe10d0b5601c4
 
Last edited:
252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Wild Charge vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Tapu Lele: 137-162 (48.7 - 57.6%) -- 95.7% chance to 2HKO

+1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Wild Charge vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Tapu Lele: 205-242 (72.9 - 86.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

On the other hand


252 SpA Choice Specs Tapu Lele Focus Blast vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 284-336 (83.2 - 98.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

252 SpA Choice Specs Tapu Lele Psychic vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned in Psychic Terrain: 208-246 (60.9 - 72.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO


For Torn, I confused him and Lando, who does check Zama incredibly consistently

252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 95-112 (24.8 - 29.3%) -- 100% chance to 4HKO

-1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Ice Fang vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 184-220 (48.1 - 57.5%) -- 91% chance to 2HKO

252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Behemoth Bash vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 159-187 (41.6 - 48.9%) -- guaranteed 3HKO

-1 252+ Atk Zamazenta-Crowned Behemoth Bash vs. 252 HP / 112+ Def Landorus-Therian: 106-126 (27.7 - 32.9%) -- guaranteed 4HKO


On the other hand, this is with no investment at all

0 Atk Landorus-Therian Earthquake vs. +1 64 HP / 0 Def Zamazenta-Crowned: 146-174 (42.8 - 51%) -- 2.7% chance to 2HKO

And the incredibly common Scarf Lando

252 Atk Landorus-Therian Earthquake vs. +1 64 HP / 0 Def Zamazenta-Crowned: 170-204 (49.8 - 59.8%) -- 99.6% chance to 2HKO


The issue with BBash is that running it means sacrificing either Ice Fang (making Zama against Grounds and Dragons) or Wild Charge (making Zama worse against Bulky Waters and the Metal Birds). BBash gives you a win against Clef and other Fairies, while making gimping it against much of the meta. It's a massive double edged... shield

You mention Weavile as bad due to Zama, even though it pairs up incredibly well with Zama, as both can handle each others' counters quite well. Moreover, it's not like any of the three mons you mentioned were pillars of the meta and if they were gone, the meta would collapse. No, all of them are decent at best and already have enough issues in the meta that hold them back. In fact, Rilla has changed HO more than Zama, though that's more due to Rilla's time in the meta.

Also, Volc and Zap don't have to rely on the 30% to do shit to Zama, their attacks do plenty


0 SpA Volcarona Flamethrower vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 182-216 (53.3 - 63.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

0 SpA Zapdos Heat Wave vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 122-144 (35.7 - 42.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO

0 SpA Zapdos Discharge vs. 64 HP / 0 SpD Zamazenta-Crowned: 76-90 (22.2 - 26.3%) -- 10.6% chance to 4HKO


Pro-Ban players claim that Zama is broken as it forces changes onto brawlers in the meta. However, every mon/mechanic causes changes, some a lot more than others, like how Cinderace caused so many Rocky Helmets or how HDB has caused some HO teams to forgo hazards or how Koko used to run HP Ice to handle the threat to Lando who might want to absorb a Volt Switch or how every mon below 120 speed used to run a +Spd nature to have a chance against ScarfTar or how Dragon Dance TTar ran Ice Beam in ADV to hit Flygon or how Snorlax necessitated every team to have a phazer. I could go on and on and on about this, but forcing changes doesn't make a mon OP.

A mon is OP when the meta is forced to run subpar options just to have a chance against it, like Buzzwhole or Seismitoad and even if they have a chance against it, they still fail, like the case with Cinderace. Zaza doesn't force any of that. Rocky Helmet Tox or SlowTwins aren't waste of a slot. Running Volc or Zap on HO doesn't make them worse, in fact, Volc makes it better against Stall.

HO has shown that it is very adaptable and it only peeters out when stuff like Cinderace which warp the tier and force stall to the forefront. It has survived through Dragapult and Rillaboom, two mons that would otherwise devastate HO

Here are the pros and Cons of am SSOU with Zama

ProsCons
A knock-off switch inNo power boost from items available
Decent typingMassive 4MSS
Great BulkEasy to wear down with Spikes resurging
Able to stave off many HO monsNo recovery
STAB CCNeeds a Howl Boost before it even has a chance to sweep, it doesn't even OHKO Urshifu-R with a Wild Charge at +1
Great speedTwo of its strongest moves hinder its bulk (CC's defense drops and Wild Charge's recoil)
Due to its move choice, it can be forced out by things it should beat if had the right move
Due to its Steel/Fighting type, it can't handle Psychic, Flying and even Fairies if it opts to drop BBash for better coverage, meaning that teambuilding with it isn't that easy
Defensive sets are passive and easy to abuse for any stallbreakers or even Ferro, since BBash is preferred there over CC

As you can see, while Zama has its very good strengths, they are held back by the myriad of issues it has. I believe it would be a decent part of the meta at best and it could even fall down to UU if I am overstating its qualities
Look. I've read a lot of whack opinions in this thread but

"It could go to UU" when we're already noticing major changes to Pokemon in the tier its being suspected into?

Yeeeeeeesh
 
I wanted to respond to Finchinator’s posts about theory and practice and his stance against theoretical posts. Theory can contribute many great and useful ideas in any kind of discussion. I have contributed many ideas to other people in math and programming without listing their applications, and we know that these fields have applications in other fields such as economics and engineering. The important thing I should note is that if you have not tried something out much or at all, you should make sure to be reserved in your language, and aim towards contributing ideas rather than conclusions. In my first post day one of this discussion, I could’ve been more careful with my words, but I made sure to say that I thought Zamazenta should not be in OU rather than say it was broken. The only reason you should “ban” theory is if you think your posting playerbase is not smart enough or too toxic to contribute useful theoretical ideas in general.
 
One thing I'd like to note is teammates. I've been using Finch's Icetails, Torn-T Zama-C team. Zama-C can fit Behemoth Bash with good team support, making the Fairies a far easier thing to deal with. Frankly, I took more damage from hail and Wild Charge than enemy attacks. I saw a rain team using Jolteon. This is because it wanted to Thunder with stab, and is faster than Zama-C. That's the kind of stupid shit people have to do lmao

On the topic of Aegislash, I tried using it before this suspect a lot, hoping to find a hidden gem. In a meta full of Knock Off, Blissey, Rocky Helmet; a Specs set (which you'd want to avoid things like burns and rocky helmet and static and all that shit) couldn't function very well due to Blissey vs Toxapex fighting. Wanting to Close Combat on a switch to Blissey while the Pex can just recover until a SpDef drop isn't good for it. It's not even about winning a 50/50, it's a lose-lose. Regen takes it to about 60% after a specs Ball, which is enough to recover off of an unfortunate mon later, or to come in on a U-Turn and switch again for more recovery.

Victini. Bruh. People having to use Victini. Kee in mind that Victini isn't really a good option for much in the tier besides Zama-C. It lacked enough immediate power outside of sun, Lando-T would stop physical variants. At best it shows if its Physical or not, and then gets walled by a Pokemon for the majority of the game.

I could say a lot more, but eh. Have a good day
 

Finchinator

no longer Harry’s house
is a Tournament Directoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Live Chat Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Super Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnusis a Past WCoP Championis a former Tournament Circuit Champion
OU & NU Leader
The only reason you should “ban” theory is if you think your posting playerbase is not smart enough or too toxic to contribute useful theoretical ideas in general.
The OU subforum has been plagued with years of theorymon derailing conversation and ruining any semblance of quality. That’s why theorymon is not allowed. This has been the case since before I started as a moderator over 4 years ago and even before I started playing almost 10 years ago. At times, there have been fun side threads dedicated to theorymon, but it has always been disallowed in suspect threads and at least discouraged in Metagame Discussion/Viability Ranking threads.

I am happy you want to contribute and honestly think there have been a lot of great posts — including on the pro-ban side (despite personally disagreeing), but you have to play the metagame to be able to contribute to discussion much like you have to play the metagame to vote. This isn’t saying people aren’t smart enough to theorymon as that’s an untrue generalization, but rather that it’s for the best to avoid or minimize theory when there’s a more accurate alternative backed by firsthand experience.
 
I wanted to respond to Finchinator’s posts about theory and practice and his stance against theoretical posts. Theory can contribute many great and useful ideas in any kind of discussion. I have contributed many ideas to other people in math and programming without listing their applications, and we know that these fields have applications in other fields such as economics and engineering. The important thing I should note is that if you have not tried something out much or at all, you should make sure to be reserved in your language, and aim towards contributing ideas rather than conclusions. In my first post day one of this discussion, I could’ve been more careful with my words, but I made sure to say that I thought Zamazenta should not be in OU rather than say it was broken. The only reason you should “ban” theory is if you think your posting playerbase is not smart enough or too toxic to contribute useful theoretical ideas in general.
I think I agree with this- theory has a place in these sort of decisions, but at the end of the day, what *actually happens* and the real, practical things are far more important. If practical experience is small, then sure theory all you want that's fine, but at this point Zamazenta has been on the ladder for a week.

My thoughts on Zamazenta (after a fair bit of laddering) is that it's honestly.. not that broken? A lot of the pokemon that were already huge meta forces like both of the steel birds can easily handle it. Only the most offensive teams seem to struggle with it, and those have their options too (Volcarona as the main one, although e.g. SD Aegislash or Band Victini can help).

I'm not convinced it's broken, but I think it probably makes the metagame somewhat worse- offense does take a sizable hit. The steel birbs will become more prominent, fat will dominate again...

So, yeah, that's kind of my view, and it seems to me this is a pretty common view from people that I've talked to on ladder trying to get reqs, or on Discord.

So, should we unban it or not?


I'd like to say that we should unban it, since that is the Principled and Correct decision based on the tiering principles. At the end of the day, these principles are more important than the "quality of the metagame", and in any case, that quality can be improved by other actions (suspect tests on e.g. Cinderace or Toxapex or [putyour favorite target here]) Also, honestly? I can hardly tell the difference, at least at the moment.

Also worth noting that the new games that release later this year will probably mess everything up again- anyone remember pre-dlc? That meta is comparable to the worst case scenario for us. Then the DLCs came and.. well.. Stuff Happened.


So... yeah.. I honestly am still not 100% convinced either way, and I would really appreciate usage stats for the last week of ladder so I can get an idea of how this actually affected the metagame.

However, at the end of the day, if i get reqs, I'm voting unban, since that is what we're supposed to do, by the key principles of the tiering system.
Thank you for slogging through this (probably pretty badly written) post
 
I've been laddering and hope to get reqs ( max GXE so far was 70, but on tilt atm). So far I have been playing a lot of games in the 1500-1600s, a large portion with the Zamazenta HO team posted in this thread. I have noticed so far is that a lot of balance and stall teams are rampant, running things like Shedninja, Aegislash, Defensive Hippowdown, Focus Blast Rocky Helmet Tangrowth, Buzzwole, Toxapex, Corviknight/ Iron Defense Skarmory, Zapdos, Slowbro, Bulky Volcarona, Quagsire, and the occasional Moltres even. Often, the teams I encounter usually have two of these checks, and the stall-based ones have had 3 even. Teams that only had one or no checks were pretty easy to deal with, as Zamazenta's speed and natural bulk and decent firepower made it easy to power through them since I could just wear down their one check until I could break through, and if you aren't running one of the harder checks/ counters to it, it's hard to play around all of Zamazenta's possible coverage ( ice fang, crunch, psychic fangs, Wild charge) which will usually be able to lure in some it's common checks and heartbreakingly take them out of the game, leaving you unable to deal with this beast.

Nonetheless, It was often frustrating to deal with these kinds of balance/stall teams that seem designed with stopping Zamazenta in mind with a Zama offense.

So in a sense, Zamazenta doesn't feel broken to me at the moment because it seems like there are just so many balance and stall teams right now on the ladder that have pretty solid teams that counter Zamazenta and many other threats too. But what I lack right now is a good way to diagnose this situation. I can't really tell if Zamazenta is overcentralizing or if these teams are so rampant because everyone is naturally focused on using and countering Zamazenta given it's a suspect test.


But what really keeps me open-minded is that even on offense, I've found that good teams with Hawlucha, Scarfed Kartana, Victini, Volcorona, Regieleki, Dragonite, while not all checks per se, can usually breakthrough or sweep through a Zamazenta team as long as Zamazenta has been chipped away at a decent amount thanks to the speed, power, and good coverage they all bring to the table (boosted when applicable) speaking from personal experience here.

With Dual Screens HO team posted earlier in the thread, I've found that SD rock polish Lando can use Zamazenta as borderline setup fodder, and if they have ice fang it usually means they are missing another piece of crucial coverage, and you still have Volcorona in the back.

But admittedly, I have definitely faced progressively more balance and stall teams as I have been laddering, and will need more experience against HO using Zamazenta and using HO to make a better decision, and hopefully by then I also have reqs too lol.
 
The OU subforum has been plagued with years of theorymon derailing conversation and ruining any semblance of quality. That’s why theorymon is not allowed. This has been the case since before I started as a moderator over 4 years ago and even before I started playing almost 10 years ago. At times, there have been fun side threads dedicated to theorymon, but it has always been disallowed in suspect threads and at least discouraged in Metagame Discussion/Viability Ranking threads.

I am happy you want to contribute and honestly think there have been a lot of great posts — including on the pro-ban side (despite personally disagreeing), but you have to play the metagame to be able to contribute to discussion much like you have to play the metagame to vote. This isn’t saying people aren’t smart enough to theorymon as that’s an untrue generalization, but rather that it’s for the best to avoid or minimize theory when there’s a more accurate alternative backed by firsthand experience.
I think to minimise theorymonning in discussion of something's influence in a metagame is to give too much inherent significance to the proactiveness response in what has been physically shown to be a factor. yes theorymonning very often and very easily devolves into meaninglessness or complete bullshit that derails the conversation or at worst creates untrue and detrimental narratives but this shouldn't mean to dismiss it entirely, what matters is the implications each theory has and for people to give significance to determining the convincingness of what each idea suggests. while results are very indicative and reflective of the current metagame position they are limited by what has been actualised within the meta and so needs to be reconsidered everytime something new appears.

to theorymon correctly in my opinion is to anticipate potential situations or consequences so they can be responded to more quickly and so to realise the truthfulness in the metagame more efficiently. results feel like a very safe way of responding to this situation or any situation at all really, and especially in a game like pokemon which is all about the intuitions and working from incomplete information, should this not indicate we're able to utilise this same skillset to improve the game itself?
 
I think to minimise theorymonning in discussion of something's influence in a metagame is to give too much inherent significance to the proactiveness response in what has been physically shown to be a factor. yes theorymonning very often and very easily devolves into meaninglessness or complete bullshit that derails the conversation or at worst creates untrue and detrimental narratives but this shouldn't mean to dismiss it entirely, what matters is the implications each theory has and for people to give significance to determining the convincingness of what each idea suggests. while results are very indicative and reflective of the current metagame position they are limited by what has been actualised within the meta and so needs to be reconsidered everytime something new appears.

to theorymon correctly in my opinion is to anticipate potential situations or consequences so they can be responded to more quickly and so to realise the truthfulness in the metagame more efficiently. results feel like a very safe way of responding to this situation or any situation at all really, and especially in a game like pokemon which is all about the intuitions and working from incomplete information, should this not indicate we're able to utilise this same skillset to improve the game itself?
Why sit on your armchair and make up theories, when you can go into the fields of battle, play, and see what the true effects are?
 
Also that the creator of the video themselves said that they made the video as a meme and that the Pokemon in question is likely broken.
I have a question. Where did you get this information and proof your statement. I'm curious about this. Can you please say where did you get this information and proof it? Just a question. Because putting words is way easier than proofing with prints and other stuff.
 
Why sit on your armchair and make up theories, when you can go into the fields of battle, play, and see what the true effects are?
because you're kind of just in the moment reacting to what appears obvious and your perception of the thing is related to the very specific circumstances that happen occur in this moment of the meta. you're not seeing entirely what zama can do but how people are immediately responding to it, and I am suggesting to prepare for future possibilities so we don't just go through the testing motions and that we should decide what should be valued and what is best for the meta
 
Last edited:
I wish a had a bit more to say, but right now zamazenta doesn't feel that bad. It gets worn down quite easily between rocky helmet support and recoil and has plentiful natural checks and counters in the metagame. It absolutely hates its 4MSS and it hasn't shown to be too crazy with wish support or future sight support from my own experience. Still, I sort of do not like its effect on the meta right now with HO needing volc (not like its a bad option but its pretty hard to forego right now) and provides sort of a "too good" knock absorber which means boots cant be knocked off on a team with zama, meaning progress wont be made as fast as before, not to mention the meta will shift to bulkier teams now. Nevertheless, I lean to unban zama should I get reqs but would be open to changing my mind. One last thing and sort of the main reason I made this post: for the pro-ban side, start proving replays in your arguments. We are constantly only dealing with on paper information and just words that anyone can pull out of their ass, but if replays are shared showing zama being overbearing with wish support or just walling the literal fuck out of offense on the high ladder it might change some minds. So yeah I lean toward zamazenta being unbanned, @ pro ban side try to incorporate replays in your arguments showing how zama is overbearing and I guarantee some minds will be changed.
I’m very torn whether I think Zama should be unbanned, but here are some mid-ladder replays of me using it on a balanced team with Wish and FS support where I’d say it put in a good amount of work:

Replay 1
Replay 2
Replay 3
(My account is Air Glider)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top