np: SV OU Suspect Process, Round 1 - Oops!...I Did It Again

[Bruh Wobuffet]

Now Time to go to look at tera, and there are main counterarguements of these, but would say, it should not be banned.

Since many players had already talked about the cons and pros of tera, im not listing reasons since it's mostly similar.
Instead I will focus on counterarguments on this topic.

This make the game uncompetitive
In the purpose of being competitive, I don't really agree that they are actually uncompetitive. Now complication exists, as mentioned by anti-tera players that it might lead insane outcome numbers. But I don't really agree that point as mind management is also a skill of the game. Are predicting sucker punch considered unhealthy? Is it unhealthy for baiting Z moves? As the major community decision, it is not. Tera timing is similar in this regard. As for the power issue, I am like: Power Creep Existed. No one claim for a ban for Z-moves. A new mechanic is one of the natural process of power creep, just like introducing mega charziards in gen 6. Now broken things thats force something or you lose situations, or not counter-able would be banned, like mega kangaskan had did. Thats why dynamax is actually banned: The buff is too high relative to the power level. When Naturally arise the point of tera, it do introduce guess, but not high in demand, just like you don't know what item a opposing Pokemon had, or which Z-Crystals. As for the type change for extra power, that is just not the same level of dynamax where HP is doubled alongside a temporary power boost AND guaranteed secondary effects. Tera just change you into a single type. It doesn't change the Pokemon's statics, it only added a stab. This isn't overpowered and uncompetitive as it's not hard to outplay. Probability management is a part of the game, As does consider the timing and option of the use of your teralisation.

I would probably add more later if I have more time lol

 

[Chilln0]

Oh boy time to say wacky stuff

Tera is unhealthy in its current unrestricted state. I hardly see anyone claiming otherwise. Not only is it just incredibly versatile, you don’t know how to answer it until it’s too late. So yes, action against Terastallization should be taken.

That being out of the way, I‘m just gonna list the options given from best to worst because I’m kinda lazy:

1. Reveal Tera type at team preview

At least for now, I see it as the compromise that keeps the positives and uniqueness of the mechanic while getting rid of most of the uncompetitiveness that stems from it. While a lot of mons have somewhat standardized tera types, there’s no denying that it is far from predictable. Some people are saying that just because VGC does it doesn't mean it's a good idea, but like, VGC obviously does it for a reason, right? Maybe I’m mistaken, but VGC doesn’t make rules just because. Considering the way Tera is currently used and the problems that stem from it, it seems like the most logical step forward.

My remaining reasons for why I believe this is the best choice come from my opinions on the rest of the options and why they’re bad, so hopefully they will suffice.

2. One Tera user per team

While this option is worth exploring, I don’t see it solving as many problems. In fact, it may make things less competitive if your only tera type loses to your opponents.

3. Only STAB Tera types allowed

People are very divided on this vote, but it seems most people agree that this option simply makes no sense. At this point, what are you even preserving? A mechanic that gives one of your mons an Adaptabilility boost without taking up a turn? People are complaining that Tera makes offense too powerful, so this barely solves anything. What’s the point? I almost put this one below the outright ban, because I can at least see where they are coming from with that.

4. Outright ban

This one seems very popular, and I definitely see why. People like to keep rulings simple. Hell, this one may be the best one, and I may look at this years from now calling my reasonings bad in retrospect. However, I don’t see a good reason to outright ban the mechanic so early in the generations life instead of at least trying restrictions first (and no, don’t point out how that happened with dynamax, that is a bad comparison for numerous reasons). We don’t know if these restrictions will work or not because… well a restriction hasn’t taken place yet, so its no more than hopelessly trying to predict the future until that actually happens.

If I am wrong, though, if these restrictions don’t solve the core problems of the mechanic, and we have to ban it regardless, then who cares? A ban then is way more justified because you just proved that the restrictions don’t work. It’s very silly to say that the restrictions won’t work when that can’t be proven yet.

Metas change wildly, especially early on, and perhaps we’ll be using tera in such a different way years from now that a ban would seem ridiculous, and so is cutting it off now, a month into the gens life.

 

[KM]

Hello OU,

I am here to tell you why I and many others support an outright ban on Terastallization.

Tera is unhealthy due its unpredictable nature and the string of guesswork that it forces. I'm going to use a replay from advaita's great pro-tera post to show you an ordinarily simple situation that is made very complicated only due to tera: Take a look at turn 25 of this battle, and let's breakdown everything that could have happened at this point in the lategame.

1. Chien pao clicks ice spinner as dnite remains dragon/flying and dies
2. Chien pao clicks Ice spinner as dnite tera's normal and clicks fire punch, then wins by clicking espeed
3. Chien pao clicks sacred sword as dnite remains dragon/flying and clicks fire punch, then wins with espeed
4. Chien pao clicks sacred sword as dnite tera's normal and dies
5. Swap into rotom-w and dnite remains dragon/flying and clicks fire punch, leading you back to scenarios 1-4
6. Swap into rotom-w and dnite tera's normal and clicks fire punch, allowing chien pao to safely revenge kill with sacred sword (real outcome)
7. Swap into rotom-w as dnite either remains dragon/flying or teras normal and clicks dd, killing rotom-w and killing chien pao with tera normal+fire punch, tanking potential ice shard.

This is what makes tera unhealthy. The TIMING of when tera comes out. This is worse than a 50/50. Notice how scouting (scenarios 5-7) does not necessarily help you, and in fact you can lose BECAUSE you decided to scout. This is an endgame that chien-pao should straight up win and it turns into this mess because of tera. Of course, this can get more complicated. I assumed that we knew the tera type, and only one player had tera available. However, every pokemon in the tier can viably run 3-4 tera types at minimum, and there's very little indication of what tera type a player has chosen on their mons. Until tera is used by both players, this kind of nonsense will haunt you. You don't need to navigate this kind of guesswork every single turn, but you need to do it way more often than you should. It's very difficult to create a long term gameplan when the impact and possibility of tera places far more importance on the short term.




Thanks for reading.

not addressing the rest of this post, but it seems like fundamentally most of these anecdotes and reasonings for pro-ban or pro-restriction rely on the notion that, for instance, Chien Pao SHOULD always win against Dragonite (or any other combination). The problem with these arguments is that they're essentially circular -- of course, without tera as a mechanic it otherwise would win that endgame, but the idea that it "should" always win this game necessarily relies on the assumption that tera is unhealthy, broken, will be banned, etc. tera absolutely does have the potential to flip the script on traditional endgames or interactions, and that's one of its primary uses, but these appeals to some sort of natural order where an ice type always beats dragonite feel more like judging this gen's mechanic based on last gen's standards than anything else.

as an aside, i also want to bring up that "flipping the script" or disrupting a common line isn't even a new concept or something remotely foreign to competitive play - - in fact, the vast majority of sets and teams at a high level are often directly and intentionally built around taking traditional lines and interactions and somehow manipulating those through items, abilities, EV spreads, or other available tools (in this example, maybe it's a Yache Dragonite or something). Tera definitely enables this kind of disruption on a more extreme level than these other tools, but the presence (and, in fact, the way these tools are seen as a marker of high level creative teambuilding and metagame knowledge) being used suddenly as a unforgivable disruption of the natural order in which pokemon A moving move 1 always beats pokemon B doesn't really track to me.

 

[Finchinator]

Are you still accepting PMs on this subject or has the time for that also closed?

My PMs are always open!

Ok, so I got 80.0 GXE with a minimum of 50 games. Attached a screenshot.

I see that I need to wait until Jan 1 to vote. Will my rating decay between now and then? Will I need to play more games, or can I just leave this account as is?

Voting no on everything btw. No ban, no team preview, no limits whatsoever. Keep it as is in game!

Post your reqs here, thanks!

 

[Boooo_Yah]

In game =/= an unofficial competitive tier. OU has nothing to do with cartridge play.

That logic especially doesn't work when VGC (an official competitive format) has open team sheets, and Tera typings are known to players.

Pokemon showdown is a simulator game, it is supposed to simulate the game to the utmost accuracy, and yes, it could be implemented for VGC for here. This is the singles format we're talking about and it probably won't even do anything to curb the issue of tera types.

Edit: I'm realizing the flawed logic I was using about "accuracy" since smogon has used sleep clause. I don't mind now if tera types are in team preview. However, Smogon is the most credible authority over the singles format, so I don't think it's rather unofficial since it has ground in the competitive format for singles. But it still won't curb the issue of tera types being absolutely powerful, all it does is eliminate the guessing factor (which is kinda useless, since you can mostly tell which pokemon has what type)

 

[turd2]

My PMs are always open!

Post your reqs here, thanks!

Done... will my rating decay though? Wondering if I'll need to play more games on that acct prior to Jan 1, or if I can just let it sit.

Finch edit: It will decay, but it only matters that you hit reqs as of when you hit them -- if you do this before Jan 1, it is a moot point what your rank is as of that day.

 

[Finchinator]

One argument I have seen everywhere from the YouTube comment section to this thread goes as follows: Terastallization is fun and banning it defeats the purpose of the game, which is to enjoy yourself. This argument is highly subjective and does not track in tiering contexts because of this, in my opinion.

I will take an excerpt from someone who I highly respect as a fellow tier leader (UU) and community presence (everyone is entitled to their opinion and I love that she posted her thoughts, but I also am entitled to disagree):

I feel like if we ban Tera, this gen will just be boring tbh. SS was an absolute snoozefest. We have a higher power level now, sure, and it's unlikely that the game would slow down to SS levels even if Tera was gone, but I do think it adds a lot of fun and enjoyment to the game. We tend to get caught up in fierce competitiveness debates, and while those are important, we do have to remember that the game is exactly that - a game. And its primary goal is to be fun! Nobody would wanna play it if it's not - let's be real, nobody's playing competitive Pokemon because they believe it's actually a good game relative to the many, many other options they have. They play it bc it's fun.

Everything in this paragraph is backed off of personal assignments of characteristics rather than fact; there is no concrete "right" or "wrong" to be encountered here. This is fine and everyone is entitled to vote based off of what is important to them -- I hope Lily votes for what she finds the most enjoyable metagame. For me, I do not think this is a suitable way to go about tiering and I have never seen this reflected in how we tier before.

What is fun for one person is not necessarily universally fun. It may not be fun for me as well or perhaps it is even more fun for me, for example. Let's break down what Lily wrote a bit more specifically!

I feel like if we ban Tera, this gen will just be boring tbh. SS was an absolute snoozefest.

Her opinion is that SS was "an absolute snoozefest", which she is entitled to have, but this is obviously an opinion rather than a fact. Personally I loved the end of SS and it was a more proactive metagame than anything I could label a "snoozefest" -- only earlier on in the generation could I see it being labeled as such. The community surveys indicated it was a very favorable metagame by the last year or so of the generation, too.

She also said that she believes this generation will be like SS if we ban Tera. Factually speaking, there has never been a metagame without Tera to draw conclusions, we have countless novel strategies that are not possible in SS, and we have a whole generation worth of tiering left to potentially encounter new outcomes. She is entitled to this opinion as well and could potentially be correct, but it is a reach and something that you cannot say with confidence (or really any backing beyond gut feeling at this point) quite yet.

personal rant

Ngl I found this bit really dismissive and even insulting as someone who has dedicated countless hours to tiering last generation/this generation and has firsthand witnessed so many people have positive experience.

I feel that assigning a negative value to one thing (SS as a generation in competitive) and then assuming another will be like it with one focal ban (SV if Tera is acted on) is super closed-minded to everything else going on, which includes some of the most cool and popularly discussed aspects of the metagame. So this just confuses me as the premise of her argument is about keeping an open-mind in shifting the status quo to personal sentiment, but the core of her comparison captures the exact opposite of this.

I also accept that she is clearly allowed to feel as she wishes and I feel bad that she did not enjoy last generation. I just think that it is very clear these feelings vary so drastically (just see her feelings vs my own as a simple case study), so I find this a flimsy thing to base tiering stances off of.

Does this make what Lily said invalid or wrong? Absolutely not, she is entitled to think this way just like people who want to preserve Terastallization for its defining place are allowed to think this way, too. But in my opinion, coding tiering decisions like this is not ideal and I prefer focusing on facts and figures like we have across our tiering system ever since it was implemented many years ago. We have tiering infrastructure that contains definitions for broken and uncompetitive for the sake of avoiding overly subjective conjecture in these contexts. Obviously there is some subjectivity within saying what "fits" into those blanket terms, but at least that limits arguments to avoid the vast array of sentimentalism.

We tend to get caught up in fierce competitiveness debates, and while those are important, we do have to remember that the game is exactly that - a game. And its primary goal is to be fun!

Here is another example I found. I am so glad that Lily is focused on her enjoyment and that she seemingly enjoys this metagame. The best part about being a tier leader is how rewarding it is creating something for so many others to enjoy. However, what may be "fun" for her is not necessarily "fun" for me or the next player. I find the premise behind Terastallization fun and unique, but the application of it and the ramifications it has on the game I have quickly found to be less fun and more frustrating.

The thing is that my frustrations about not personally being able to cover as much as I am accustom to in the builder or account for as much as I am accustom to in the builder is not sufficient grounds for me to have any set opinion alone. In fact, I think it is important we keep an open-mind and try to adapt as much as possible to avoid simply recreating history. Maybe I am just a step slower at the game than I used to be or maybe I have made mistakes firsthand that cloud it for me. Things like this are why I would never ban anything based off of raw, subjective feeling and why we tried a more creative, preservation-minded suspect to try and break the trend of linear tiering results when we faced a newfound topic -- it is best to have your systems evolve with the times, it is best to continue to keep an open mind, and it is best to display adaptability in the face of conflict rather than limiting your range of solutions and/or being dismissive. In the same vein, it is best that we look for arguments grounded in definitive values and fact rather than singular assignments of "fun" or "frustrating" in my book.

Ultimately, I do prefer tiering action and I will make a lengthy post on this later, but just wanted to get this repeated point tackled early.

 

[Rahil098]

I strongly agree with everything stated, Tera in it's current form is too unpredictable, which makes the metagame unhealthy.

There is no mind game involved at all. Sure, for example Annihilape usually run tera Water, but some people are also using tera Dark to bait people, so you have to cover Ghost/Fighting + Water + Dark at the same time, otherwise you have a high chance it can either setup in your face (especially if you are choice locked) or kill you with Rage Fist boosted.

Therefore, I would say showing the tera type at preview is the more healthy nerf, because it creates actual mind game = You know what tera type to expect, but the opponent can bait it as well because he's holding it.

It's clear that something needs to be done regarding tera either way.

I don't think that revealing tera types upon team preview is the best option. It certainly is better than the current state, but I don't think it is the best solution in the long term.

Even if we reveal tera types in team preview, it is still going to be a guessing game. You will constantly be asking the question "Is my opponent going to terastalize or not?". It's like sucker punch mind games, but on a different level. Sucker punch is different because it's not like every mon is carrying it. And even if you knew that mon will tera, it's not unlikely that your active won't have options to deal with the opposing mon after it teras.

I think an outright ban would be the best option, because bending/limiting the mechanic this way will not solve every issue related to the mechanic.

 

[Sua]

Hoping the option of "1 Tera user per team (Only the first member of your party will be allowed to Terastallize during the course of the battle)" wins.

Tera is definitely a extremely strong mechanic but this option should preserve the creativity and fun of being of able to tera a Pokémon, while keeping in check the unpredictability and flexibility of being able to Tera a Pokémon on a whim depending on what's best for that specific game, which in my opinion was way too powerful and uncompetitive.

With this you'll have to commit and reveal that only this one Pokémon can tera. Which should remedy a solid portion of the issues while keeping the Tera mechanic in the game and the Tera type you chose for that specific Pokémon a "secret".

I personally disagree with the people who want to rush and ban tera completely if we've accepted and are willing to work with a complex ruling.

I enjoy the concept of using certain Pokémon who without Tera are not very good but with it, can become viable. The creativity of Tera allows for many cool and interesting sets. For instance, Revavroom who has Shift gear can't really make good use of the move since he get's completely walled by steel types because his best option he has to hit steels is Bulldoze. However, with Tera, I ran in UU a Fire Tera Type, Air Balloon, Filter, Revavroom set with Spin Out, Shift Gear, Tera Blast and Gunk Shot with moderate success. This was incredible awesome that this was possible.

I will reiterate that I understand that Tera is an extremely powerful mechanic. I will also say that the creativity the mechanic allows is also very enjoyable for me and for many others. I want to say that if we are willing to do complex rulings, we should not rush to outright just ban Terastallize. Of course it'd be easy to just outright ban it because clearly it is very powerful and as it is right now and just uncompetitive as a whole if left unchanged. If I only had 2 options that were BAN or KEEP Tera as it is, the option would be simple for me and it would be BAN. However, that's not the case.

It would be a huge shame to just ban the new mechanic of Generation 9 as a whole if complex rulings are on the table.
If even with the ruling of "1 Tera user per team (Only the first member of your party will be allowed to Terastallize during the course of the battle)" it still proves to be an issue, we can remove even more unpredictability by revealing what that 1 Pokémon's Tera Type is. This can keep the power of Tera in check while keeping the creativity and possibilities for cool and innovative sets still in the game. We have options before we just outright ban it. I have even seen someone else even mentioning banning STAB Tera types as they provide "no creativity" and the STAB boost it gives it just WAY too powerful just to name other options available from the many.

My favourite Pokémon being Torterra, imagining being able to use a Rock Tera type so he can have neutral damage to Ice and resist incoming Fire attacks, while getting STAB Stone Edge sounds awesome on a Rock Polish set. So, though I agree with it being a very powerful mechanic, it would be a absolute shame not to test these other options before outright getting rid of it.

 

[Lily]

I don't wanna reply to the entire thing you've posted Finch bc I don't really disagree with any of it necessarily and it's all rooted in opinions and differences in philosophy, but I do want to point something out.

She also said that she believes this generation will be like SS if we ban Tera. Factually speaking, there has never been a metagame without Tera to draw conclusions, we have countless novel strategies that are not possible in SS, and we have a whole generation worth of tiering left to potentially encounter new outcomes. She is entitled to this opinion as well and could potentially be correct, but it is a reach and something that you cannot say with confidence (or really any backing beyond gut feeling at this point) quite yet.

I didn't say this - in fact, I said the opposite.

SS was an absolute snoozefest. We have a higher power level now, sure, and it's unlikely that the game would slow down to SS levels even if Tera was gone, but I do think it adds a lot of fun and enjoyment to the game.

I don't think banning tera would make this gen like SS - the nerfing of recovery moves, lack of magic guard and (good) regen spammers, and the release of crazy fat punishers like Chi-Yu and Gholdengo will see to that. All I said was that I feel it'll slow the game down to a level that I wouldn't enjoy. It feels like a lot of what you had to say was shutting this down, and I'd agree with you that saying it'll be like SS is silly... bc I never said it in the first place. I guess I can see how it's a bit unclear and don't want to be dismissive of your efforts last gen - I've been there lol, I know how hard it is.

Don't have a whole lot else to say that I haven't already; differences in philosophy happen and that's ok. I understand what you're saying about how fun is subjective and how it's important to keep more tangible things in mind, but I don't think it's quite that simple. When I do anything related to tiering, the primary question I ask myself is: "does this action make playing the game more enjoyable?" and move from there. Usually if the answer is yes it's a good idea, and if it's no, it probably isn't. In general, something that's fun for the majority is almost always worth keeping around unless it actively removes skill from the equation (this is rarely the case, though, because things that don't allow you to express skill usually aren't fun). Sometimes it's an unfortunate necessary evil, like Dynamax; that was fun, but it wasn't competitive. If others feel Tera Isn't enjoyable to play with or isn't competitive, then that's a completely valid reason to vote how they want. I just think it's enjoyable, competitive, and feel like I'd enjoy the game less without its presence (which isn't to say I wouldn't enjoy it at all). Thanks for the reply, though, it's always nice to see other people's mindsets/what drives them when it comes to things like this.

 

[RoyalDispenser]

If I didn't find non-tera enjoyable I'd just swap from OU to customs/cart and play with friend group rules, likewise a friend of mine currently tells me over comms to just not tera, so I'm chilling regardless of the outcome. Pretty sure thats what 90% of the 1 post accounts in this thread do but accusations aside, I don't see the issue in leaving fun out of the equation when it comes to smogon tiering because no one is really forced to play it that way. Its about competitive integrity and removing what ruins that, I can count on my fingers how many games have a 'ranked' mode I find fun, and smogon is basically ranked pokemon.

I feel like tiering that way shows too many cracks on what biases are permitted to leak through decisions. There's enjoyability in consistency and skill just as much as there is in randomness and chaos, the question is if the game feels like competitive integrity is still there or not, and whether the metagame can develop or stalemates because something is clogging it.

Personally I don't think the metagame or tiering can truely start until tera is gone, because when the suspect is over we're either going to have a mess to go through, + retest + more test when DLC comes, and it'll never develop into something that is competitive particularly from the teambuilder standpoint. It definitely feels like tera clogs the meta from having healthy development, and its mostly just preventing chaos by having some of these go-to abusers of tera with common tera type usage. However the biggest constraint is how difficult it is to team build with multiple checks to 1 threat because the checks/counters for all variations of 1 pokemon are either non-existent or split up into multiple team slots, I can't say anything is particularly over centralizing because there's such a variety of teams attempting to handle a much variety of pokemon as possible given how some pokemon are basically 2 or 3 different ones depending on how they tera.

 

[Srn]

not addressing the rest of this post, but it seems like fundamentally most of these anecdotes and reasonings for pro-ban or pro-restriction rely on the notion that, for instance, Chien Pao SHOULD always win against Dragonite (or any other combination). The problem with these arguments is that they're essentially circular -- of course, without tera as a mechanic it otherwise would win that endgame, but the idea that it "should" always win this game necessarily relies on the assumption that tera is unhealthy, broken, will be banned, etc. tera absolutely does have the potential to flip the script on traditional endgames or interactions, and that's one of its primary uses, but these appeals to some sort of natural order where an ice type always beats dragonite feel more like judging this gen's mechanic based on last gen's standards than anything else.

So if I am judging this interaction by last gen's standards, and you seem to be implying this is a bad thing, then what new standards shall I judge this interaction by? Should I expect my chien pao to lose to dnite? Perhaps I should expect my breloom to not revenge kill kingambit? These new standards seem quite silly to me! I appeal to the natural order not because it is the status quo but because it keeps variance down to levels that are predictable. So if we start with that belief (and I touch on this near the end of my post which you choose not to address), then my argument goes something like this:

"Variance should not be too high in a competitive game" -> "The long-term planning and superior positioning of the chien pao should mean that it should win this game" -> "However, all of the outplaying in the early/midgame doesn't matter because you need to predict this tera correctly" -->"This is a position you are put in because tera is unhealthy and variance is too high."

I do not start with the assumption that tera is unhealthy, because I believed "variance should not be too high in a competitive game" well before tera came around, and it was true well before I decided if tera was healthy or unhealthy. I fail to see how my argument is essentially circular.

as an aside, i also want to bring up that "flipping the script" or disrupting a common line isn't even a new concept or something remotely foreign to competitive play - - in fact, the vast majority of sets and teams at a high level are often directly and intentionally built around taking traditional lines and interactions and somehow manipulating those through items, abilities, EV spreads, or other available tools (in this example, maybe it's a Yache Dragonite or something). Tera definitely enables this kind of disruption on a more extreme level than these other tools, but the presence (and, in fact, the way these tools are seen as a marker of high level creative teambuilding and metagame knowledge) being used suddenly as a unforgivable disruption of the natural order in which pokemon A moving move 1 always beats pokemon B doesn't really track to me.

Once again, I cover this in the part of the post which you choose not to address:

"Tera is just like megas, or z-moves, or items or lure sets! If we can keep those, why can't you deal with tera?"

Tera is fundamentally different in that it has no opportunity cost and has no tell. Megas take up your item slot and are very predictable (If I see a garchomp+lopunny on my opponent's team, 99% of the time its regular chomp and mega lop). Z-moves take up your item slot and you must dedicate only one user in the teambuilder. Lure sets tend to be subpar when they're not doing their job. Weird items can be scouted, knocked off, tricked, and have obvious opportunity costs. Unlike all of the above, you can choose the most advantageous tera in every game. If your tera has
a bad matchup, just don't use it. Or wait until a point in the game where its matchup improves. The flexibility and low cost of tera make it far more comparable to dynamax than it does to anything else mentioned imo.

"Pokemon has always been about prediction and hidden information! Learn to predict!!"

Not only can tera enable more options than is reasonably expected to be predictable (as I tried to show at the beginning of this post), the mechanics of tera itself are far more impactful than a resist berry or a choice scarf or something similar, and have none of the associated opportunity costs. Changing your typing/getting adaptability can swing the matchup most of the time and the outcome of the entire game sometimes.

I am not treating this as a sudden and unforgivable disruption, because I am well aware lure sets exist. And as you have already stated, the surprises that tera enables are far more impactful. However, they are also far less predictable. It's one thing if this silly little ttar holds a silly little chople berry, it's another thing entirely when the kingambit can tera fairy, flying, ghost, or remain dark/steel at any turn as I'm trying to keep it under control. Or hell maybe it'll tera fire and ignore this will-o-wisp. Oh and there's no indication of what tera type they've chosen because only the builder knows how the tera types of 6 mons have been appropriated to cover teambuilding holes. Hopefully that tracks with you, let me know if I was unclear anywhere.

 

[backslash447]

I’m working on getting reqs rn and I’m gonna state my piece from my experience so far.

I have yet to lose a game solely because of Tera. Like since game was released. Yeah I’ve lost to Tera abusers, but that was because my team didn’t possess the tool needed to beat them (i.e. having no counter to Flying Moon) or I was simply outplayed and my check had already been picked off. I really don’t see the point in a full ban given that I have yet to be put in a situation where the game is out of my control due to Tera.

In addition, I’ve yet to really be hit out of left field by a Tera Type. Most of the time things are pretty predictable. Offensive mons will Tera STAB or Tera to a common coverage type. Defensive mons will almost always Tera into something that resists a common weakness or Fairy. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the meta is still very new. Yeah people know what’s good and what’s not, but there’s still so much depth to be mined from this mechanic and its interactions.

Lastly, should we really ban Tera before getting some of the most obscene mons out of the way? Annihilape just shreds through everything with Bulk Up Rage Punch, Tera or no Tera. Shed Tail enables dangerous set up pokémon to come in for free with an extra 50% health.

If you ask me, this is probably the most controversial moment this community is going to face. Where are we going to draw our line in the sand? We can ban and ban and ban, but at the end of the day, something is always going to be on the chopping block. What level of burden on team building is too much for standard OU play? In the past, you’ve always needed a mon to beat Lando-T. I know that’s a simpler scenario, but still, it changes the way you build a team. What about Taurus in gen 1? Snorlax in gen 2? The list goes on and on. I get it. Tensions are high. People have strong opinions about what’s most important in this game that we’ve basically forced into existence. But truly this mechanic is genuinely fun and skillful in my opinion. Definitely more so than 2 Lando-Ts performing the exact same three moves in a row at the start of every OU game.

 

[Chameleon]

Try not to overthink what people mean when they say a mechanic is fun. If someone thinks Tera is reasonably balanced, and also that a meta without Tera would be reasonably balanced, the deciding factor is fun. What's important is the player is properly informed as to whether skill is the primary factor in winning, which in regards to Lily's post, she gave reasoning for. In that vein, I expect as many players to lean against Tera because they don't enjoy having a Pokémon unexpectedly sacked to it as players who lean towards Tera because they enjoy the wildcard factor - even if the latter mention fun more often. Judging skillfulness is hard without tournament data after all.

I'll conclude with this. Lure That Threat is a recurring staple of this forum. It's pretty wild that we as a community endorse a thread dedicated to defeating Pokémon with Pokémon they are "supposed to beat" using unexpected options. Clearly there is a level of unpredictability not only tolerated, but idealized by the community. No one is questioning whether Tera adds a new layer of unpredictability to the game, but rather if that equates to an unfair contest. This question isn't as obvious as Dynamax nor as siloed as a single Pokémon suspect test, so those laddering for reqs have my sympathy. Not sure if I'm going to ladder yet or how I'd vote, but as biased as I seem towards Tera, I'll try to keep an open mind.

 

[Vall]

Try not to overthink what people mean when they say a mechanic is fun. If someone thinks Tera is reasonably balanced, and also that a meta without Tera would be reasonably balanced, the deciding factor is fun. What's important is the player is properly informed as to whether skill is the primary factor in winning, which in regards to Lily's post, she gave reasoning for. In that vein, I expect as many players to lean against Tera because they don't enjoy having a Pokémon unexpectedly sacked to it as players who lean towards Tera because they enjoy the wildcard factor - even if the latter mention fun more often. Judging skillfulness is hard without tournament data after all.

Basically my thoughts. I think the meta will turn out fine with or without tera, with most of the problematic mons not relying on tera at all. Admittedly some mons become problematic, but that's not unreasonable when adding a new mechanic. Admittedly, I have lost a few games from tera on the final turns, but in all such games I had used tera earlier for sizeable benefit, so the outcome would've remained the same regardless of tera. Even with endgame true 50/50's, if you had burned your tera while the opponent had saved it to add uncertainty to an endgame interaction, It's a fair use of the mechanic. Such an event would mean you probably would have lost without tera.

Additionally, I enjoy the more intricate aspects of tera that can be utilized in addition to offense/defense typing, such as tera ghost to become immune to trapping & ghost cures, or tera grass/fire to become immune to spore/burn.

Ultimately though, I believe both restricted, banned and current metas would be equally reflective of skill, but I prefer playing with tera. I don't think action is necessary, but I'm open to tera type on team preview, which conserves the integrity of the mechanic while increasing counterplay.

 

[M2H]

Honestly I'm kind of uninformed on Tera Types as they function in the actual video games. Is it possible to reveal tera types in team preview in those games or would doing so be something that is not possible in the actual games?

I'm inclined to like the preview option the best if its possible in game, but if not I probably like that option as well as the 1 tera user per team option the least. They might technically be the 'best' solutions (I'm honestly not sure how I feel on this) for promoting a healthy metagame but they also seem like somewhat artificial solutions.

I also think the STAB only fixes the problem of tera types on some Pokemon (notably Dragonite and Annihilape) and is also technically possible in game if somewhat complex (like banning all versions of Pokemon with non-STAB tera typings) but also makes terastilization a pretty lame mechanic and overly punishes stall playstyles. Threats like Chi-Yu would likely have to be banned in the aftermath of such a solution, whereas in a full ban on terastilization that may or may not be the case. Now, one could say "that should have no bearing on the decision we make now," but at the same time, any of these solutions besides a full ban, full unban, or preview (depending on whats possible in game) seem to be artificial solutions. In that way, I think its reasonable to consider what pokemon/playstyles will be salvageable in the aftermath of various decisions.

One thing I might find worthy of looking at could actually be a ban on tera blast, as it's essentially a stronger STAB hidden power that can be either physical or special. Doing so could reduce the unpredictable element of tera types to a degree, though such a decision would likely need to be paired with something else.

 

[TR_Admin]

I am surprised that nobody has talked about how strong keeping stabs after tera is.
Every offensive pokemon only has a limited amount of checks/counters and top pokemon have even less, especially with the current limited pool of pokemon pre-home.
With tera, that pokemon has even less answers or even none, I mean... how are you supposed to deal with three types at once ?

Tera on defensive pokemon is fine though because they don't really benefit from that.

 

[Vall]

I am surprised that nobody has talked about how strong keeping stabs after tera is.
Every offensive pokemon only has a limited amount of checks/counters and top pokemon have even less, especially with the current limited pool of pokemon pre-home.
With tera, that pokemon has even less answers or even none, I mean... how are you supposed to deal with three types at once ?

Tera on defensive pokemon is fine though because they don't really benefit from that.

For the most part, the same as every other offensive pokemon, revenge killing it or walling it. I haven't really experienced it making that much of a difference, it usually only causes the wall to come out slightly worse for wear at the end of it.

 

[Hykalia]

Alright, I finally have an opportunity to give my two-sense on this behemoth of a topic.
Firstly, I am strictly opposed to outright banning tera as a whole and feel this should only be a last resort if all else fails to quell the potential metagame madness tera could induce despite being neutered.
First let's start with why it SHOULD be limited/nerfed, the best way I think tera should be nerfed is that it needs to be limited to one user per team AAAND that user must have its tera-type revealed at team preview per VGC ruleset. I do not personally believe that non-stab tera-typing needs action mainly because of the nature of the above two nerfs removes much of the mind games associated with non-stab tera mind games, examples being tera-normal dragonite and tera-flying blaziken respectively. Should tera be nerfed to the above two methods I mentioned previously tactics like type changing to evade attacks and change weakness will become MUCH easier to not only predict, but also tolerate as well imo.
Plus, the gen is still in its early phases, so for now I do not believe a ban is appropriate to solve the problem.

Thus, I will be voting in favor of tera being LIMITED/NERFED, but not BANNED.

 

[Lobby Eeveee]

that it needs to be limited to one user per team AAAND that user must have its tera-type revealed at team preview per VGC ruleset.

I don’t know if that’s allowed when voting

 

[emperiod]

Good yes lets ban a fun and interesting new mechanic so we can get back to games lasting over 100 turns while we stall eachother to death.
Feels like nobody is considering tiering Pokémon based off how well they can do with tera. Chien Pao being the central arguing point..
Why not just ban Chien Pao if you think that he's too problematic when he teras? I see them in every other game but I don't struggle with them I tend to just try to draw them into a bait.

The last few gens have been absolute boring stallfests and this generation will become the exact same thing if tera gets banned. I should see this statement as dissuasion enough to not ban tera but the fact that most folks run 3+ stall pokemon with recover moves it seems like that is what people like. Experimentation with Tera instead of relying on the same two best tera types for each pokemon has led to by far the most enjoyable battle experience i've ever had with this franchise. I'll go with whatever tier tera gets sent to but I strongly urge against it's ban.

 

[HydreigonTheChild]

Good yes lets ban a fun and interesting new mechanic so we can get back to games lasting over 100 turns while we stall eachother to death.
Feels like nobody is considering tiering Pokémon based off how well they can do with tera. Chien Pao being the central arguing point..
Why not just ban Chien Pao if you think that he's too problematic when he teras? I see them in every other game but I don't struggle with them I tend to just try to draw them into a bait.

The last few gens have been absolute boring stallfests and this generation will become the exact same thing if tera gets banned. I should see this statement as dissuasion enough to not ban tera but the fact that most folks run 3+ stall pokemon with recover moves it seems like that is what people like. Experimentation with Tera instead of relying on the same two best tera types for each pokemon has led to by far the most enjoyable battle experience i've ever had with this franchise. I'll go with whatever tier tera gets sent to but I strongly urge against it's ban.

stall isnt that good most of the time... gen 7 is offense / balance, gen 8 is balance / offense and gen 6 is balance + HO, gen 5 is offense mainly and stall is basically non exisant... none of these are stallfests.. What are you talking about? Do you have anything to back that up... Or are you just saying that because "smogon loves stall"

3 pokemon with recovery moves is more like balance lol? that is litterally most balance teams with 3 offense + 3 defense. Tera ban if anything will make balance better... cuz now they dont have to have absolute hard walls to deal with them defensively.. and instead balance can shine + offense can shine as well and it wont turn to MU fishes.. like i am yet to see a stallfest on ladder.. its either people spamming HO or offense, or a balance team and u can see how a balance team struggles in this meta

100 turn games? bruh that is not very common... and stall games dont last that long unless its like a balance vs stall MU and u have like no offense to pressure it. Balance vs balance rarely even lasts that long

 

[emperiod]

stall isnt that good most of the time... gen 7 is offense / balance, gen 8 is balance / offense and gen 6 is balance + HO, gen 5 is offense mainly and stall is basically non exisant... none of these are stallfests.. What are you talking about? Do you have anything to back that up... Or are you just saying that because "smogon loves stall"

3 pokemon with recovery moves is more like balance lol? that is litterally most balance teams with 3 offense + 3 defense. Tera ban if anything will make balance better... cuz now they dont have to have absolute hard walls to deal with them defensively.. and instead balance can shine + offense can shine as well and it wont turn to MU fishes.. like i am yet to see a stallfest on ladder.. its either people spamming HO or offense, or a balance team and u can see how a balance team struggles in this meta

100 turn games? bruh that is not very common... and stall games dont last that long unless its like a balance vs stall MU and u have like no offense to pressure it. Balance vs balance rarely even lasts that long

100 is not a literal number in this instance. I just find recovery pokemon and stupid hard walls like Garg/Dodonzo to be extremely annoying. Every gen has had them and tera helps to take those walls out. Healing and stacking buffs is just horribly uninteresting to me and my hope was that this gen would depart from that and so far it has but if tera is banned I fear it'll just become Gen 8 II electric boogaloo and I'm not for that.

(Got swept 6 0 by a dodonzo in-between these replies even.. maybe i'm the problem)

 

[Dusk Mage Necrozma]

100 is not a literal number in this instance. I just find recovery pokemon and stupid hard walls like Garg/Dodonzo to be extremely annoying. Every gen has had them and tera helps to take those walls out. Healing and stacking buffs is just horribly uninteresting to me and my hope was that this gen would depart from that and so far it has but if tera is banned I fear it'll just become Gen 8 II electric boogaloo and I'm not for that.

(Got swept 6 0 by a dodonzo in-between these replies even.. maybe i'm the problem)

-having defensive Pokemon =/= stall
-gen 9 is way more offensive with or without Tera due to all the insane wallbreakers and sweepers like Chi-Yu

 

[advaita]

For starters, I'd like to say sorry for the wait Srn but I felt that I needed to play and watch the metagame develop some more before I could respond to the post you made in the initial Tera-discussion thread and also your great post on page 1 of this thread. Now that I have received the requirements for voting and additional SV tournament experience by being 6 rounds into No Johns, I can say that my stance has actually changed quite a bit.

I do think there are a lot of applications I mentioned in my initial take that have aged well. When it comes to Adding STAB my thoughts are unchanged as I still find a lot of the users to be predictable-- Volcarona, Roaring Moon (very overrated), Espathra etc. You brought up Dragonite multiple times, and be prepared for this hot take, but I actually think Dragonite is one of the most broken Pokemon in the metagame as of now (literally Chi-Yu level). The typing with Multiscale is even better this gen with the Pokedex-cut, and it literally feels like we have fucking E-Killer roaming around in OU. Extreme Speed / Dragon Dance / Earthquake is all you need and it literally invalidates any team without Unaware late-game. To top it off, it has a free 4th moveslot where it can tech whatever it wants for your teams needs. I've seen Roost, Ice Spinner, Fire Punch, Encore, Dragon Claw, and hell even mixed Hurricane to take out Great Tusk which has 30%+ usage at the moment. I completely agree with your take that the guesswork when it comes to Dragonite Tera'ing is bogus as changing from Dragon / Flying to mono-Normal has to be one of the most uncompetitive sequence of plays I have played against the past couple of weeks. Dragonite is also still relatively underexplored as I think Choice Band, Silk Scarf, and Lum Berry sets are just as oppressive, though less splashable compared to the standard Heavy-Duty Boots set. Its negative impact on the metagame is undeniable imo and its come to the point where I have seen people tech random Ghost-Tera on Pokemon such as Chien-Pao and Breloom just to check it. But overall, my conclusion here is that Dragonite is the issue, not this aspect of Tera itself because other abusers of this application don't force the guesswork Dragonite does via its typing + Multiscale.

However, there is one application in my initial take that you and many others have changed my mind on and that is the 4th application highlighted in my last post (The Best Offense Is A Good Defense). I think at the time, this application wasn't utilized to its full capacity but after playing some more I find this aspect of Terastallization to be unbalanced as well. Playing vs Kingambit late-game has to be one of the most evil things ever. Here are all the types that are valid for this Pokemon-- Flying, Ghost, Dark, Fairy, Fire,... Another Pokemon that abuses this is Iron Valiant-- Steel, Fairy, Ghost, Electric... I said Annihilape was the problem earlier and not Tera itself, but scratch that as it once again falls under this application with its options-- Water, Normal, Fairy, Fire, Dark... Garganacl looks like a defensive abuser on paper but it gets one of the most broken moves that force guaranteed progress in Salt Cure; losing significant HP / dying to Iron Defense + Body Press sets because you weren't sure it was going to Tera into a Flying, Fairy, Water, or Ghost has happened more times than I can count. This application is once again extremely underexplored and it's definitely going to become more problematic as time goes on.

Because of this, I don't find Tera to be mostly balanced anymore. I'd now say it's along the lines of somewhat balanced.

However, I don't think an outright ban is the right move as there are many aspects to this mechanic that are fair and add strategic depth to games. Showing Tera-Types at Preview solves the most problematic application of Tera which I highlighted above. It does not however solve people's complaints of the mind-games involved. Here's an example: using Tera-Grass Glimmora and not having Energy Ball to begin with to scare out Great Tusk. However, I don't think this context alone is enough until we see how it plays out. The best part of this option is it is parallel to VGC's recent implementation of an open team sheet which I really like.

Mind-games and 50/50's have existed for all gens of Pokemon. Tera definitely increases the frequency, but it isn't anything overly egregious in my opinion. That's why I'm a bit mixed on what I will be voting for the first question. For the second question, my vote's ranking will be as follows:

1. Show Tera-Types At Team Preview
2. Outright Ban
3. One Designated Tera User Per Team
4. Ban Non-STAB Tera

Outright Ban is only so high on my list because I think the latter two options are awful and don't address the most broken aspect of Tera which I highlighted above. VGC knows what's up. Thank you for reading.