thats the issue tho. Tera ice IS sacrificing your other matchups. Ice is a awful defensive type and it literally only helps for kyurem. In a metagame with as many threats to account for as SV OU, your tera type needs to do more than help aganist 1 mon imo.
-
The moderators of this forum are Finchinator, Ruft, ausma, 658Greninja, kd458, Srn, TPP, and viivian.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
np: SV OU Suspect Process, Round 14 - Hazy Shade of Winter
- Thread starter Finchinator
- Start date
- Status
Not everything is about you man. There is a genuine dialogue to be had, 3d posted with the intent of good faith rather than to exclude specific people, and I asked that you take it to the appropriate place moving forward in my place. Feel free to PM me -- thanks.
Flipping back to Kyurem: some people seem to object to the suspect or feel strongly it should stay. This is fine and you are entitled to feel this way -- in fact, I am glad people are posting, but the suspect itself was plenty justified. I will give a full, transparent timeline of how it came to be for the sake of informing the public.
February 2024: Kyurem remained OU by the second closest margin ever, receiving 58% of support for a ban (making it a prime candidate for a re-suspect).
July-August 2024: OLT began and new Kyurem sets saw an uptick in usage. Strong players like bea, Alhen, and clean (posts hyperlinked from the OLT thread), not users tagged, all mentioned it being very effective with two mentions of a suspect or ban specifically. It was pretty clear that SubTect and DD Kyurem were popping off, having a field day in the OLT metagame. That does not mean a ban should happen, but it warranted discussion for sure.
Early September 2024: We surveyed OLT qualifiers earlier this week and then results were publicized: In a survey, active and high-achieving players who qualified for the Official Ladder Tournament gave Kyurem a 3.8 out of 5 when asked if they felt tiering action was needed on the Pokemon (with 1 being no action needed and 5 being action clearly needed). This is firmly in suspect territory, putting itself on the map. However, Gouging Fire was clearly more supported -- it got suspected with 15-20% more survey support and got banned with over 90% support.
Mid-September 2024: Gouging Fire got banned and a full week passed, so we began to discuss ways to proceed. There was a lot of support for a Kyurem suspect, so I put it up to a councul vote as to if we suspect or wait. 7 members of the council supported proceeding with a suspect while 2 did not, so we proceeded with a suspect thanks to this supermajority.
This is a similar process to a lot of other suspects and not every suspect needs a ban to be a success -- the point is to give people a chance to determine the metagame's tiering path, not forcefeed bans (otherwise, we would have just done council votes on the Pokemon's placement, which we are not doing this late into the generation with this much up for debate).
February 2024: Kyurem remained OU by the second closest margin ever, receiving 58% of support for a ban (making it a prime candidate for a re-suspect).
July-August 2024: OLT began and new Kyurem sets saw an uptick in usage. Strong players like bea, Alhen, and clean (posts hyperlinked from the OLT thread), not users tagged, all mentioned it being very effective with two mentions of a suspect or ban specifically. It was pretty clear that SubTect and DD Kyurem were popping off, having a field day in the OLT metagame. That does not mean a ban should happen, but it warranted discussion for sure.
Early September 2024: We surveyed OLT qualifiers earlier this week and then results were publicized: In a survey, active and high-achieving players who qualified for the Official Ladder Tournament gave Kyurem a 3.8 out of 5 when asked if they felt tiering action was needed on the Pokemon (with 1 being no action needed and 5 being action clearly needed). This is firmly in suspect territory, putting itself on the map. However, Gouging Fire was clearly more supported -- it got suspected with 15-20% more survey support and got banned with over 90% support.
Mid-September 2024: Gouging Fire got banned and a full week passed, so we began to discuss ways to proceed. There was a lot of support for a Kyurem suspect, so I put it up to a councul vote as to if we suspect or wait. 7 members of the council supported proceeding with a suspect while 2 did not, so we proceeded with a suspect thanks to this supermajority.
This is a similar process to a lot of other suspects and not every suspect needs a ban to be a success -- the point is to give people a chance to determine the metagame's tiering path, not forcefeed bans (otherwise, we would have just done council votes on the Pokemon's placement, which we are not doing this late into the generation with this much up for debate).
Regarding rigor of reqs and suspect etiquette: reqs are easier now than they used to be. I have internally discussed moving GXE up slightly and it is possible this is implemented in the future, but it would only be done after it was discussed sufficiently. Kneejerk decisions benefit nobody and we are going to continue to operate with attention to detail and our process rather than for the sake of doing the flashy move or catering to the vibe of the month.
I think this is best discussed for another thread, but feel free to PM me if you feel strongly about reqs either way -- I will relay noteworthy information to the appropriate discussion areas.
I think this is best discussed for another thread, but feel free to PM me if you feel strongly about reqs either way -- I will relay noteworthy information to the appropriate discussion areas.
Finally: people are allowed to discuss whatever they think should or should not matter when determining what to vote on a Pokemon. There are rules in the OP, but they are more suggestions and guidelines than they are firm -- moderator judgement will be applied when necessary, so do not go batshit crazy as it will not end well for you of course.
I personally think there are way too many changing metagame factors to try and predict the future to a tee based on a ban or do not ban result, but I understand a lot of people feel strongly -- I am not going to play censor or pretend to know better/worse than everyone. It is a forum for the people, populated by them, and intended to help them after all.
I will post my long thoughts on Kyurem this weekend or next week before the deadline after I am no longer in weirdo insomniac mode, so until then. Happy posting and have a nice day everyone
I personally think there are way too many changing metagame factors to try and predict the future to a tee based on a ban or do not ban result, but I understand a lot of people feel strongly -- I am not going to play censor or pretend to know better/worse than everyone. It is a forum for the people, populated by them, and intended to help them after all.
I will post my long thoughts on Kyurem this weekend or next week before the deadline after I am no longer in weirdo insomniac mode, so until then. Happy posting and have a nice day everyone
I'm ambivalent to Kyurem in the tier (and won't be trying for reqs, not that I'd make them) but I do want to comment on one thing:
Tera Ice to defensively check Kyurem does have another positive effect - it opens up a strong hit on the assorted ground types of the tier, notably annihilating Landorus and Gliscor, and there's a fair few threats (like Ogerpon-W) that routinely lack the ability to land a SE hit on an ice type. If the mon already wants to run HDB and/or can set up on Kyurem and counter-sweep, then Ice is not a complete disaster typing.
Also, "I built a team with a huge weakness to Specific Threat and handle that threat with terastalization" is a completely valid use of the mechanic, and only becomes a problem when it becomes the standard counterplay, rather than just an option.
Tera Ice to defensively check Kyurem does have another positive effect - it opens up a strong hit on the assorted ground types of the tier, notably annihilating Landorus and Gliscor, and there's a fair few threats (like Ogerpon-W) that routinely lack the ability to land a SE hit on an ice type. If the mon already wants to run HDB and/or can set up on Kyurem and counter-sweep, then Ice is not a complete disaster typing.
Also, "I built a team with a huge weakness to Specific Threat and handle that threat with terastalization" is a completely valid use of the mechanic, and only becomes a problem when it becomes the standard counterplay, rather than just an option.
As someone that, while not being a top player by any means, and has only achieved top 30-20 on the ladder (and usually staying around the 1700s-1800s), I honestly don't know why someone that has lower ELO than me shouldn't be able to give their opinion here.
What I'm gonna say might be tough, but that elitism is part of the bad reputation this community gets a lot of the time. In fact, it discourages people to trynna improve and stay in the community, giving their thoughts etcetera. Of course someone that has a better knowledge of the metagame / is a good builder / a top player will have solid statements about the meta. And actually, should therefore be able to counter-argument or help the lower skill player in the conversation.
Despite this, it's also not good imo to disqualify someone's skill because they're not agreeing with you. Okay, you don't agree with Magcargo, CTC or Pais. That's cool, differents points of view are necessary in a community to improve. But that does not give you the right to just roast and saying stuff like "you're not as good as you think". They are as good as they think and they proved it. Even if you like or not half of the ladder are CTC's teams.
And in the same way we shouldn't invalidate anyone's thoughts because they play in the 1200s (rather, we could help them to improve and correct their wrongs. Because, we may even find a new point of view by doing that) we can't just insult people that want to keep Kyurem in the tier.
Is the argument about fearing what will happen after Kyurem (maybe) gets banned in the tier wrong? Yes, but not because they're saying stupid things, but rather because that's not the point of the suspect test.
Have some solid arguments in both sides made in favour and aganist of Kyurem? Also yes, so let's stick to that, the arguments, a healthy debate where everyone can be respected.
Have a nice day folks.
What I'm gonna say might be tough, but that elitism is part of the bad reputation this community gets a lot of the time. In fact, it discourages people to trynna improve and stay in the community, giving their thoughts etcetera. Of course someone that has a better knowledge of the metagame / is a good builder / a top player will have solid statements about the meta. And actually, should therefore be able to counter-argument or help the lower skill player in the conversation.
Despite this, it's also not good imo to disqualify someone's skill because they're not agreeing with you. Okay, you don't agree with Magcargo, CTC or Pais. That's cool, differents points of view are necessary in a community to improve. But that does not give you the right to just roast and saying stuff like "you're not as good as you think". They are as good as they think and they proved it. Even if you like or not half of the ladder are CTC's teams.
And in the same way we shouldn't invalidate anyone's thoughts because they play in the 1200s (rather, we could help them to improve and correct their wrongs. Because, we may even find a new point of view by doing that) we can't just insult people that want to keep Kyurem in the tier.
Is the argument about fearing what will happen after Kyurem (maybe) gets banned in the tier wrong? Yes, but not because they're saying stupid things, but rather because that's not the point of the suspect test.
Have some solid arguments in both sides made in favour and aganist of Kyurem? Also yes, so let's stick to that, the arguments, a healthy debate where everyone can be respected.
Have a nice day folks.
Well I have been looking at these posts about tera ice to defend against kyurem and I would like to put my own 2 cents.
Personally I think tera ice...works. I have never used it myself but from hearing the arguments for and against it tera ice does have some offensive and defensive advantages. However I will say that I feel like tera ice isn't good enough to use as your main tera especially if you are only trying to defend against kyurem. At that point just go tera steel with a levitate mon. I am not saying it is bad I am saying it isn’t the most flexible solution. After all what is to stop Iron moth or ghold from coming in and revenge killing you or something? Just food for thought not trying to start an argument.
Personally I think tera ice...works. I have never used it myself but from hearing the arguments for and against it tera ice does have some offensive and defensive advantages. However I will say that I feel like tera ice isn't good enough to use as your main tera especially if you are only trying to defend against kyurem. At that point just go tera steel with a levitate mon. I am not saying it is bad I am saying it isn’t the most flexible solution. After all what is to stop Iron moth or ghold from coming in and revenge killing you or something? Just food for thought not trying to start an argument.
no, i think that the "x mon/core will be broken if kyurem goes" arguments might also be actually wrong, not just irrelevant. waterpon could get easier to answer because a lot of grasses and dragons are going to get better. gliscor might be easier to answer because covering both it and kyurem in builder is a hassle, especially for fat teams. zap-king-lu will forever be held back by raging bolt, a legit hard counter to zapdos, being a large meta presence that's very likely to improve with kyurem gone. i really don't see any future where a kyurem ban breaks these things
I don't think Kyurem gone will make ice and dragon mons easier to fit in.
Darkrai is still running around with Ice Beam, and pretty much everyone and their dog rn runs ice coverage because of Gliscor and Lando.
Not too much to be said that hasn’t been said already, but I’ll give my two cents anyway
I don’t find Kyurem insanely broken, but the amount of pressure this mon exudes both mechanically and literally is kinda crazy lol. Only a narrow selection of mons confidently switch into a Kyurem with little to no information, with it usually coming at the cost of at least 1-2 of your team being crippled by one of its base 130 attacking stats. Unlike other mons in the tier that also thrive off of their movepool variety too like Valiant/Darkrai, Kyurem differentiates itself through much more sizable bulk that lets it soak some SE attacks to secure trades… and also being a potential win-con through the use of DD
The mon just mostly screams variance hell to me. Even if you do have designated switch ins for it, there’s still the looming threat of being affected by either of the secondary effects most of its moves have which can shift the dynamics of matches very easily. I believe there are plenty of consistent breakers in this tier that would still allow the meta to be played in a healthy state even if Kyu gets the boot w/ mons like Ogrepon/Bolt/etc. still continuing to perform well
That being said, I intend to vote ban
I don’t find Kyurem insanely broken, but the amount of pressure this mon exudes both mechanically and literally is kinda crazy lol. Only a narrow selection of mons confidently switch into a Kyurem with little to no information, with it usually coming at the cost of at least 1-2 of your team being crippled by one of its base 130 attacking stats. Unlike other mons in the tier that also thrive off of their movepool variety too like Valiant/Darkrai, Kyurem differentiates itself through much more sizable bulk that lets it soak some SE attacks to secure trades… and also being a potential win-con through the use of DD
The mon just mostly screams variance hell to me. Even if you do have designated switch ins for it, there’s still the looming threat of being affected by either of the secondary effects most of its moves have which can shift the dynamics of matches very easily. I believe there are plenty of consistent breakers in this tier that would still allow the meta to be played in a healthy state even if Kyu gets the boot w/ mons like Ogrepon/Bolt/etc. still continuing to perform well
That being said, I intend to vote ban
Last edited:
Not too much to be said that hasn’t been said already, but I’ll give my two cents anyway
I don’t find Kyurem insanely broken, but the amount of pressure this mon exudes both mechanically and literally is kinda crazy lol. Only a narrow selection of mons confidently switch into a Kyurem with little to no information, with it usually coming at the cost of at least 1-2 of your team being crippled by one of its base 130 attacking stats. Unlike other mons in the tier that also thrive off of their movepool variety to like Valiant/Darkrai, Kyurem differentiates itself through much more sizable bulk that lets it soak some SE attacks to secure trades… and also being a potential win-con through the use of DD
The mon just mostly screams variance hell to me. Even if you do have designated switch ins for it, there’s still the looming threat of being affected by either of the secondary effects most of its moves have which can shift the dynamics of matches very easily. I believe there are plenty of consistent breakers in this tier that would still allow the meta to be played in a healthy state even if Kyu gets the boot w/ mons like Ogrepon/Bolt/etc. still continuing to perform well
That being said, intend to vote ban
I think this is maybe the crux of the issue as to why the responses are so varied in the thread - there's no one single thing that Kyurem does every single game that is impossible to handle. It can do like 4-5 different things all VERY WELL and they all have different counters that make it hard to deal with in the builder. Like cool, I can run a team that has ways to handle DD Loaded Dice Kyurem but then SubTect needs completely different counterplay - it's awkward and very constricting on the meta. But some people could only run into a couple variants that they have the ability to deal with and then they're like "well I have no issues so you guys are being hyperbolic!"
For reasons outlined in my first post, I intend to vote ban on kyurem.
However I do want to acknowledge some truth in what some DNB are saying.
Fear mongering or not, it is in my opinion totally true that a kyu ban makes some pretty annoying already strong shit better. The Juries out on if waterpon+raging bolt can destabilise zapkinglu enough, so I’m going to focus in particular on SD scor (no longer forced to Tera as early, if at all) which is already an arguably negative mon for the meta, and is ~somewhat~ checked/kept in place by kyurem.
Firstly that’s not the process of tiering action, but more importantly I’d much rather see other mons re-tested that can be reintroduced to curb gliscor and other threats that emerge from a kyu ban, rather than keeping kyurem to try deal with them. I think there are other options that achieve curbing what is being “fear mongered” in the wake of a kyurem ban, that are healthier for the meta game than kyurem itself (refer to my earlier post if you wish to know why I believe kyurem to be unhealthy). And if that proves to not to be a viable approach, take standard action and suspect the problematic mons and ban.
This is far from my best worded post but I can’t be bothered to fix it/reword it (sorry)
TL;DR Yes kyurem ban removes a ‘key’ check/breaker to SD scor among other ‘fear mongered’ cores, but I’d rather see other mons retested and reintroduced/ or if not possible suspects and bans to curb this opposed to keeping kyurem to do it (as kyurem is unhealthy imo)
However I do want to acknowledge some truth in what some DNB are saying.
Fear mongering or not, it is in my opinion totally true that a kyu ban makes some pretty annoying already strong shit better. The Juries out on if waterpon+raging bolt can destabilise zapkinglu enough, so I’m going to focus in particular on SD scor (no longer forced to Tera as early, if at all) which is already an arguably negative mon for the meta, and is ~somewhat~ checked/kept in place by kyurem.
Firstly that’s not the process of tiering action, but more importantly I’d much rather see other mons re-tested that can be reintroduced to curb gliscor and other threats that emerge from a kyu ban, rather than keeping kyurem to try deal with them. I think there are other options that achieve curbing what is being “fear mongered” in the wake of a kyurem ban, that are healthier for the meta game than kyurem itself (refer to my earlier post if you wish to know why I believe kyurem to be unhealthy). And if that proves to not to be a viable approach, take standard action and suspect the problematic mons and ban.
This is far from my best worded post but I can’t be bothered to fix it/reword it (sorry)
TL;DR Yes kyurem ban removes a ‘key’ check/breaker to SD scor among other ‘fear mongered’ cores, but I’d rather see other mons retested and reintroduced/ or if not possible suspects and bans to curb this opposed to keeping kyurem to do it (as kyurem is unhealthy imo)
Last edited:
if you're looking to retest pokemon that meaningfully threaten gliscor instead of keeping kyurem in the tier then your options consist of palafin, baxcalibur, chien-pao, and urshifu, so i don't see how this could actually improve the tier. i agree that kyurem needs to go and i do understand that gliscor will only become even better if kyurem gets banned but dropping random ubers into OU instead of just suspecting gliscor (assuming it garners enough support for a retest ofc) is definitely an interesting take to say the least
Some quick thoughts on logistics of tiering and overall health of the community:
Back in June I posted the following:
"Anyone who is serious about trying to fix this meta is more concerned with what other mons need to be banned, since that's the only logical route we've boxed ourselves into."
Kyu is a major issue for balance teams, has almost no switch ins, and needs almost comically specific counters and burnt Teras to even half check the mf.
Kyu invalidates a lot of playstyles that aren't HO or Stall. I'm not going to pretend the mon isn't basically broken unless you load up either of those playstyles. The only way for any other style to handle Kyu is to Tera, and we have to ask ourselves is that a bad thing? Think hard, how many situations have you found yourself in while playing SV where your only hope of stopping some nasty threat was to Tera?
At some point we have to put a bow on this meta and call it a day. Years into Gen 10 there will 100% be broken stuff running around in Gen 9 but no one will care anymore, especially not our current tier leaders who have worked their ass off trying to fix this mess.
However, I'm voting ban. It's not my place as a voter to worry about a hypothetical meta. It's bad tiering if we think that way.
I am going to list some hard checks that HO has to this mon. I haven't seen an argument for DNB that highlights HO's tools for Kyu; just ban posts showing how easily structures outside of HO and Stall fold to this mon.
I won't be factoring in Tera or we could be here all day, and the bulkiest sub/tect sets I've found only run 52hp with nothing else. The specs/dance sets aren't really on trial here as Kyu wasn't seen as an issue before the rise of this set. So, on paper, here are mons that fit on HO that can handle sub/tect Kyu 1v1 even in suboptimal situations where Kyu has a sub up.
Stealth Rock- Any good HO has this up and keeps it up. These calcs are vs a Kyu at 100% but SR needs to be mentioned.
Scizor- Handles Kyu easily, can switch into EP break sub then KO next turn
Pult- OHKO with Draco specs or Band darts and break past subs via Infiltrator
Zama- Can switch into Ice Beam, break sub then KO back
Weavile- Can switch into EP/Ice break sub then KO back
Kyurem- Need a speed tie but technically you can trade, the Dice set wins every time.
Iron Crown- Specs can eat an EP, Trachyon breaks sub then outspeeds next turn for KO.
Fast Encore Mons like Val can switch in on the sub turn and force it out or KO.
Revenging Kyu is also a thing, such as Iron Boulder who can live an EP, break Sub then KO. If no sub then Enam, Roaring, Treads, Scarf Ghold, obvious RK stuff basically. After that we get into niche picks so I'll stop here.
This is a short list, and a choice locked Pult is on it... HO struggles with sub/tect Kyu just like most other structures, and needs 2-3 mons to take it out if Sub is up. Basically chip it down, break sub, then bring in E-Killer Nite or whatever. There are HO games where Kyu is just another mon getting swept up in a sweep, and HO shouldn't be letting it get a sub anyway, but if it does then almost all momentum is gone and you need to trade and RK in a best case scenario.
The only consistent, 100% way to handle Kyu is extreme HO that has SR up and steamrolls with a set-up sweeper or pure stall played at a high level.
That said, if you want to vote DNB because you're okay with this I'm not outraged by it. The aforementioned statement in bold could lowkey be applied to a few others mons, not to the same extent but not that far off either. At some point we do need to put a bow on this meta and call it day. If your level of acceptance for broken mons running around is higher than mine I can only respectfully agree to disagree. Thanks for reading.
- Any attempt to raise suspect voting prerequisites would be messy but worth a shot, as this tier has been marred by frankly silly outcomes of some of these suspect tests, imo. There's a reason we've had multiple suspects of the same mons. It's getting goofy.
- Ladder skill and game knowledge are not always at the same level. You can be a great player and have almost no insight into what is best for the meta. We've all seen hot ass takes from above average players, even top players, such as questioning the objectively good decision to ban Volcarona. On the inverse, you can take a player like Alternator who is open about not being able to get reqs but always has level-headed and intelligent insights into our tier.
- It's hard to tell which group is lowkey screwing up these suspects; skilled players who are frankly out of touch with what a healthy meta should look like (balanced does not mean boring- MU fishing HO is far more "boring") or players who barely get reqs that skew the outcome because they like their cheesy broken mon or just simply don't like banning mons on principle.
- I don't think there's ever been a case of a mon that has been banned in error, I don't this is something we need to worry about. I was going to say, "If anyone has an example of a mon being banned that wasn't broken lmk, I'm curious" but that would just open the floodgates to, with all due respect, clueless players. I've been playing OU since Gen 6 and after every ban the meta improves. The issue is not mons being banned unfairly, it's with mons unjustly escaping the banhammer.
- Reqs is far from a perfect system. You can also load up vs high skill players in low ladder who are also getting reqs. I've personally ruined dozens of runs, and I've had some tough losses early ladder from others trying to reqs. There's also a conversation about how we're playing with a potentially broken mon, which makes reqs easier...
- Outright ignoring tiering rules should be looked into, such as saying you're going to vote a certain way based on what you think the meta will look like after. This would be nigh impossible to enforce but there are some egregious examples of bad faith voters.
- The philosophy of keeping mons that are on the fence has been problematic to me since Gen 7, such as keeping Kart around because it's only broken 70% of the time. However, that issue is exasperated to its limit in a Tera meta. I've said countless times that Tera bumps most mons up a grade, such as from B+ to A- or A. So, we have A+ or S tier mons hitting broken status when they burn a Tera, and more times than not can only be stopped by a defensive or surprise Tera. We should be leaning more towards banning mons than not.
- Personal attacks and ELO/GXE shaming has an always will be cringe- even when I used to do it.
- Overall, the community is in far better place. I don't think the elitism is an issue anymore. As an OU room frequenter the vibes have changed drastically over the years- far, far less toxic. I can't speak too much on forums but I have lurked old threads and it's safe to say things are better.
- We all owe a great deal of admiration to our tier leaders, especially Finch. We must remember it is a voluntary role and they do it for the love of the game and the community. I know we get passionate, and some of us (me) can be volatile weirdos, but there does need to be at least a baseline level of respect. The Gen 7 council could be described as "asleep at the wheel" and the tier is still fun (imo) but has some serious issues baked into it. They had problems tackling Megas and Z moves, which to be fair is a difficult and daunting task, but Tera is roughly 3x more complicated and difficult to balance, we need to respect that.
- I don't think defensive Teras should be a part of any suspect discussion. The variables are far to high to quantify it. Sure, Tera Ice Glowking might handle Kyu but there are so many factors involved with that decision it's unreal. Is it better to Tera Ice Glowking or force a Tera Ground on Kyu and RK it with Rilla? Depends on the match, the player, the plays, etc. There is an almost endless list of situational Teras. Tera Fire SS Dragonite handles Kyu, but what if Kyu predicts and goes Tera Ground EP? It's basically a moot discussion. Defensive Tera can not be successfully analyzed "on paper" in any meaningful way. I could make cases to unban Pao and Flutter if we want to start talking defensive Teras in a vacuum. It's counterproductive. Tera is meta within a meta, and the only thing we can really do is focus on the standard meta and let Tera be Tera. If your main argument for not banning a mon is defensive Tera that's already a major red flag.
Back in June I posted the following:
"Anyone who is serious about trying to fix this meta is more concerned with what other mons need to be banned, since that's the only logical route we've boxed ourselves into."
Kyu is a major issue for balance teams, has almost no switch ins, and needs almost comically specific counters and burnt Teras to even half check the mf.
Kyu invalidates a lot of playstyles that aren't HO or Stall. I'm not going to pretend the mon isn't basically broken unless you load up either of those playstyles. The only way for any other style to handle Kyu is to Tera, and we have to ask ourselves is that a bad thing? Think hard, how many situations have you found yourself in while playing SV where your only hope of stopping some nasty threat was to Tera?
At some point we have to put a bow on this meta and call it a day. Years into Gen 10 there will 100% be broken stuff running around in Gen 9 but no one will care anymore, especially not our current tier leaders who have worked their ass off trying to fix this mess.
However, I'm voting ban. It's not my place as a voter to worry about a hypothetical meta. It's bad tiering if we think that way.
I am going to list some hard checks that HO has to this mon. I haven't seen an argument for DNB that highlights HO's tools for Kyu; just ban posts showing how easily structures outside of HO and Stall fold to this mon.
I won't be factoring in Tera or we could be here all day, and the bulkiest sub/tect sets I've found only run 52hp with nothing else. The specs/dance sets aren't really on trial here as Kyu wasn't seen as an issue before the rise of this set. So, on paper, here are mons that fit on HO that can handle sub/tect Kyu 1v1 even in suboptimal situations where Kyu has a sub up.
Stealth Rock- Any good HO has this up and keeps it up. These calcs are vs a Kyu at 100% but SR needs to be mentioned.
Scizor- Handles Kyu easily, can switch into EP break sub then KO next turn
Pult- OHKO with Draco specs or Band darts and break past subs via Infiltrator
Zama- Can switch into Ice Beam, break sub then KO back
Weavile- Can switch into EP/Ice break sub then KO back
Kyurem- Need a speed tie but technically you can trade, the Dice set wins every time.
Iron Crown- Specs can eat an EP, Trachyon breaks sub then outspeeds next turn for KO.
Fast Encore Mons like Val can switch in on the sub turn and force it out or KO.
Revenging Kyu is also a thing, such as Iron Boulder who can live an EP, break Sub then KO. If no sub then Enam, Roaring, Treads, Scarf Ghold, obvious RK stuff basically. After that we get into niche picks so I'll stop here.
This is a short list, and a choice locked Pult is on it... HO struggles with sub/tect Kyu just like most other structures, and needs 2-3 mons to take it out if Sub is up. Basically chip it down, break sub, then bring in E-Killer Nite or whatever. There are HO games where Kyu is just another mon getting swept up in a sweep, and HO shouldn't be letting it get a sub anyway, but if it does then almost all momentum is gone and you need to trade and RK in a best case scenario.
The only consistent, 100% way to handle Kyu is extreme HO that has SR up and steamrolls with a set-up sweeper or pure stall played at a high level.
That said, if you want to vote DNB because you're okay with this I'm not outraged by it. The aforementioned statement in bold could lowkey be applied to a few others mons, not to the same extent but not that far off either. At some point we do need to put a bow on this meta and call it day. If your level of acceptance for broken mons running around is higher than mine I can only respectfully agree to disagree. Thanks for reading.
Last edited:
Personally I believe in a palafin retest, but if you (and others ofc) disagree with that opinion I totally get it.
My bigger point was supposed to be acknowledging the DNB argument of kyurem keeping certain cores/mons eg gliscor more in check, but preferring action be taken to deal with them either by banning or re introducing ( I just personally am more excited by the latter option ) opposed to keeping kyurem to deal with it.
As I mentioned in the post, I acknowledged it wasn’t my best worded, hope that clears it up.
Sorry to derail away from Kyurem again, but Palafin 100% should be retested as should Bundle and Volc. Frankly Bax probably should as well, that was a week 1 quickban that needed further time for counterplay to develop (to an extent it already did, it already lost hard to Balloon Ghold which was everywhere at the time) - quick banning a Mon week 1 because "everyone is spamming screens HO" frankly was way too rash and at the very least a suspect should have been done. There is no need to do anything radical such as freeing Chien Pao. But it's true we have other options to keep Gliscor at bay and in the meta to prevent the meta from sliding into shit in Kyurem's absence
To put it bluntly, I disagree with you a great deal on much of your opinion.
We do not need to retest Bundle or Bax. Both are very clearly broken. I do not think this is controversial either.
Yeah we should retest volc after it just got banned with a 75% majority, great idea!
Broken checks broken is a flawed argument, as it supposes that the thing in question is unquestionably broken to begin with. There is no debate with it; the thing checking meta threats is broken, and must be banned. It takes a backwards approach to tiering, insisting that problems need to prove they aren't a problem, when in actuality you could've spent the words on saying why the thing in question is broken.
When people are rightfully worried over how the meta will develop without Kyurem, one can shut that comversation down by saying, "Oh that's broken checks broken, gg no re," or some shit like that. They first dismiss the worries with a wave of their hand, and then act under the presumption that Kyurem is broken, instead of trying to build a solid claim that it's broken (which isn't the hardest thing to do, from what I've seen).
Over all, it's a horribly dismissive non-sequitur that jumps the shark on whether or not something is banworthy, and I'd rather read your essays on why the frozen chicken is broken over reading non-arguments about how shit just doesn't really matter.
When people are rightfully worried over how the meta will develop without Kyurem, one can shut that comversation down by saying, "Oh that's broken checks broken, gg no re," or some shit like that. They first dismiss the worries with a wave of their hand, and then act under the presumption that Kyurem is broken, instead of trying to build a solid claim that it's broken (which isn't the hardest thing to do, from what I've seen).
Over all, it's a horribly dismissive non-sequitur that jumps the shark on whether or not something is banworthy, and I'd rather read your essays on why the frozen chicken is broken over reading non-arguments about how shit just doesn't really matter.
my friend in absolute christ what in the deepest and most desolate stygian-blue pits of tartarus itself are you talking about. how do you say something like "let's not get crazy and free chien-pao" and in the same breath say "free bax and bundle"? bax is ddance kyurem on steroids and bundle is breaker kyurem with 136 speed and unresisted stab. both of those are frankly more broken than pao and under no circumstances should either of those be freed in this gen, possibly ever. besides that, we should really be focusing on kyurem and keeping this thread on track because it's having a hard enough time as it is. this is not the palafin suspect thread, or the gliscor suspect thread, or the volc resuspect thread, or the zap-king-lu discussion thread, or the thread for any of the other million things people have been talking about instead of kyurem. if you focus on the subject of the suspect instead of the effects you imagine its ban might have, you'll probably have more success in bringing over people to your side
I think even responding to posts of such low caliber is problematic lol
They have indeed successfully derailed any decent discussion about the suspect- their post has literally no place here and would be better fit on the main OU forum.
It's a nice breakdown of why their logic (or lack thereof) doesn't make sense, and highlighting the fact they don't even have a tenuous grip on the meta is amusing, but now they're going to respond with even more asinine nonsense and the thread is essentially hijacked for the next 2 pages. Posts like these that clearly circumvent the rules and more importantly the point of a thread should be simply deleted by staff imo. But here I am ironically giving even more attention to what could be considered incoherent babbling lol.
EDIT:
I was on the fence if kid was trolling or not but it seems they're dead serious lmfao
Last edited:
Listen baxcalibur was basically better kyurem (on the physical side) so no. Iron Bundle is less of a no but please don't bother lol. I wish to keep my feelings about volcarona away from this thread as I do not want to start arguments but I think a palafin retest would be a great idea. Especially if kyurem remains in the tier palafin could probably be a solid threat without being broken thanks to pure water typing having plenty of checks. There are also some ubers pokemon that I think should be tested but that is a discussion for another day.
- Status