np: UU Suspect Test Round 2 - Cold As Ice

[Pocket]

Heysup, if it's going under the universal Evasion Clause, this combination ban would be reinforced in all tiers. Indeed, I think the scope is too large for one suspect tier to decide.

If this modified evasion clause only affects the UU metagame... then we're talking about setting a precedent arguably worse than Aldaron's Proposal x_x;;

For the above reason of avoiding unnecessary confusion, I would NOT put Snow Warning + Snow Cloak under Evasion Clause, but as another combination ban.

 

[Heysup]

Heysup, if it's going under the universal Evasion Clause, this combination ban would be reinforced in all tiers. Indeed, I think the scope is too large for one suspect tier to decide.

I don't see the harm in saying that the evasion is taken too far in the sole case of hail, but that's just me.

 

[SJCrew]

Heysup, if it's going under the universal Evasion Clause, this combination ban would be reinforced in all tiers. Indeed, I think the scope is too large for one suspect tier to decide.

If this modified evasion clause only affects the UU metagame... then we're talking about setting a precedent arguably worse than Aldaron's Proposal x_x;;

For the above reason of avoiding unnecessary confusion, I would NOT put Snow Warning + Snow Cloak under Evasion Clause, but as another combination ban.

If the OU players don't want to clause Evasion-increasing weather abilities, then that's their prerogative. We're not setting any kind of negative precedent by banning them in UU. And I'm a bit puzzled at your conclusion that banning only one specific instance would be any better for precedent's sake when we're all well aware we're just doing this to weaken Froslass. It's almost exactly the same as Drizzle/Swift Swim on a smaller scope.

 

[Pocket]

Frosslass, and possibly Mamoswine if it ever drops back down to UU. Not too sure if these 2 Snow Cloakers deserve the same treatment as the many powerful Swift Swimmers, but it's up to you UU players, I guess :0

 

[DetroitLolcat]

Can't we just ban Froslass? Snow Cloak +Snow Warning is a combo that's suspect on one Pokemon, and the combo itself is obviously,obviously not a broken combo. Froslass can abuse it to the point of possible brokenness, therefore Froslass should be Suspect because of it. Stop trying to implement complex bans to save one Pokemon and using Evasion Clause as a scapegoat. It's not broken because of Snow Cloak hax for the same reason Garchomp wasn't broken because of Sand Veil hax. They're broken because their hax abilities push them past the point of brokenness. If you ban Snow Warning and Snow Cloak, you're saying that combo is far too powerful to exist in a healthy metagame. If that is so, then please explain to me the broken set Swinub can run to break UU. No takers?

Drizzle+Swift Swim shouldn't have happened IMO whether it was best for the metagame or not, simply because it's setting a precedent for future complex bans.

This is poor logic: Froslass can run a broken set with Snow CLoak, therefore Snow Cloak breaks Froslass and Snow Cloak should be banned.

If A breaks B, then B is broken, not A. Snow Cloak breaks Froslass, therefore Froslass is broken.

This is good logic: Snow Cloak makes Froslass broken, therefore Froslass should be BL.

Just stick to banning Pokemon instead of bringing in Bullshit Clause again. Evasion Clause is for the purposes of banning broken effects of Evasion over multiple tiers. It's why Double Team belongs there. It's why Brightpowder+Lax Incense was one of the shittiest bans in Smogon history. We've become too liberal in extending the effects of Evasion Clause in order to separate the aspects of a Pokemon from the Pokemon itself. If you take away Snow Warning from Abomasnow, you don't have Abomasnow anymore. Abomasnow (and Snover if Hail remained broken afterward) should have been nominated, not Snow Warning. It's why Ninetales (and later Vulpix if it remains broken) should be being nominated in OU, not Drought. It's why Tyranitar (and later the Hippos) should be being nominated in OU, not Sand Stream.

We play Pokemon, not Abilities. We ban Pokemon, not Abilities (except in really, really, really extreme circumstances like Moody).

 

[Pocket]

I agree with DetroitLolcat that a combo ban seems unwarranted for this particular case.

Why are we even having a heated debate about possible suspects, when the suspect round hasn't even started? We would have to put up with another month, or more, with Froslass and Hail before we get to nominate anything...

@DetroitLolcat

I would've agreed with you about banning the Pokemon, rather than the weather-summoning ability, a couple of months ago, but now I agree with the line of reasoning that Mario with Lasers presented in the OU suspect thread - he posted in response to banning Multiscale instead of Dragonite:

Once I suggested we just banned V-Create instead of Victini in UU, and pretty much no one agreed with me, as people said I was pretty much asking for a V-Create+Victini complex ban.

Obviously I wasn't, but I could see their point; banning anything that isn't a pokémon should be done based on the principle that the non-pokémon element is broken, not merely "the factor that makes X broken". V-Create isn't broken, but it could be argued Victini with V-Create is in UU (either for spamming the move or merely by having access to it). Double Team is "broken" (whatever you mean with that, fuck semantics), but not Double Team Raichu. One could say Multi-Scale is broken, but do we really believe in that, or are we merely trying to convince people "Dragonite is broken with it"? Inner Focus Dragonite is no way in hell even close to broken, of course, but Pressure Lugia is broken as all heaven, so we can safely say Multi-Scale isn't broken per se.

Drought is also a brilliant example: Ninetales may still hold her own in OU, but just look at Vulpix in UU and tell me the bastard was broken. As someone said once about Politoed, the pokémon in these cases is merely a vessel, a puppet. It's not abusing the ability/item/move, it's being abused by it.

An hypothetical example of that would be if Game Freak created a Guts clone called Manly Man and gave it to Groudon and Haxorus. Now Haxorus is a god among pokémon and people want to either ban it or ban Manly Man, but... Is the ability really broken? It didn't make Groudon any more broken than it already was, just manlier. That isn't a capital offense. On the other hand, Haxorus grabbed its chance to skyrocket into top 10 by its teeth, and is now exploding shit and not looking back. Can you say it's a vessel for Manly Man, or is Haxorus abusing it instead?"

 

[shrang]

Anyone else using Wynaut + Dugtrio? Wobbuffet got banned, but Wynaut can mostly do its job at Encore Tickling slow walls and then just switching to Dugtrio to finish them off. Sure, it takes up two slots, but the reward is well worth it, IMO. I've had so many SubCM Raikou sweeps because of how easily Chansey gets wreaked by Wynaut. Even if you switch into Toxic, you can usually get it down to -3, and there's no way Chansey can get out of getting killed by Dugtrio.

 

[His Eminence Lord Poppington II]

i used that in the pre-wobb ban era, with wobb, obviously; in combination with a taunt / u-turn pokemon that would u-turn to wobbuffet and destroy it. also encoring stuff like registeel's stealth rock is fantastic, especially when you outspeed, or even 0 speed hitmontop's fake out, which wynaut cannot do =(

 

[Heysup]

Frosslass, and possibly Mamoswine if it ever drops back down to UU. Not too sure if these 2 Snow Cloakers deserve the same treatment as the many powerful Swift Swimmers, but it's up to you UU players, I guess :0

UU Snow Cloakers (in which you forgot some very viable ones like Glaceon) are different in the sense that they automatically start with 20% to destroy a team where as Swift Swimmers aren't a game of % chances.

Can't we just ban Froslass? Snow Cloak +Snow Warning is a combo that's suspect on one Pokemon, and the combo itself is obviously,obviously not a broken combo. Froslass can abuse it to the point of possible brokenness, therefore Froslass should be Suspect because of it. Stop trying to implement complex bans to save one Pokemon and using Evasion Clause as a scapegoat. It's not broken because of Snow Cloak hax for the same reason Garchomp wasn't broken because of Sand Veil hax. They're broken because their hax abilities push them past the point of brokenness. If you ban Snow Warning and Snow Cloak, you're saying that combo is far too powerful to exist in a healthy metagame. If that is so, then please explain to me the broken set Swinub can run to break UU. No takers?

As I've said before, Garchomp was way more controversially good without SS than Froslass ever was without Hail. There is a direct difference between the two's situation even if you ignore the obvious environmental factors that further prove my point (like OU vs UU etc).

Snow Cloak + Snow Warning is a principle ban at its very core, and while I don't fully agree with it as the best option for "brokeness", it still makes perfect sense. Neither Froslass nor Swinub should be able to abuse a loophole in the evasion clause (or at least, that's what this ban is suggesting).

Come to think of it, it makes way more sense than Swift Swim + Drizzle if you want to bring the prevo argument into it. Swinub can abuse evasion in various ways but Horsea sure as hell cannot abuse the speed and power in OU. Not quite sure what you hoped to accomplish with that.

Drizzle+Swift Swim shouldn't have happened IMO whether it was best for the metagame or not, simply because it's setting a precedent for future complex bans.

Ok but it was done and nothing crazy has happened yet as a reaction to it.

This is poor logic: Froslass can run a broken set with Snow CLoak, therefore Snow Cloak breaks Froslass and Snow Cloak should be banned.

If A breaks B, then B is broken, not A. Snow Cloak breaks Froslass, therefore Froslass is broken.

This is good logic: Snow Cloak makes Froslass broken, therefore Froslass should be BL.

You start this with a false premise and then bring the rest of your argument into it after. That doesn't make it correct if your premise is still false.

You suggest that Froslass can run a broken set with Snow Cloak. This is far from the truth. In fact it's almost unanimously true that Froslass cannot run a broken set without Snow Cloak being active via hail. This is because Snow Cloak is the cause of Froslass being broken, it isn't like Garchomp - it is not broken without Hail.

What you suggest afterward is simply stating a falsehood; you're misleading yourself by taking the word "break" and "broken" very literally.

We ban the cause of the broken metagame. It makes more sense if you think about it as the metagame being broken and we ban the thing that's breaking it. What you're suggesting is banning the symptom instead of a cause. If you have a mosquito bite, you can scratch it and relieve the itch, but that doesn't make your mosquito bite go away; it actually makes it worse.

Just stick to banning Pokemon instead of bringing in Bullshit Clause again. Evasion Clause is for the purposes of banning broken effects of Evasion over multiple tiers. It's why Double Team belongs there. It's why Brightpowder+Lax Incense was one of the shittiest bans in Smogon history. We've become too liberal in extending the effects of Evasion Clause in order to separate the aspects of a Pokemon from the Pokemon itself. If you take away Snow Warning from Abomasnow, you don't have Abomasnow anymore. Abomasnow (and Snover if Hail remained broken afterward) should have been nominated, not Snow Warning. It's why Ninetales (and later Vulpix if it remains broken) should be being nominated in OU, not Drought. It's why Tyranitar (and later the Hippos) should be being nominated in OU, not Sand Stream.

We play Pokemon, not Abilities. We ban Pokemon, not Abilities (except in really, really, really extreme circumstances like Moody).

Well with the possibility of new abilities for Pokemon, it makes no sense to ban an entire Pokemon if it's one of their optional abilities causing them to be broken. If a Pokemon is healthy for the metagame without its broken ability, why ban it? It's not even a complex ban at this point at all. And Moody is not just an extreme example...it's why we give the option in the first place. Think about why we did it instead of banning each and every Pokemon with it. It will be the same reason people want to ban Snow Cloak / Snow Warning.

 

[Pocket]

Seems like Sand Veil + Sandstream should've been banned last round instead of Garchomp by principle, to remove all loopholes in Evasion Clause.

 

[tlb31m]

Seems like Sand Veil + Sandstream should've been banned last round instead of Garchomp by principle, to remove all loopholes in Evasion Clause.

Not necasseraly. Garchomp seemed to be band because it doesnt have the proper counter as it didnt in 4th gen. Name something that can counter it properly or even safe switch in without chomp taking massive damage/killing it or setting up to sweep a whole team? Mixed sets for chomp, phsyical sets and berry packing sets all seem to not have the proper counter and this is the reason why thunderous is on its way out an eventually mence will get their as well. Luck hax clause was (in my opinon) an actual good clause for smogon to do (for the first time) since froslass,cacturne and evasion pokemon abilitys arent band. It just makes their abilities useless half of the time.

 

[Pocket]

Garchomp has more checks than ever. For one, there's many more faster mons that didn't exist in DPP OU - namely, Latios, Thundurus, and Deoxys-S. Without Sand Veil, it's most effective Sub-Dance set would lose its effectiveness, being hard-walled by Shed Shell Skarmory.

YacheChomp with Fire Fang is certainly deadly, but many mons can eat a +2 DClaw. +2 Outrage would destroy shit, but it's vulnerable to revenge-kills. Just like Thundurus, the inability to raise its Speed via Dragon Dance is its downfall, since it's checked much easily.

 

[FlareBlitz]

If you ban Snow Warning and Snow Cloak, you're saying that combo is far too powerful to exist in a healthy metagame. If that is so, then please explain to me the broken set Swinub can run to break UU. No takers?

This is terrible logic. It's like saying "well if you think Garchomp should be banned then prove to me that specs chomp breaks the metagame". In order to ban something, not all instances of that thing need to be broken, just one. Banning all of garchomp's non-broken sets by banning garchomp is no different than banning the non-problematic usage of Snow Cloak in hail by banning the problematic usage of the same.

The reason complex bans exist is because they can sometimes create a better metagame than if we simply bludgeon an entire pokemon or playstyle out of existence. This was the reasoning behind the drizzle/swift-swim ban. In the case of froslass, it's an incredibly popular non-broken spikes user outside of hail. There's no real reason to ban all usage of froslass when we can just ban its usage where it is problematic - in hail.

You might be tempted to make a slippery slope argument at this point, and I can understand why. I mean, there may be nothing stopping us from, say, banning draco meteor on dragons (to take an old example) if we embrace complex bans. But nothing should stop us from doing that if it would be best for the metagame - in that particular example, the complex ban has a much greater scope and impact than I personally would be comfortable with, but if the other option (hypothetically) happens to be banning every single dragon in OU, I can see why some people would be open to considering it.

I have never liked traditionalism. If you have a problem with this particular complex ban for some reason (like saying that the cost of instituting it is greater than the possible benefits, which I would easily see being the case), that's fine. But don't say things "on principle we should only ever ban pokemon" because I have no interest in needlessly constraining the options available to us as a community.

_____________

Back on topic, I'd like to summarize the positions of the various members in this community so we can focus on finding the best one instead of having all the sides engage in a free-for-all. And let me know if I missed something.

We can vote such that all evasion-modifying abilities are illegal in all circumstances (General Snow Cloak/Sand Veil ban).

We can vote such that all Pokemon on a team which can create a certain form of weather cannot have any ability that increases their rate of evasion due to that weather (Snow Cloak/Sand Veil and Weather complex ban).

We can vote such that individual Pokemon with evasion-modifying abilities in a certain weather are illegal in that weather (If Froslass specifically is broken in hail, Froslass is banned in teams that can use hail).

We can vote such that individual Pokemon with evasion-modifying abilities in a certain weather are illegal in that weather (If Froslass specifically is broken in hail, Froslass is banned on all teams).

Given these positions, we can focus on two issues to resolve the whole debate:

1) Pokemon ban or ability ban?
2) Complex ban or simple ban?

What do you guys think?

 

[Heysup]

We can vote such that all evasion-modifying abilities are illegal in all circumstances (General Snow Cloak/Sand Veil ban).

We can vote such that all Pokemon on a team which can create a certain form of weather cannot have any ability that increases their rate of evasion due to that weather (Snow Cloak/Sand Veil and Weather complex ban).

We can vote such that individual Pokemon with evasion-modifying abilities in a certain weather are illegal in that weather (If Froslass specifically is broken in hail, Froslass is banned in teams that can use hail).

We can vote such that individual Pokemon with evasion-modifying abilities in a certain weather are illegal in that weather (If Froslass specifically is broken in hail, Froslass is banned on all teams).

I mean, for me it seems like we almost have no choices here.....

Jabba basically hinted at disqualifying any complex bans of that nature (second and third option).

The fourth option makes utterly no sense. Uh oh my flashlight ran out of batteries, may as well throw the entire flashlight out.....

Seems like the first option is the only one....but I do in fact think you missed some other options :

We can vote to ban Snow Warning (which would ban Hail altogether)

We can vote to ban Abomasnow (which would simply nerf hail a little bit but basically leave Froslass unscathed in Hail)

It really depends what we think is broken. If Froslass is the main concern here because of Snow Cloak, then we should ban Snow Cloak. If Hail is the problem, perhaps we should either remove or nerf its ass.

 

[Pocket]

Ban Snow Warning / Abomsanow if:
- BlizzSpam is too powerful
- residual damage from Hail is too powerful
- a multitude of mons with Snow Cloak and Ice Body is too powerful

Ban Snow Cloak if:
- Frosslass, Beartic, Glaceon are too powerful in Hail thanks to Snow Cloak

Ban Froslass if:
- Froslass is too powerful in Hail

It really boils down to this. If complex ban is not allowed, and if you're an advocate of minimizing the impact of a ban in a tier, you would agree.

 

[FlareBlitz]

I mean, for me it seems like we almost have no choices here.....

Jabba basically hinted at disqualifying any complex bans of that nature (second and third option).

The fourth option makes utterly no sense. Uh oh my flashlight ran out of batteries, may as well throw the entire flashlight out.....

Seems like the first option is the only one....but I do in fact think you missed some other options :

We can vote to ban Snow Warning (which would ban Hail altogether)

We can vote to ban Abomasnow (which would simply nerf hail a little bit but basically leave Froslass unscathed in Hail)

It really depends what we think is broken. If Froslass is the main concern here because of Snow Cloak, then we should ban Snow Cloak. If Hail is the problem, perhaps we should either remove or nerf its ass.

I'd agree that a general ban on snow cloak/sand veil is the cleanest, most balanced option.

My understanding of Jabba's post is that if we decide to do option 2 or 3, we would need to make it a "evasion-ability/weather" ban instead of just a "snow cloak/snow warning" ban, which makes sense to me.

Thanks for mentioning those two other options, those are also indeed viable, and would be the best option for people who view hail as a playstyle to be broken. I think we should wait until round 3 before we talk about whether hail is in fact broken though; we don't have to wait with regards to discussing evasion clause, because I think evasion-boosting abilities should be dealt with in some fashion regardless of if Froslass (or hail) is ultimately balanced or not.

 

[WinstonShnozwick]

Why not just..

Ability ban Snow Cloak;

-Froslass is broken in hail with it, I fully accept this. But complex bans can be avoided.

-Any free evasion is unfair and promotes luck, and while brightpowder could be too low, a 1 in 5 chance to miss a move shouldn't happen against any pokemon, regardless of its power in the metagame. I don't care who my opponent is, I do not want to give them a free turn in any situation if I can help it.

-This would soft ban froslass until cursed body comes out, but it can be waited out if people recognize the virtue of patience. Froslass is not broken out of hail, and it is unfortunate, but this is possibly the cleanest ban to deal with the situation.

-Glaceon has another ability it can fully goddamn use, so what if you can't get your free hax in hail? Better that you can rely on your own skills to beat someone than pray to Arceus for not missing.

-Beartic is a fucking joke and if anyone is seriously advocating a decision for bans because of his nonexistant spot in the UU metagame, they should take their head out of their fanboy ass and realize that RU is where beartic belongs.

-Mamoswine is irrelevant, he is certainly OU.

 

[Pocket]

After Eo wielded Caturne and offensive Sand Veil Gliscor to reach the top of OU ladder, I realized that none of us has the authority to decide whether an obscure Pokemon deserves any recognition or not. Who knows, maybe Beartic may replace Mamoswine's spot with a SubPunch set or a Swords Dance / Bulk Up / CB set. It has the stats and the movepool to be effective, if there are no better options available.

To me Snow Cloak / Sand Veil falls in the same hax category as Serene Grace. There are Pokemon who can abuse it to broken levels, such as Shaymin-S and Garchomp, while there are other mons who can abuse it without being broken (ie Jirachi / Togekiss / Cacturne / Sandslash).

All I've been hearing thus far is how broken Froslass is because of Snow Cloak, but what else? Is Glaceon broken with Snow Cloak? According to Heysup, it's "very viable," but not broken.

Imo, you guys need more evidence than Froslass to ban Snow Cloak / Sand Veil. Such a ban results to a soft-ban of Beartic, which is ridiculous. You guys need to take more responsibility about these choices, since the outcome of UU not only affects UU players, but RU players as well (which is an official tier now).

To put it bluntly, you guys are playing favorites. This is not the same as Aldaron's Proposal (when you guys were still talking about combo bans), but more akin to Speed Boost Blaziken and Sand Veil Garchomp. Except only worse, because now you guys are talking about banning an un-broken Ability / Pokemon (Snow Cloak and Beartic, respectively).

 

[WinstonShnozwick]

I'm a great fan of original yet effective sets, and I would love to try out your top tier beartic set that can do so well in UU.

Essentially you're arguing to not ability ban snow cloak because you want to protect beartic. Glaceon is a non issue because last time I checked, ice body is released and is completely viable. Now how is this any different from people saying we should ban froslass outright, where froslass is a very viable used pokemon in UU that is not part of the problem. Beartic sucks, to put it bluntly, and is much more viable in RU. I doubt anyone would miss him, and it's not like you could use him when swsw is released.

Here's beartic's usage stat in UU for august; 209 | Beartic | 112 |0.21703%

To put it bluntly, this is very obviously playing favorites. He's completely out of the radar in the UU spectrum. I've noticed people like to cite that team that laddered so well with cacturne and gliscor sand veil, and it has no standing. That incident is what in statistics we call an outlier. Simply put, I doubt he won battles with a niche aspect so shaky on hax, and more about being a skilled battler (very skilled to win with cacturne), and also some hax (which doesnt show anything, because anyone can win battles with hax). And if it was the hax that got so high on the ladder, it just proves even more why abilities like snow cloak should be banned, because if a pokemon as terrible as cacturne can reach top tier in OU, there is something very wrong with the hax involved, and/or you are extremely skilled at battling. Ability banning snow cloak gets rid of the unwanted hax caused by froslass I.E. the broken problem and keeps hail (unbroken playstyle) and froslass (unbroken without hax misses) in UU. Downside? A pokemon with realistically no usage or aptitude to have use in UU becomes unusable until its dw ability is released (so technically, usable in UU when this happens). He has essentially no usage in UU from his stats (112 battles), and it's pretty easy to see that the people using him only did so for sake of forced originality in hail teams or favoritism towards said pokemon.

 

[Pocket]

I'm not playing favorites, Winston... I'm simply against banning Pokemon that are not broken. You say Beartic is viable in RU, but with the Snow Cloak ban, it will be promoted to BL, not relegated to RU. Now that's just disturbing - a crappy Pokemon tiered BL. I don't think Beartic would thrive in RU either way.

Arguably Sand Veil is a clutch ability that enhances the sweeping capabilities of SD Acrobat Gliscor and Cacturne. However, are they broken to the same extent as Garchomp? Obviously not, since people are complaining about Dragonite and Excadrill, not about these Sand Veil sweepers.

Misses are annoying, but NOT broken. It's like Serene Grace; if you're facing a Sand Veil / Snow Cloaker, you should expect to miss once in awhile, and weigh in the risks of using a move with less than perfect accuracy. Garchomp is a top-tier sweeper that a single miss can be game-breaking. Not exactly the case for Gliscor and Cacturne. As well as for Beartic I assume, a Pokemon which doesn't have the Speed or T-Wave to abuse Snow Cloak to the same extent as Froslass.

I hope you can see that Froslass is the sole issue with Snow Cloak.

 

[breh]

yeah the problem with that is that air slash != evade abilities. to flinch, you HAVE to attack (or get lucky with parahax, but w/e); to evade, you do nothing but sub until you get a free one, at which point you get up spikes until you're done.

 

[Pocket]

Have you forgotten Skymin's 80% chance to drop the opponent's Special Defense by 2 stages by using its powerful main STAB? A Pokemon that can SubSeed + flinch an opponent to death? Yea, those are also the effects of Serene Grace.

What you depicted is the perfect abuse of Snow Cloak by Froslass, thanks to its blistering Speed and its access to Spikes. You simply compared the non-broken example of Serene Grace with the broken example of Snow Cloak. If you want to strengthen the anti-Snow Cloak camp, provide the brokenness of other Snow Cloakers.

 

[WinstonShnozwick]

If you want to strengthen the anti-Snow Cloak camp, provide the brokenness of other Snow Cloakers.

I admit that this argument has some merit, but if you want to go down that route then do the same to humor me. If you want to strengthen the anti-Froslass camp, provide the brokenness of Froslass outside of hail. She has numerous checks discussed in this thread if you don't miss her due to Snow Cloak's hax. Here, Weavile and Cobalion to name two. Arcanine runs through Froslass, just watch out for the paralyze. Spiking and spinblocking? Foresight hitmontop and foresight blastoise were made to get around ghosts right?

 

[Godsend]

Froslass is no where near broken outside of Hail. It's got speed, Spikes, and ghost typing. That's it.

 

[Pocket]

Garchomp is not broken outside of Sand, either. It's still a top-tier sweeper, no doubt, but not broken. Without its Sand Veil hax, it's just another very good OU mon that we ended up banning because of Sand Veil. Do you honestly believe that Garchomp (without Sand Veil) is more dangerous than Excadrill or Dragonite? Excadrill and Dragonite are much harder to revenge-kill than Garchomp (ie Multiscale, Dragon Dance boosting both Attack AND Speed, as well as +2 priority ExtremeSpeed all make Dragonite much harder to revenge-kill than Garchomp). Yes, Garchomp would still be in OU without Sand Veil hax.

So I don't understand the double standard that I'm seeing in this thread. "This is UU, not OU" doesn't fly, because it's the same suspect test process ran by the same suspect test mods (ie Jabba / reachzero). It's an issue of being consistent and objective in these testing process, without bias. Otherwise, it defeats the entire point of this gruesome suspect testing project.