Stop being wrong about the children's video game, and I won't have toyou’re almost 30 please stop crashing out over a children’s videogame
Stop being wrong about the children's video game, and I won't have toyou’re almost 30 please stop crashing out over a children’s videogame
FYI, I didn't just hit 1500, I reached top 20 on the ladder without using Snorlax (ImJustSamu is highlighted because I DM'd this to him after he told me I'd never surpass him, which I was of course able to do with the greatest of ease). I didn't even use Cloyster. I ran Gar/Mie/Zam/Don and made it work. If you're going to argue the fact that I could "only" reach top 20 on the ladder, you're giving me a lot more credit as a player than I probably deserve. It's not like I'd be in the top 5 if I just switched something out for Snorlax and changed nothing else. No, I built a strong team and I played reasonably well with it, despite no Lax (which everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, told me was a terrible idea and that I would never break top 20 without Snorlax. Of course, when everyone tells me that I can't do something, I'm going to put everything I have into proving them wrong).Personally, I just disagreed with your scientific method more than your conclusions. Your point essentially boiled down to "I reached 1500 elo w/o, thus it's the worst of the big 3." Exact quote: "As I mentioned above, the fact that I was able to reach 1500 elo without a Snorlax basically proves this in my eyes."
No, that's not how experiments work; your data don't support that conclusion. You provide evidence that snorlax is dropable. If that was your only conclusion, and you just said "Hey, Ive found some success dropping Snorlax," I would've said cool stuff and thanks for sharing. Lax has some issues that can be exploited.
This is a fair point, actually. The reason I didn't test these, though, is because I never held the belief that Tauros and Chansey were dispensable in the first place. But it's fair to say that I could've tested teams without them anyway to control for my own biases.But without doing the same experiment with chansey and tauros, you can't say anything about one mon being worse than another. You didn't test that
Did you break top 20, though?For instance, I've broken 1500 w/o chansey, and Ortheore did it with freaking ditto.
You reaching top 20 and your final game being snorlax is all we have proof of. We dont have any games besides one (Which is lost to time) and you didnt bother to show any losses, other wins, close games, only proof that your LAST game was laxless. (Which again is lost) You couldve laddered up to that point and we would never have known. Now im not saying you did this but you are presenting a statement with minimal evidence to back you up besides "It worked once dont worry about the rest of the time"I'm not gonna find specific bits and evidence. Bleh :p
Ladder is pretty terrible with a lot of inexperienced players, idk why hitting top 20 is considered an accomplishment lol. Also the 75 gxe kinda disproves your point because it’s the lowest out of everyone displayed in the screenshot. If you were using a snorlax team your win rate would prob be higherFYI, I didn't just hit 1500, I reached top 20 on the ladder without using Snorlax (ImJustSamu is highlighted because I DM'd this to him after he told me I'd never surpass him, which I was of course able to do with the greatest of ease). I didn't even use Cloyster. I ran Gar/Mie/Zam/Don and made it work. If you're going to argue the fact that I could "only" reach top 20 on the ladder, you're giving me a lot more credit as a player than I probably deserve. It's not like I'd be in the top 5 if I just switched something out for Snorlax and changed nothing else. No, I built a strong team and I played reasonably well with it, despite no Lax (which everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, told me was a terrible idea and that I would never break top 20 without Snorlax. Of course, when everyone tells me that I can't do something, I'm going to put everything I have into proving them wrong).
This is a fair point, actually. The reason I didn't test these, though, is because I never held the belief that Tauros and Chansey were dispensable in the first place. But it's fair to say that I could've tested teams without them anyway to control for my own biases.
Did you break top 20, though?
you're just completely dodging the argument? royzin's entire point (correct me if i'm wrong) is that RBY ladder is not a good example of skill because of the amount of bad players, thus meaning that tournaments are where you can actually prove skill (wow maybe the winner of a RBY tournament is good and accomplished!). I really don't see why that's a pointlessly high standard, being a ladder hero for RBY doesn't mean much. And again, you're just ignoring the fact that your GXE is extremely low (resulting from LaxLess potentially), which is potential evidence of farming low ladder noobs - not saying that happened, but yeah.If being in the top 20 players on the ladder without Snorlax isn't an accomplishment, then being good at RBY itself must not be an accomplishment. Good thing I don't have to give a solitary fuck about your pointlessly high standards, though. You are nobody to me.
When was the argument ever about ladder being doable with snorlax? It was always about which of the big 3 was the most droppable, which, again, you never explained why ladder proves your point. Top 5 on ladder might not even prove anything, let alone top 20. Let the tournament results speak, not ladder games against opponents of questionable caliber.I wouldn't go that far. You do absolutely need a plan for Snorlax, because it's a very powerful and immediate threat, especially if you don't have one of your own. My only point of contention (that was ridiculed, and now suddenly people are claiming it's always been believed, which is absolutely hilarious to me) is that climbing the ladder is more than doable without Snorlax and you just don't understand the game very well if you don't see why.
what the fuck is up with all this rudeness? this could've been a calm discussion but no you had to start with the insults. anyways, you still completely dodged the entire argument. snorlax is droppable - this point has been conceded - the question is which of the big 3 is most droppable, not if they are droppable or not. and again, you're just sidestepping the questionable process - where's the comparison of snorlax to chansey in terms of droppability? If you want to make a claim and back it up with evidence, you need to contextualize the evidence and explain why it means anything - especially in a way that addresses counterpoints rather than devolving into insults instead of actually discussing. come on now, this is just lazy.From day number fucking one, you clueless fucking moron. Pretty sure I know what the subject of the argument is when I'm at the origin of the argument and you just stepped in after two years like you know anything that's going when you clearly know jack shit.
IN LADDER. Yes. That was ALWAYS the subject, from the beginning. From before the argument even appeared on this forum.
Notice how this conversation is taking place in the LADDER THREAD? YEAH. It's almost like that's not on accident. Dipshit.
this still ignores the point of... which of the big 3 is most droppable on ladder... you have no evidence that lax is more or less droppable than chansey... you're still ignoring the entire argument...No, I'm just refusing to contribute to a conversation that I was never having in the first place, and one that you are (obnoxiously, and like a weirdo) are trying to force me into for God knows what reason. I am not interested in discussing who the most droppable staple is outside of ladder. I am literally only interested in ladder. That is why I am in the ladder thread. Fuck. Off.
And who are you to anyone? Some jackass giving straight up abuse to other players because you're frankly nothing-burger ladder accomplishments don't get recognised? If your so good to talk down to others I can't wait to see how you'll do in SPLYou are nobody to me.
The issue with slower bulkier pokemon is that if they sponge a bunch of hits trying to wake, then depending on the scenario they may just die before they get the chance to do anything (this is mostly relevant lategame). You don't need to maximise bulk either- if a pokemon has decent longevity in certain key matchups (mostly Chansey), then you can exploit that specific matchup to burn sleep turnsKinda dumb question - If given a choice which pokemon do you think is the "best" to have put to sleep by the opponent ?
Been running through the non-OU pokemon on the ladder and Hypno is like just bulky enough that it has a decent chance to wake up later on in the game. Vaporeon has also awoken from nap time and won me a game here and there but obviously Vape is weak to electric attacks and walled by water types. It's a strange "slot" because you want your least valuable pokemon slept basically.
2025 tier list update:Recently reached 1500 elo with a team that doesn't use Snorlax, so I think I have a unique perspective on this.
(Proof: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen1ou-1671958287)
S:
A:
B:
C1:
C2:
D:(unordered)
Chansey is the most indispensable of the "big 3," and in my view, at this stage in the meta, slightly edges out even Tauros. It's the only Pokémon in the game that is straight-up buffed by being paralyzed—that is to say, the benefits of getting your Chansey paralyzed utterly eclipse the downsides in a manner that may as well be referred to as a "buff," because that's essentially what it is. There's a reason many people will forfeit the moment their Chansey gets frozen; without Chansey in play, it becomes almost impossible to protect the rest of your team from status conditions in a meta where inflicting status serves as your primary win condition. I would liken losing your Chansey in RBY to hanging your queen in chess. It's a tremendous setback that is extremely difficult to come back from, and not having a Chansey on your team while your opponent has one is like being 75 meters behind in a 100 meter dash. It's that important. The choice to forgo Chansey on any serious team can only be described with one word—foolish.
Not much to say about Tauros—it's still indispensable, and the king to Chansey's queen, but its vulnerability to status conditions and inability to recover its health means that you REALLY have to pick your battles with it—a downside that Chansey lacks. Chansey can safely switch into every special attack in the game when paralyzed. Tauros cannot. That said, obviously, it's still the best kill switch in the game. I think people will always view Tauros as #1 because of its role as a sweeper—after all, Tauros is designed for scoring KOs, and Chansey isn't—but the thing is, Tauros needs a lot of support before it can get that late game sweep going in the first place, and Chansey is simply the best Pokémon at providing that support—and, therefore, the true MVP of the metagame.
Snorlax is overrated. As I mentioned above, the fact that I was able to reach 1500 elo without a Snorlax basically proves this in my eyes, especially when I didn't find the task particularly difficult. It goes without saying that Snorlax is strong, and can be a challenge to deal with—if you don't have one yourself, it's probably gonna take more than one of your Pokémon to deal with it (unless you run Porygon). However, Snorlax has a bevy of exploitable weaknesses that simply prevent it, in my eyes, from being the true undroppable S-tier Pokémon that everyone seems to think it is. For one thing, it gets outsped by Chansey and Rhydon. Any Snorlax that switches in on a healthy Chansey puts itself at risk of getting hit by all manner of status conditions. Since low speed means bad crit rate, Chansey is very likely able to take at least two hits before needing to switch out, which means that Snorlax has to dodge Sing three times in this scenario before its opponent pivots to another, more accurate sleeper. Snorlax is one of the worst Pokémon to have asleep or frozen. Rest is annoying to deal with, but the fixed two-turn wake up makes it extremely easy to exploit the wake up turn and simply put it back to sleep, or even just smack it with Alakazam Psychics until it dies in two or three hits (minding his high crit rate). Without Amnesia, it also struggles to deal with Porygon, which is just... kinda pathetic, really—and with Amnesia, you're running a suboptimal Snorlax that's even easier to exploit. Obviously, I'm not saying Snorlax is trash—I have it at the top of my A-tier, and it's still the third strongest Pokémon in the meta. But this notion that you can't make a good team without one is just utter nonsense. It is by far the least threatening of the big 3, and I think its popularity is more a measure of self-reinforcing groupthink than anything else. "It's true because the community says so," or "It's true because the numbers say so," rather than "It's true because you literally cannot win without Snorlax." This isn't GSC—you CAN go without Snorlax. It's just a very strong Pokémon that you probably should use. Nothing more.
Exeggutor is extremely annoying. Like, nothing kills it. Even moves that are supposed to kill it (Starmie's Blizzard) do a terrible job of killing it, and even then, it has such an easy time putting all its checks to sleep anyway. The only surefire way to KO an Exeggutor is to have it blow itself up—a scary prospect, which makes every encounter with this big dumb palm tree far more of a nail-biter than it ever feels like it needs to be. In my opinion, every team needs to pack a Rhydon, a Gengar, or both, simply because of this Pokémon alone. The only reason it's not higher than Snorlax is because when it blows up, at least it's gone for good.
Alakazam and Starmie are incredibly strong, but they're down here because they are absolutely terrible at fighting other special attackers, including themselves. An Alakazam cannot consistently close the deal on another Alakazam, which is a problem. Starmie has Thunderbolt to deal with members of its own species, I suppose, but Starmie's problem is having to run Thunderbolt in the first place when it would much rather be running STAB. Out of all Pokémon in the RBY meta, Starmie suffers the hardest from 4MSS, and it's a shame to see. I would also like Starmie more if it had a little bit more HP to supplement its decent physical bulk—but then, it would be even harder to two-shot it in the mirror match, I guess. Oh well.
Rhydon is good enough that I believe every team (at least of certain archetypes) needs to use it, but HAVING to use Rhydon also kinda sucks. Getting walled by Pokémon like Exeggutor and Cloyster blows, and moves like Rock Slide simply aren't strong enough (or accurate enough) to consistently deal with these threats. Plus, since Subsitute is garbage in this generation, it's liable to getting checked by all sleepers, as well, since they all outspeed him. Even Chansey can two-shot it with Ice Beam. Rhydon has a lot going against it, making him one of the harder meta Pokémon to use, but he's an absolute beast if you play him very intelligently.
Jynx is basically a less scary Exeggutor that gets STAB Blizzards and freeze immunity. Too bad it doesn't have the same bulk, and only runs three moves (nobody has ever seen Jynx use its fourth move. Ever). Cloyster gets the same Ice-type benefits, but of course trapping, while extremely annoying, is also super gimmicky and inconsistent.
Slowbro spends too many games dying before it can get all of its boosts up before it's able to wreak any real havoc, but it can be scary if you're not prepared for it, or if all of its checks are dead (which means you're in a pretty bad spot anyway). The problem is, even if its checks are crippled with status, they can still deal with Slowbro adequately.
Gengar would be C1-tier or higher if it had a better sleep move, or a slightly higher Attack stat, or wasn't weak to Psychic, or wasn't weak to Ground, or had ANY good STAB moves, or if Mega Drain had a higher base power, or if the most common leads in the game couldn't threaten to OHKO it, or if it wasn't speed tied with Tauros, or if it had any sort of consistency whatsoever. It really has everything going against it in this generation, doesn't it? The fact that it's usable in the meta at all is actually incredible. You could fix just ONE or TWO of those issues I mentioned, and Gengar would be an excellent Pokémon, all for the sheer utility of its Ghost typing alone—but to have all of those issues at once? It's just... a lot.
Jolteon gets to be in C because it's the fastest viable Pokémon, and it's capable of slapping Chansey around in a pinch. It has some respectable characteristics. I just don't care about Electric-types in this meta when you can just run Rhydon and shut them down completely. Zapdos gets to be much higher because it's much bulkier and Drill Peck is very strong, but it's underwhelming for the same reason. It's too bad moves like HP Ice and Roost didn't exist yet.
It depends on your team of course, but Starmie, Alakazam, and Gengar are among the better candidates. Not a dumb question at all.Kinda dumb question - If given a choice which pokemon do you think is the "best" to have put to sleep by the opponent ?
I've been doing something very similar trying to make any mon work:"except for trash because in trash I couldn't come up with any way of using the pokemon."
Aight so farfetchd is a funny mon.F Tier - Better than trash. For example can cause paralysis consistently. Can explode etc.
Nah, dual dance is directly outclassed by Scyther, which runs the exact same set but with HB>BS. No matter which way you slice it, Farfetch'd is just worse than everything that fills a comparable role.Yeah the thing that makes farfetch'd unique I think is swords plus agility but it's so weak. If I want to run sand attack I'm probably putting it on something like Jolteon to spread paralysis (force out an incoming pokemon due to accuracy drops). Maybe Sandslash is the next best candidate because it might help getting swords up against a blizzard user. It's kinda telling I'd prefer Confuse Ray to Smokescreen on Magmar though.