I see a lot of division on peoples opinion of Persian, what do people think about it? Do they think its an A tier mon? a B tier mon? a C tier mon? What's with all the division over this feline?
I see a lot of division on peoples opinion of Persian, what do people think about it? Do they think its an A tier mon? a B tier mon? a C tier mon? What's with all the division over this feline?
"Walled"I would say solid B mon. Fast normal spreading crits but frail and walled by Haunter (and can be slept in return).
Dug has even better calcs vs Tangela, and wouldn't you call Dug walled by Tang? The fact is that this is a very offensive tier and threatening sleep in return makes it very threatening"Walled"
Haunter Psychic vs. Persian: 93-110 (27.9 - 33%) -- guaranteed 4HKO
Persian Thunderbolt vs. Haunter: 48-57 (16.3 - 19.4%) -- possible 6HKO
Persian Thunderbolt vs. Haunter on a critical hit: 93-110 (31.7 - 37.5%) -- 90.8% chance to 3HKO
This thing switches in like twice max (from 100%) before it fears losing to a crit.
I see a lot of division on peoples opinion of Persian, what do people think about it? Do they think its an A tier mon? a B tier mon? a C tier mon? What's with all the division over this feline?
I've seen people argue before that Tangs not a Dug wall and instead just a really good check, which is fair considering it gets 4HKOed. Dugs best option to hit Tang (Slash) also can't crit while TBolt can. Haunter is also relatively easy to switch into after sleeping something if you have Kad healthy, while Tang has paralysis to threaten. And ofc keeping Haunter healthy by the time Persians out is not very realistic considering its got a 40% chance to take a fat chunk from slower foes its trying to sleep (outside of Tang who even then still paralyses it), and after getting sleep off Haunter may want to just spam attacks or explode. If Haunter is still healthy by the time Persians come out you've done something wrong.Dug has even better calcs vs Tangela, and wouldn't you call Dug walled by Tang? The fact is that this is a very offensive tier and threatening sleep in return makes it very threatening
Persian being walled by Haunter isn't the problem. Like Haunter being more relevant sucks but isn't too bad since most players are kind of Booming it midgame anyways.
It's the increase in Articuno usage. Slash is really weak against it and is reliant on TBolt crits to deal with it. Kang can Rock Slide it on the switch while Dodo threatens it with BSlam Paralysis. I suppose it's not a big deal if you pair Persian with something like Dewgong, but a Normal-type with a lousy MU against the most threatening setup sweeper in the tier isn't exactly a good look.
For those not familiar with the history of the tier, what are the drops and rises due to this new VR?
Not entirely sure what this post means but I merely suggested that if tiers are made by the method, then cutoffs should be cleanly separating tiers, not something within a tier. The choice of tier for the cutoff is subjective; the tiers are made quite objectively by the program (difficult to explain "quite", ask me questions on discord if you'd like).Isn't the entire system subjective? Vapicuno's program (i dont think its a method) doesn't produce cutoffs, or tiers, it's subjective data analysis.
Although that said I think this VR and its tiers are pretty questionable
edit: added my double post to here for related topic
As a side note, I thought Vapicuno suggested breaking ties by giving the Pokemon with a higher standard deviation the edge. Meaning Tentacruel > Kadabra, is this incorrect?
Not super sure about S2 being a tier, these mons seems like A tier worthy rather than S tier worthy and lines up better with most of the VRs posted here tbh. But it doesn't really matter I suppose.
Unfortunately I still don't really understand what you're saying. As far as I understand, the way RBY lower tiers does the cutoff is that there is no a priori tier label like C by which the cutoff is drawn, which is consistent with my method, which does not label tiers by viability but rather by separability. Where B ends and where C starts, which is a different matter, is mostly determined by the dendrogram produced by my program. A full tier like ABC is a split high up in the dendrogram while a subtier like B1B2B3 is a split low in the dendrogram. One could technically cut off at the subtier level though almost by definition there would be more disputes since in my formalism a tier is defined by disputed rankings.i believe you misread what i said, the cutoff is still C and below, although now that I re-read hipmonlee's post it seems odd to discuss where the cutoff should be rather than discuss where B tier ends and C tier starts (which isn't the same thing)
Responding to "Vapicuno's program (i dont think its a method) doesn't produce cutoffs, or tiers, it's subjective data analysis." and "it seems odd to discuss where the cutoff should be rather than discuss where B tier ends and C tier starts (which isn't the same thing)"i dont think i said anything about any of this
Just going to lay my 2 cents down on the matter; this meta is still underdeveloped and the last think I think it needs right now is more suspects making the tier unstable again right after we settled it, I think it should just be standard UU for UUFPL, more meta development is always nice and less people are complaining about the state of the tier than they have in a very long time.Is there any interest here in unofficially testing anything anytime soon, or is the general consensus to leave it as is for now and let it develop, specifically for RBY UU. I ask because UUFPL is coming up and I am hearing mixed things about the state of the tier and if potential changes should be looked into, and that would be an opportunity to try something out and see how it goes.
samei miss lapras
Tell it to be less good smh. Maybe it will listeni miss lapras