We don't have to find one that everyone agrees on, that's pretty much difficult to do. However, I am sure we can refine one so that the majority of people agrees on.
-
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.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Relooking at banning philosophy: Suspecting Moves
- Thread starter ginganinja
- Start date
We don't have to find one that everyone agrees on, that's pretty much difficult to do. However, I am sure we can refine one so that the majority of people agrees on.
For the record, I agree it's too late for a Stealth Rock suspect, as I am fully aware of the ramifications of such a test and how ridiculously long it would take to reshape the entire game. The reason I posted in this thread was only to point out that broken moves (by the definition I posted earlier) do exist.
I will, however, be lobbying for a very early SR suspect test in XY.
Mind you, I don't even believe "broken" should be a relevant factor when determining what gets banned, I was merely making a point.
I will, however, be lobbying for a very early SR suspect test in XY.
Mind you, I don't even believe "broken" should be a relevant factor when determining what gets banned, I was merely making a point.
Just to update you guys on how I specifically stand on the matter...I'm being convinced to put SR on the table...I'm not even close to allowing U-turn / Scald on the table.
By on the table I mean discussion for suspect. Now, obviously, you guys can discuss whatever you want, but the only one I (and a couple others), as someone on the OU Council, am considering seriously for discussion is SR.
I'm not sure I agree with kokoloko's definition, but it certainly has enough merits to discuss.
Again, I'm being slowly convinced to seriously consider SR...not close to U-turn or Scald.
I'd also like to emphasize that this topic title is a bit misleading, because we already consider suspecting / banning moves (and abilities).
I think I'd far prefer if you guys made new topics for each of the specific moves so I could see consolidated arguments.
You guys can tl;dr as much as you want about banning philosophy, but as this generation's suspect process has shown..the voters don't give a fuck, and the people deciding what to suspect can use whatever somewhat intelligent sounding theorymon to "justify" something on the the broken perspective (I'm specifically recalling a kokoloko uu suspect in which he basically disregards the agreed upon decision to only suspect based on broken and no one says anything).
EDIT: Referring to this kokoloko post: http://smogon.com/forums/threads/uu-suspect-discussion-chandelure.3479163/#post-4580450
See, any semi-intelligent person can manipulate whatever definition you throw down. Why? Because no definition that is exceedingly specific will be accepted...because it is basically impossible. The nature of our beast will yield a general / vague-ish definition, and this will allow anyone to manipulate to suspect according to his whims and desires anyway.
It's a bit blunt but the reality is...we can waste time on a banning philosophy (as we did earlier in BW)...but it won't actually do much because there are enough arbitrary variables for any semi intelligent person to take advantage of to "justify" a suspect.
So yea, make the individual topics already.
By on the table I mean discussion for suspect. Now, obviously, you guys can discuss whatever you want, but the only one I (and a couple others), as someone on the OU Council, am considering seriously for discussion is SR.
I'm not sure I agree with kokoloko's definition, but it certainly has enough merits to discuss.
Again, I'm being slowly convinced to seriously consider SR...not close to U-turn or Scald.
I'd also like to emphasize that this topic title is a bit misleading, because we already consider suspecting / banning moves (and abilities).
I think I'd far prefer if you guys made new topics for each of the specific moves so I could see consolidated arguments.
You guys can tl;dr as much as you want about banning philosophy, but as this generation's suspect process has shown..the voters don't give a fuck, and the people deciding what to suspect can use whatever somewhat intelligent sounding theorymon to "justify" something on the the broken perspective (I'm specifically recalling a kokoloko uu suspect in which he basically disregards the agreed upon decision to only suspect based on broken and no one says anything).
EDIT: Referring to this kokoloko post: http://smogon.com/forums/threads/uu-suspect-discussion-chandelure.3479163/#post-4580450
See, any semi-intelligent person can manipulate whatever definition you throw down. Why? Because no definition that is exceedingly specific will be accepted...because it is basically impossible. The nature of our beast will yield a general / vague-ish definition, and this will allow anyone to manipulate to suspect according to his whims and desires anyway.
It's a bit blunt but the reality is...we can waste time on a banning philosophy (as we did earlier in BW)...but it won't actually do much because there are enough arbitrary variables for any semi intelligent person to take advantage of to "justify" a suspect.
So yea, make the individual topics already.
I support move testing but I would think we would have to be more conservative with them. SR clearly has a huge effect, shuts down types, distribution, etc but this same argument doesn't work for a move like Spore, where it's only abused by Breloom and for Pokemon like Amoonguss and Parasect is their only reason for use. It's really too late for any move test in BW but I could see moves like U-Turn becoming Suspect worthy in XY, especially since we're gaining even more of them.
Agreed, if we don't test it early enough we'll become too accustomed to it. I would want SR tested immediately.
spoken like a true XY tier leader TFC. #TimeForChange
You can say to make individual topics for discussing suspecting SR but it's never going to get suspected, because it just affects way too much and we don't have the time left. Not only would banning SR completely change OU, it would screw up NU/RU/UU/LC as well. It's a bit blunt but the reality is that making an individual topic for SR is just as big of a waste of time as arguing banning philosophy. What's the point in discussing SR for suspect if it will never be suspected this gen? (I mean c'mon really, we all know that it won't, it's too metagame defining). That being said, I completely agree with Aldaron's sentiments regarding subjectivity/vague definitions etc.
Ok I lied, the real reason I'm posting was for that TFC remark, the rest was just filler.
Anyway, the reason I'm posting is to say that I agree that it's too late to do any suspecting of moves in BW. Weather was taken off the table for suspecting because of this same reason right Aldaron? We didn't want to suspect 'metagame defining things' iirc? I'm interested to see how people managed to change your opinion on this, since SR is basically more metagame defining than anything else. (maybe I'm misremembering what you said but i don't think so...)
You can say to make individual topics for discussing suspecting SR but it's never going to get suspected, because it just affects way too much and we don't have the time left. Not only would banning SR completely change OU, it would screw up NU/RU/UU/LC as well. It's a bit blunt but the reality is that making an individual topic for SR is just as big of a waste of time as arguing banning philosophy. What's the point in discussing SR for suspect if it will never be suspected this gen? (I mean c'mon really, we all know that it won't, it's too metagame defining). That being said, I completely agree with Aldaron's sentiments regarding subjectivity/vague definitions etc.
Ok I lied, the real reason I'm posting was for that TFC remark, the rest was just filler.
This is off topic but...Nah, weather was taken off the table cause the pro-test people didn't do a good enough job convincing it was absolutely necessary.
I'll still support a Drizzle test if you guys convince the council to test it, time notwithstanding.
The tone in your post is a bit mocking and I don't really appreciate that but my bluntness actually serves a purpose...I said there is no point to doing a definition because people will find ways to manipulate that.
If we're being completely honest though, you should be aware that logically speaking, referencing the non OU tiers at the end of a gen from the "too little time" perspective is actually irrelevant; if anything, it is a far bigger deal doing a "metagame-wide" test early in a gen for non OU tiers than at the end of a gen. Why? Because there are no official tournaments that recognize past gen non OU tiers (and there won't be anytime soon). Any tests that will significantly shift our accepted paradigm in tier formation have to be strongly considered even early in a gen...time is very literally nearly irrelevant. There are cons to doing early, middle, late in a gen.
I don't understand how your "bluntness" for why individual topics are a waste of time accomplishes anything. You're assuming that they won't be tested. That is YOUR personal assumption, and nothing I have said contradicts the possibility that they might be tested.
Time is irrelevant to me; I am of the philosophy that we are creating a metagame for the future as well as the present, meaning it should be relevant for generations to come. Hence, time is utterly irrelevant to me. People shouldn't view OU tiering only in the BW generation time range...it will be relevant at least for 2 more gens in tour, and possibly forever once we implement the old gen ou tour.
Meaning, if you can convince us to test the moves, I'll do my best to convince the rest of the council that time is irrelevant.
Meaning the individual topics are not a waste of time.
Meaning you should make them.
I'll still support a Drizzle test if you guys convince the council to test it, time notwithstanding.
The tone in your post is a bit mocking and I don't really appreciate that but my bluntness actually serves a purpose...I said there is no point to doing a definition because people will find ways to manipulate that.
If we're being completely honest though, you should be aware that logically speaking, referencing the non OU tiers at the end of a gen from the "too little time" perspective is actually irrelevant; if anything, it is a far bigger deal doing a "metagame-wide" test early in a gen for non OU tiers than at the end of a gen. Why? Because there are no official tournaments that recognize past gen non OU tiers (and there won't be anytime soon). Any tests that will significantly shift our accepted paradigm in tier formation have to be strongly considered even early in a gen...time is very literally nearly irrelevant. There are cons to doing early, middle, late in a gen.
I don't understand how your "bluntness" for why individual topics are a waste of time accomplishes anything. You're assuming that they won't be tested. That is YOUR personal assumption, and nothing I have said contradicts the possibility that they might be tested.
Time is irrelevant to me; I am of the philosophy that we are creating a metagame for the future as well as the present, meaning it should be relevant for generations to come. Hence, time is utterly irrelevant to me. People shouldn't view OU tiering only in the BW generation time range...it will be relevant at least for 2 more gens in tour, and possibly forever once we implement the old gen ou tour.
Meaning, if you can convince us to test the moves, I'll do my best to convince the rest of the council that time is irrelevant.
Meaning the individual topics are not a waste of time.
Meaning you should make them.
Time is relevant because of X/Y? Do you really think we'll have the manpower to update near-every Gen V analysis/article while at the same time setting up X/Y? You know that between skeletons, testing, quality control, write up, grammar and html that a lot of time and energy goes into making an analysis/article. We may be making a metagame for the future, but will we have the resources in the future to properly represent and sustain it onsite?
Yes lol.
You're drastically overestimating how hard it would be to change the analyses. A large majority of the analyses would remain relatively the same and we could easily fast track "tweak" changes. Why do you think that we'll suddenly lose our workforce once XY comes? Some people will move to XY, others will notice a vaccuum in BW and stay there. If we wanted analyses up faster there is nothing stating the project to update the BW analyses would have to follow the same long process normal C&C goes through...fast tracking is an easy solution.
Also, you are making a HUGE error in thinking that the analyses would EVER trump our priorities in forming the metagame. This is ABSOLUTELY false and I'm laughing at work on how you even come close to implying that. Lol. Still laughing.
Still laughing.
Now I'm only smiling.
...
We have a ton of people who want badges. Even if the current contributors aren't up for it...someone will rise up to the task.
We have a: really damn big community.
Again, time is irrelevant tiering - generation wise because we are building a metagame for the future; it is irrelevant for everything else (C&C, RMT, Tutoring) because tiering is our #1 priority.
You're drastically overestimating how hard it would be to change the analyses. A large majority of the analyses would remain relatively the same and we could easily fast track "tweak" changes. Why do you think that we'll suddenly lose our workforce once XY comes? Some people will move to XY, others will notice a vaccuum in BW and stay there. If we wanted analyses up faster there is nothing stating the project to update the BW analyses would have to follow the same long process normal C&C goes through...fast tracking is an easy solution.
Also, you are making a HUGE error in thinking that the analyses would EVER trump our priorities in forming the metagame. This is ABSOLUTELY false and I'm laughing at work on how you even come close to implying that. Lol. Still laughing.
Still laughing.
Now I'm only smiling.
...
We have a ton of people who want badges. Even if the current contributors aren't up for it...someone will rise up to the task.
We have a: really damn big community.
Again, time is irrelevant tiering - generation wise because we are building a metagame for the future; it is irrelevant for everything else (C&C, RMT, Tutoring) because tiering is our #1 priority.
haunter
Banned deucer.
I love how this thread has been derailed from its original topic to how much time we have for Gen V suspect testing. Anyway, I just want to echo what Aldaron has said repeatedly about nothing being set in stone when it comes to bans. Weather (i.e. Drizzle\Drought) has not been tested again since we don't think it's broken nor unhealthy for the metagame. Needless to say, we might take a different approach to weather in Gen VI. Actually, one of my priorities when X\Y come out is to make a clear stance on weather and Stealth Rock, the two main factors that have shaped the Gen V metagame and that will likely be metagame-defining in Gen VI as well.
Let's try to stay on topic from now on.
Let's try to stay on topic from now on.
Just wanted to say kd24 practically rewrote a ton of gen 3 analyses recently, we're not exactly on any kind of C&C time limit for even gen 5. A stable game is much more important anyway.
It's hard to say that talking about time is ever really a derail from talking about Suspect Testing. Dissenters for this test or that test always point to the clock, more so the closer we get to a new generation. Because they think that arguments of time are valid, their concerns comprise a good percentage of any thread on whether we should test this or consider testing that.
What they don't realize has already been touched upon definitely by Aldaron—time doesn't mean a thing as far as testing is concerned. We're not rushing to get things done before October just because a new generation is nearing. The betterment of any given metagame shouldn't have a deadline—I've been asked repeatedly in the last couple of weeks whether retesting Latias in Gen IV can be done, we were supposed to have closed the book on Gen IV years ago, right? Not as easy as that, because it may be the best thing to revisit Latias, especially since it was never tested in a metagame without Salamence. My hesitations on retesting Gen IV Latias aside (it's off topic), Suspect Testing in general is not designed to be this quick and easy process with clear-cut timetables and solutions. The only reason we're not revisiting things in Gens I-III is because those metagames are actually stable (and we don't have a sim for all of them I guess), but once you start having hundreds upon hundreds of competitive variables instead of Starmie Tauros Alakazam Exeggutor Chansey Snorlax Zapdos Rhydon Golem Jynx Slowbro as an entire metagame of pokemon (this is hardly an exaggeration on Gen I, lol), you realize that carefully shaping your metagame is an important endeavor that shouldn't be constrained by time.
Or resources, which is the bigger point. The onus, as always, falls largely upon the community to make changes to the metagame. If there are evidently individual threads that are supposed to be made (as Aldaron has stated/suggested), make them. Make them now, and not later, especially if "you" are going to be the same people who point to the clock when things somehow don't happen. Policy Makers can make any sweeping policy changes they want at the snap of a finger if you all are worried about time, but we have sought however to democratically involve the community in Policy affairs, and we'd like to keep it that way.
What they don't realize has already been touched upon definitely by Aldaron—time doesn't mean a thing as far as testing is concerned. We're not rushing to get things done before October just because a new generation is nearing. The betterment of any given metagame shouldn't have a deadline—I've been asked repeatedly in the last couple of weeks whether retesting Latias in Gen IV can be done, we were supposed to have closed the book on Gen IV years ago, right? Not as easy as that, because it may be the best thing to revisit Latias, especially since it was never tested in a metagame without Salamence. My hesitations on retesting Gen IV Latias aside (it's off topic), Suspect Testing in general is not designed to be this quick and easy process with clear-cut timetables and solutions. The only reason we're not revisiting things in Gens I-III is because those metagames are actually stable (and we don't have a sim for all of them I guess), but once you start having hundreds upon hundreds of competitive variables instead of Starmie Tauros Alakazam Exeggutor Chansey Snorlax Zapdos Rhydon Golem Jynx Slowbro as an entire metagame of pokemon (this is hardly an exaggeration on Gen I, lol), you realize that carefully shaping your metagame is an important endeavor that shouldn't be constrained by time.
Or resources, which is the bigger point. The onus, as always, falls largely upon the community to make changes to the metagame. If there are evidently individual threads that are supposed to be made (as Aldaron has stated/suggested), make them. Make them now, and not later, especially if "you" are going to be the same people who point to the clock when things somehow don't happen. Policy Makers can make any sweeping policy changes they want at the snap of a finger if you all are worried about time, but we have sought however to democratically involve the community in Policy affairs, and we'd like to keep it that way.
I guess I should make clear that I am and never was against testing Stealth Rock because of, well, what it is and how it basically defines a good part of the game. If writers, contributors, whatever you want to call them, are ready for what MAY come, then I have no problem with testing it or not testing it. I'll still be playing Pokemon whether its here or its not lol. My only concern was we would be dumping a huge pile of work alongside what X/Y is guaranteed to dump, resulting in one or the other not getting the quality write-ups they deserve. Now I'm done with the issue.
Now SwagPlay, on the other hand, is a total bitch and definitely needs to be brought up because it basically has made Liepard the most hated mon across all the tiers (except little cup, which has murkrow). I would not be opposed to quickbanning that shit ;X
Now SwagPlay, on the other hand, is a total bitch and definitely needs to be brought up because it basically has made Liepard the most hated mon across all the tiers (except little cup, which has murkrow). I would not be opposed to quickbanning that shit ;X
I am really hesitant to agree to the idea of testing a move on the grounds of it being broken. I think it's important that we try and include as many key elements of the cartridge games into our tiers as possible-- as I believe it's important that we stay relevant to a broader group of players. Even if VGC is doubles, The Pokemon Company is pushing competitive Pokemon now, and wifi also means that Pokemon battles online can develop communities much more organically and far-reaching beyond our circle.
While I have never agree with the "we're not playing Pokemon" cries of purists, I do see value in trying to keep as much of the creators' visions as possible. While there are many players that don't like BW (and it's obvious DPP is the most favorably viewed OU), I really appreciate the design aspects and often ingenious balancing done by the game designers-- especially with all the intricacies and complexities of BW.
That said, I'm all for suspecting moves (and abilities) under the guise that they are "uncompetitive"-- along the lines of OHKO moves, Accuracy, and restricting Sleep Clause.
I actually think Scald is a move that we could consider banning for being uncompetitive, never mind whether it is broken. The fact that encountering significant Hax through Scald is just about Guaranteed (the only type immune to burn is weak to Water!), is a big cue that this may be a movie that's not good from a competitive standpoint; nvm its power.
While I have never agree with the "we're not playing Pokemon" cries of purists, I do see value in trying to keep as much of the creators' visions as possible. While there are many players that don't like BW (and it's obvious DPP is the most favorably viewed OU), I really appreciate the design aspects and often ingenious balancing done by the game designers-- especially with all the intricacies and complexities of BW.
That said, I'm all for suspecting moves (and abilities) under the guise that they are "uncompetitive"-- along the lines of OHKO moves, Accuracy, and restricting Sleep Clause.
I actually think Scald is a move that we could consider banning for being uncompetitive, never mind whether it is broken. The fact that encountering significant Hax through Scald is just about Guaranteed (the only type immune to burn is weak to Water!), is a big cue that this may be a movie that's not good from a competitive standpoint; nvm its power.