Implemented Rethinking the foundations of BW

[LuckOverSkill]

BW OU is a metagame that has lived through rough times, more so than any other generation's main tier. As a testament to its instability, we're still arguing about bans 10+ years later.

The reasons for this instability are many. Here are the main ones:

• It was the first generation that Smogon fully tiered in an official manner.
• BW brought a lot of changes that altered how the game worked. Team preview, 2 new weather setters (Ninetales and Politoed), and more weather-based mechanics (Sand Rush and Rain Dish mostly). Plus extra mechanics that were dropped or nerfed in the following gens (Sleep counter reset and Burn damage being the biggest examples).
• The tiering philosophy wasn't as developed as it is now. You'd find plenty more resistance to bans back then. Couple the sentiment with new toy syndrome, and then the inevitable normalization that follows tiering inaction, and you get people who are anti-ban out of principle.
• The council was incompetent and complacent. Incompetence was expected; after all, tiering as we know it now was a completely novel concept. Complacency was the bigger issue. You had people on the council who refused to play the metagame because they hated it. Having people with decisional power refuse to interact with the thing they hold power over was, to put it mildly, horrid.

The last one was the main factor in shaping up BW OU's history. It was hard to get things done when the council refused to do anything. The result was a broken metagame.

It's no surprise that a lot of things still get discussed often in BW circles. Should we have unbanned Kyurem-Black? Isn't Reuniclus a little too good? It doens't really feel like Latios belongs to a balanced tier. Neither do Keldeo or Thundurus-T. And it's also why you see BW OU discussion overrepresented in this very forum. How many things have been banned from BW post-XY release, compared to ORAS bans post-SM release or SM bans post-SS?

Discussion about the tier seems to have died down since dice's thread. Nobody has bothered to push for big changes since then. Gems got banned, yet 2 of their 3 strongest abusers are getting attention now.

The goal of this thread is to gauge the actual interest in tiering BW in a different way. To do so, I see two main paths forward:

1. The aggressive bans option, which resurfaced in the Cloyster & Volcarona thread in posts from Rewer (link) and BKC (link). Basically, it's a "ban things we should have banned 10 years ago", where we try to right the wrongs that have happened for the reasons I outlined above.
2. The reset option, which means unbanning everything and re-tiering from scratch. This is most definitely a fringe idea, but I'm putting it out there.

Now, you may be wondering "ok, but so what? the tier is in a pretty good state right now". Yes and no. It's in a pretty good state all things considered. It's a metagame built on shaky foundations and held together by duct tape.

The case for banning Latios, Keldeo, Reuniclus, Thundurus-T, Drizzle, Scald, and whatever else on the list, is simple: these things are, objectively, deranged. They are so far above everything else in power level and warp the metagame to a point that trying to deal with them makes for a miserable experience. Banning Volcarona and Cloyster is fine, but it does feel ridiculous to focus on these mons when demons like Latios exist. It's like trying to fix a leaky boat by patching up small holes in the hull when there's a massive breach elsewhere.

The case for a reset is much weaker and I doubt I can make a convincing one for it beyond "it's so twisted we should burn it down and rebuild from scratch". Plus, since BW is not the main gen anymore, it's mostly played by enthusiasts, who might not be enough to make things work out without hitches.

Every serious rejection of strong tiering action boils down to keeping the tier's identity. If you think identity is more important than competitiveness, then by all means post in support of keeping the status quo with the occasional adjustment. If you think competitiveness is more important and would like to see bigger changes in BW, then say so.

Since every tiering thread (including the recent one about Cloyster & Volcarona) has people talking about all sorts of grievances with BW. It's clear that we need some serious discussion in its own thread, rather than pollute other threads with unrelated posts.

 

[Finchinator]

BW has been broken since the current generation; decisions ranging from Aldaron's proposal earlier on to the laissez-faire approach later in the generation had the metagame grow very unevenly with a "broken checks broken" dynamic permiating throghout for a long time.

We have done our best since OGC was created to rid the metagame of things like Dugtrio/Arena Trap, Gothitelle/Shadow Tag, sleep, Baton Pass, King's Rock, Assist, Sand Rush, and more things that were pretty clearly unbalanced in the metagame. This has created a BW that is at very least playable and enjoyable for some people -- we have had a ton of good games and strategies throughout the last 5 years of SPL/Classic/etc., but it has danced around some core, identity-based matters that the OP, BKC, and others stated throughout their posts, which prevent others from enjoying the tier to the fullest extent.

I do not really know what is best as an overhaul with things like Latios will take a very long time to "settle" from as BW sees much less play than a CG metagame and this will inevitably cause other issues like Keldeo (already arguably broken), Thundurus-T, etc. and then there are the unanticipated ripple effects as well. Personally, I am a bit scared of this reality and what it will do to BW after so much time and with so much uncertainty, but if it is what the most people who play the tier want, then I am not going to stand in the way of it; it's important the playerbase gets what it wants out of our metagmes after all.

 

[Amaranth]

Amaranth, you don't play this tier, why are you posting here?

Yes I do. I played it when it was CG, I play it sparingly in occasions such as Classic, had voting rights in the Gems vote, have watched and studied it plenty as a teammate and as a manager in SPL and in all the RoA teamtours that I religiously partake in.
I'm not going to pretend I'm a BW main, but I know what I'm talking about.

I do not really know what is best as an overhaul with things like Latios will take a very long time to "settle" from as BW sees much less play than a CG metagame and this will inevitably cause other issues like Keldeo (already arguably broken), Thundurus-T, etc. and then there are the unanticipated ripple effects as well. Personally, I am a bit scared of this reality and what it will do to BW after so much time and with so much uncertainty, but if it is what the most people who play the tier want, then I am not going to stand in the way of it; it's important the playerbase gets what it wants out of our metagmes after all.

If it takes a long time: so be it!
BW has existed for 13 years and has been an oldgen for 10. If this started 5 years ago, almost certainly today BW would be "settled", or at least better. If this starts today, maybe this mess will be fixed in due time.
And it's not like we'd be sacrificing something that people really like. People are already vastly unhappy with the state of the metagame. From my conversations with people, it seems discontent with the tier amongst BW mains is higher than in any other oldgen; and clearly the gen is struggling to attract new players as well - last month, BW was the smallest ladder of any OU post-GSC.
I've heard the sentiment that current BW is at least partially solved, if not worse, in one form or another from several top players of the tier; that building is down to a general rock/paper/scissors triangle of playstyles, and anything else is good for one-time cheesy wins at best. Is it really that big of a sacrifice if we blow it all up, ban Latios and/or Reuniclus and see where it goes? I don't think the 'unstable' BW will be particularly worse than the status quo; if anything, a less 'figured out' metagame is what the playerbase of this tier has been craving. Current BW is stagnant and only going downwards.

edit: not worth its own post but re: the replies to this, if survey proves my feelings here are not in touch with the overall playerbase, then of course my whole post is wrong. i think it's clear that this post has no hard logic, it's not trying to have hard logic lol. it's just a statement of my perception of how the tier feels. if my perception is wrong, then by all means, continue on

 

[peng]

And it's not like we'd be sacrificing something that people really like. People are already vastly unhappy with the state of the metagame. From my conversations with people, it seems discontent with the tier amongst BW mains is higher than in any other oldgen; and clearly the gen is struggling to attract new players as well - last month, BW was the smallest ladder of any OU post-GSC.

i’ll give a proper post later but this is cherry picking at best

firstly can we wait for an actual survey before throwing out “no one likes this” comments - its unsubstantiated and several top players have said they would quit if the tier was overhauled, much of this discussion is being led by other tier mains or retired players. General player discontent is very different to being supportive of a tier rehaul - i’m a bit discontent but the only tiering action i would personally vote ban on is volc or cloy

secondly, ladder games are as follows:

RBY - 22726
GSC - 9402
ADV - 233796
DPP - 67865
BW - 55024
ORAS - 57489
SM - 143778
SS - 60579

BW is the 6th out of 8 for old gen ladder games but the difference between 4th and 6th is a handful of % (why are we acting like post-GSC is a fair cutoff, we could easily use these stats to push a GSC overhaul thread). it is incredibly tight between BW/ORAS/SS, they basically see the same number of ladder games between 55k and 60k

the reality is that ADV and SM saw a ton of ladder usage and gens 4/5/6/8 are within a similar range, this is not even close to evidence that BW doesn’t get new players.

there are good pro-ban arguments, we don’t need this flimsy stuff

 

[Finchinator]

I've heard the sentiment that current BW is at least partially solved, if not worse, in one form or another from several top players of the tier; that building is down to a general rock/paper/scissors triangle of playstyles, and anything else is good for one-time cheesy wins at best.

The fact that this is surfacing in a PR thread of this variety is silly.

There is no archetype triangle. There has never been a full archetype triangle. There was one brewing years ago, but all of Sand, Rain, and HO archetypes have evolved a great deal to interact with each other in totally novel ways -- they are still shifting, too.

Yes, it is easy to take outdated, known teams and try to break through modern PsySpam Sand with older Rain or withstand the assault of modern HO with crusty Sand and come up way short. But recent builds from our many informed and active players have continued finding ways to circumvent this and keep the tier moving forward, keeping each archetype capable of beating others, and so on. If anything, I find the continued evolution of trends and archetypes a healthy thing. I do think specific Pokemon within this dynamic are unhealthy and addressing them can be find, but the whole triangle point is overblown and not fully representative of the format.

If I had replays fully up right now, I would go to exhaustive detail to explain how lazy and overstated the "match-up triangle" take on BW is and has been for a few years -- that's not just a shot at your post as it is so much as the general logic that has been recycled poorly many times over. And once replays are back up, I will happily do this as well.

And it's not like we'd be sacrificing something that people really like. People are already vastly unhappy with the state of the metagame.

Speaking as someone who both plays the tier and interacts with many others who do across BW circles, BW discord, etc.: I beg to differ. I think survey results will speak on this more later this week though; hoping to get that up later today or tomorrow as I alluded in the Volc/Cloy thread.

last month, BW was the smallest ladder of any OU post-GSC.

Peng's post hit on this, but I find it unfortunate that, with the data available, you drew this conclusion and thought it was worthy of being used as a major point in your post.

 

[M Dragon]

Some people are acting like BW is the worst old gen and that nobody likes it and thats completely false. I personally think that BW is a fun tier to play in general, although I do understand that some "auto win MU based" mons like Volca or Cloyster can make things feel like a gamble sometimes.
This movement of "lets ban all the broken mons in the tier" doesn't make sense to me, especially knowing what is happening with SV OU atm. SV OU has banned a huge amount of mons and the meta is actually even worse, we have already seen the chain effect banning certain things can cause.
SV OU has a huge playerbase and its still not even close to having a stable meta yet, and SV OU can afford a process like this because of that reason. BW? It would take YEARS to have a stable metagame again, and there is no gurantee that it would be a better one.

Another thing is that banning something because it is broken is not always the best thing for the metagame. The most obvious example is GSC Snorlax, which is probably the most broken thing in any OU metagame and we know that GSC OU without Snorlax is much worse. We know that and we can predict that because it is a simple change and has been tried multiple times in the past.
You cannot do that in BW. You ban Latios? Then the chain reaction starts: Keldeo, Thundurus, Magic Guard, Drizzle, Land-T, Terrakion... it is impossible to predict.

BW OU has the following traits:
* It is the last generation with neverending weather setters and the first generation with non Ubers Drizzle and Drought users (the weather issue).
* It is the last generation without Defog and has a ghost type that can spin block common spinners, and has very good Spikers, which makes Spikes very strong, which also makes Magic Guard very powerful in a metagame where Spikes are very good.
* Sleep mechanics make sleeptalk strategies unviable.
* It is the last generation without Fairy types, making Dragon mons much more powerful than in later gens.
* Scald was introduced, a water attack that can burn.
* There is a huge number of very powerful threats.

There are so many different directions that could have been taken: we could have banned permweather abilities and kept weather boosting abilities, we could have banned weather completely... it is impossible to know if the metagame would have been better or not.

The main problem here is that there are so many things and changing any "core" element of BW can cause a huge chain reaction that would take a big amount of time to stabilize again, and even then, the new metagame might be worse.

Scald is broken! lets ban it! Ok rain teams can't really beat Ferrothorn anymore, which would probably make them nearly unviable, making sand teams even more dominant.
Magic Guard is broken! lets ban it! Ok, you made Spikes even more broken. Do we ban Spikes then?
Latios is broken! lets ban it! Latios is probably what is keeping the frail balance BW OU is in atm. You ban Latios and in the next 5 years you have to ban a lot more mons, and after all those bans maybe BW OU is even worse than what it is atm.

And you could say, who cares! lets do it, it doesn't matter how long it takes! SV OU can do it because it has a huge playerbase, BW OU doesn't. Also, a process like this could possibly even kill any interest on the tier, because we would be changing an old metagame completely, and a lot of the people that are playing it do that because they enjoy it. So in my experience, unless the metagame is really bad (spoiler: its not), any big change is just not worth it.

I personally enjoy playing this "broken checks broken" style of BW and I wouldn't want any big change that could potentially ruin it. I dont think the tier is bad enough for any drastic change, and I don't think the risk and the time needed to have a stable metagame again is just not worth it.

 

[dice]

my opinion is: banning volcarona or cloyster are really misguided actions that do not address the core issues which concern the tier.

while the former can and often does punish certain builds, i have never found it too oppressive at equilibrium where i think it merits a ban. cloyster has only recently seen more modern adaptations and the push for an axe feels, to me, lazy. there are a plethora of common checks that are robust, splashable, and good.

i concede that volcarona is arguably ban worthy and am open to that; however, if any measure is to be taken in the tier, i think we should take a balls to the walls approach or nothing. nitpicking offensive elements that counteract normative balances doesn’t strike me as tactful; it only seeks to linearize teambuilding and resources, and make safer the standards that we have come to accept as “fair”.

(we seriously operate in a tier where do nothing max spdef tyranitar is standard—think about how terrible that is in theory)

these are just my two cents as a player, builder, and fan of this tier for many, many years. i have always sought to push its boundaries, and i will always do so. i would find it shameful to stunt offensive strategies, none of which i have felt personally overwhelming, for the sake of a simpler, manageable, balance on balance brawl. how boring.

 

[Tbolt]

I'm interested in seeing how only a Latios ban would affect the tier. It's fairly evident that Latios is among the most centralizing forces in BW OU, with it not really having much of the way of actual switch-ins (even Tyranitar, the Pokemon that's supposed to remove Latios, doesn't want to switch into Latios). The Steel-types that resist Draco Meteor don't really pressure Latios or its team, so it can just switch out and come back in later.

The main argument with banning Latios is that it also has important defensive utility in its ability to hold back numerous rain attackers. Removing Latios would remove an element of counterplay that holds these rain threats in check. However, I would argue a couple of points:

Latios is itself a massive threat for these rain teams, so removing Latios on these rain teams limits the dimensionality of the threat that they pose (they're now more reliant on Water- and Electric-types to make progress)

Latias has similar defensive utility to Latios, while also being less demanding in-battle. Currently, Latias is largely overshadowed by Latios because Latios's sheer power (or brokenness if you choose to see it that way) makes it just the superior choice. Pulling from usage statistics from this year:

BW PL III

| 2    | Latios             |   38 |  38.00% |  44.74% |
| 42   | Latias             |    2 |   2.00% |  50.00% |

SPL XIV

| 1    | Latios             |   41 |  42.71% |  46.34% |
| 27   | Latias             |    7 |   7.29% |  28.57% |

Monai Invitational

| 2    | Latios             |  128 |  40.76% |  54.69% |
| 32   | Latias             |   18 |   5.73% |  33.33% |

I was about to compute usage statistics for the top 8 of the large BW individual tours this year, but until the replays come back online, that isn't going to happen.

Latias is far inferior when wielding a Choice Specs or Choice Scarf set in comparison to Latios, so it usually doesn't pose as much immediate pressure as Latios does. I think that its lack of power may hold it back in being able to weaken the Pokemon it's supposed to be checking like Keldeo and Thundy, but I'm interested in a metagame just without Latios and seeing if Keldeo and Thundurus-T actually become too overwhelming for the tier when the near-perfect offensive Pokemon (I do believe that most teams, if they added a Latios, become better) is removed from nearly every team archetype. If the tier does indeed become worse without Latios in it, then we can make a decision from there, same as any suspect test.

 

[Finchinator]

Hello, we have a new tiering survey focusing on Volcarona and Cloyster from the other thread. I included a question on some larger players in the metagame from this thread that gives people a chance to elaborate on how they feel, too.

I will personally read through every response I can, including those on the open-ended question. Please take a moment to fill it out. Thank you.