Shouldn't it be clearer that our tests aren't just for extra credit?

[Jumpman16]

We in the Policy Review, supposed to have a responsibility to implement/oversee key rules and regulations for the competitive metagame, are the same people who have the authority to make something really happen when the competitive battle scene hits a bump in the road. One of the first such bumps was whether or not Deoxys-S should be allowed in the standard metagame, and that seems to have worked itself out nicely enough, though people like ipl are still certain that DX-S is still actually uber.

A similar but much less obvious example is what we do with—you guessed it—Wobbuffet. I've posted to this effect in this thread, and I will repaste my latest plea below:

I'm bumping this to urge those of you who have used Wobbuffet in the almost two months since I posted this thread to weigh in with your findings.

And less obviously—unless you've read and comprehended one or more of my Walls of Words in this thread—I'm bumping this thread to remind everyone that we're not going to be able to test a damn thing until and unless those of you who have used Wobbuffet and faced it in high-level competitive play can tell the community what you've experienced. Unless you've been under a rock the last week, you've noticed the myriad threads about Mew, Darkrai, Manaphy, evasion, and even Wobbuffet in Stark Mountain. These are all well and good, but you all must realize that you can't expect anything actually to, you know, *happen* if you don't actually use the suspects in question. You can't expect Policy Reviewers like Obi, Colin, Mekkah and myself to have anything to go on when nothing is really being reported back on the forums as to how Wobbuffet usage is actually affecting the metagame from a strategic standpoint.

So please, for the sake of the metagame, let's get over this first hump and let the community know, from battle experience, what Wobbuffet has done over the last two months. As previous stated, battle logs are fine, as are well-constructed "warstories" featuring Wobbuffet and how it did or did not set up a sweep. I have no problem reading long, raw battle logs if that is what it takes to determine how Wobbuffet's affected the metagame, and in that regard I can speak for my fellow Policy Reviewers (and thus relax the "no battle logs" rule somewhat). But again, realize that there's seriously no other way for the metagame to embrace changes Mew or evasion if we don't know how they actually impact it.

This hasn't really worked in Stark Mountain. The thread didn't have the desired result when I posted it in the beginning of April, and it hasn't had the desired result since my bump. I have had the urge for some two weeks to actually make this some kind of announcement, but I then realized that issues like this are pretty much the entire reason we created this forum.

So, first of all, I would ask all of you to what extent you agree with me on what I've just underlined: we can't get over a second speed bump until we get over the first. I believe that nothing is going to happen until we make it painfully clear that the community needs objective, quality experience with Wobbuffet and any "suspect" (pokemon whose tiering between OU and uber is legitimately in question) in the standard metagame and that this experience to be reported back in some intelligible way. ipl has done his best to convince the masses on the forums that his reign in the top three spots of the Shoddy ladder was due in very large part not only to Wobbuffet but to DX-S, and for that effort I am very thankful. Unfortunately, one battler can't spark this change, as much as the pleas of one Policy Reviewer can't. So I'm officially opening this discussion with you all. I'd love to know if you agree that findings need to be reported back to the community in order for real change to happen.

Second, would you see the value of raw battle logs? I personally actually like reading raw battle logs, and I'd be actually more inclined to do so for Wobbuffet's suspect status whether or not the battle itself is actually horrible and proves one or both battlers did not use/respond to Wobbuffet the way a skilled battler did or prove otherwise inexperienced.

Third, if you don't think battle logs are an objective way to get to the bottom of how Wobbuffet is affecting the standard metagame, what would you propose? How else would you determine to what extent it has "overcentralized" the metagame and may or may not be "uber"? I realize I'm using terms we have had trouble defining, but thinking about it in terms of the objectivity of battle logs may bring some different perspective to it.

Please post here if you have any ideas at all. We need to get something done here. Maniaclyrasist's Lati@s efforts have stalled (as has the thread here in this forum). Mew may or may not actually be uber. Same with Darkrai. Same with Species Clause and anything else we'd love to test, but...perhaps aren't making evident enough how important the actual results are.

 

[Cathy]

Third, if you don't think battle logs are an objective way to get to the bottom of how Wobbuffet is affecting the standard metagame, what would you propose? How else would you determine to what extent it has "overcentralized" the metagame and may or may not be "uber"? I realize I'm using terms we have had trouble defining, but thinking about it in terms of the objectivity of battle logs may bring some different perspective to it.

I've already answered these questions, in multiple places. (So has Obi.) See, for example, this post. I don't want to repeat myself here, so to be brief, the evidence shows that the game has not become more centralised, and the arguments usually presented in response to this are poor and easily refuted (I've refuted them all in many places).

One good point is that if the game had become more centralised (it didn't) then it would be difficult to say why it did. That is to say we can not easily identify the pokemon causing the centralisation. Since the game did not become more centralised, we do not have to address this right now.

As far as I am concerned the test produced useful results that we acted on (by not banning Wobbuffet again -- we consider it standard, not in testing).

However, there's certainly no harm in analysing battle logs or what-have-you, but I'm not sure what they would really prove.

In order to ignore the existing evidence with regard to Wobbuffet, you have to develop a different theoretical basis for the ban list than preventing overcentralisation. Even if Smogon wants to do this, for the purposes of the Shoddy Battle ladder, this is the only criterion and Wobbuffet does not fulfill it at this time. I don't consider this an open issue.

Same with Species Clause and anything else we'd love to test

As I posted in the species clause topic itself, testing it is more complex than testing a pokemon because you can't really test it. If you take away species clause and pokemon X becomes ridiculously broken and the game is centralised around it, then you have two choices: reinstate species clause or ban pokemon X. It is not as simple as just testing a pokemon.

 

[imperfectluck]

It has been argued at various places on this website that the metagame has shifted to a bulky sweeper oriented metagame, with the most popular Pokemon being Tyranitar, Heatran, Celebi, Bronzong, and whatnot, for instance see the May predictions topic. I believe this is heavily influenced by Deoxys-E, which has the effect of reducing the effectiveness of fast offensive teams that are frail and rely on a variety of resistances in order to win. It has also had a significant influence on the choice of items in the metagame, namely, choice scarf is seen much rarely than several months ago, and what once was a metagame filled with Specs Gengars and Modest ScarfGars has now exclusively become Timid Scarfgars, in an effort to combat the influence of Deoxys-E. I see Pokemon that are lower on the speed spectrum than Garchomp that utilize Choice Scarf as waning in usage, due to slower Pokemon like Heracross and Heatran standing no chance whatsoever of being able to outspeed Deoxys-E. Another reason for the decline of Choice Scarf is the newly added presence of Wobbuffet, with the ability to easily revenge any Choice item'd Pokemon, but coming in after that Scarf Pokemon ko's something lets it take a softer hit than it would from a Specs or Band Pokemon.

I've also mentioned this before in chats, but I'll post this here: it is my opinion that it is impossible to prove Wobbuffet is "overcentralizing" because simply put, it is impossible to Wobbuffet-proof a team, unless you are willing to use all physical ghosts/special darks/5 U-Turners + Ghost/6 Shed Shells or what have you. There is something on every team that Wobbuffet can trap and do something to, and you're stuck with a double-edged sword: if you attack, you may lose that important counter to his one Pokemon, if you don't attack, you get Encored, and maybe he's got Dugtrio waiting in the wings, or he Tickles you in tandem with Tyranitar, or switches to a myriad of dangerous Pokemon with setup moves that are nearly "uncounterable." It's a very simple strategy that nearly anyone can pull off properly, and most regular teams are unequipped to stop it. Wobbuffet, simply put, is a ridiculous Pokemon that lets its user pick and choose one Pokemon that they want gone on their opponent's team, and poof, maybe your opponent's best counter to your crucial sweeper just disappeared, or Garchomp gets a Swords Dance in, etc. etc., I don't believe this promotes metagame health, nor does Deoxys-E by making teams such as LO Gengar, Heracross, Salamence, Gyarados, Magnezone, and Snorlax nearly unfeasible to ladder with (that being one of my old ladder teams prior to the advent of Deoxys-E and Wobbuffet.) Rather than lowering usage of those such Pokemon, Deoxys-E simply makes certain team combinations undesirable, as well as making the item Choice Scarf into a joke.

 

[Cathy]

The game hasn't become more centralised. This is a very simple and true claim. I've already addressed this so many times I don't feel like writing a lengthy response here. This has nothing to do with "lowering usage" of individual pokemon. It has to do with the number of viable pokemon. It seems that you argue that Wobbuffet and Deoxys-S dramatically change the metagame. This may be true, but it's not a reason to ban them.

Also, the hypothetical concern that no metagame would ever appear to be overcentralised by the method I have advocated has already been shown to be wrong, because the "OU tier" of the ubers ladder contains just 15 pokemon, making it far more centralised than the ~50 OU tier of the standard ladder. The method definitely works to detect centralisation.

or he Tickles you

Even though it doesn't affect whether he will banned (he won't be), Tickle will be removed soon, along with all the rest of event moves.


The only thing that can happen to make Wobbuffet bannable is for the metagame to actually become more centralised, unless you are developing a new theoretical approach to developing the ban list, and we won't be using your new approach for the Shoddy Battle ladder anyway, unless it can be shown to have actual advantages.

I'm probably coming off a bit hasty in this topic, but I've been saying these things for months, and no one has any new arguments. I don't see why this is even considered an open question.

 

[imperfectluck]

Perhaps what Smogon should base "bans" off of isn't purely centralization, but rather for the purposes of "metagame health," of course, this is all purely subjective...

 

[jrrrrrrr]

I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment behind the original post. To answer some of the questions you posed, I would personally value some "raw battle logs" to see what impact these unbanned pokemon actually have on the game. My own personal observations are one thing, but seeing a much broader range of battles in which these pokemon are used could be eye-opening.

The game hasn't become more centralised. This is a very simple and true claim. I've already addressed this so many times I don't feel like writing a lengthy response here. This has nothing to do with "lowering usage" of individual pokemon. It has to do with the number of viable pokemon. It seems that you argue that Wobbuffet and Deoxys-S dramatically change the metagame. This may be true, but it's not a reason to ban them.

Also, the hypothetical concern that no metagame would ever appear to be overcentralised by the method I have advocated has already been shown to be wrong, because the "OU tier" of the ubers ladder contains just 15 pokemon, making it far more centralised than the ~50 OU tier of the standard ladder. The method definitely works to detect centralisation.

I don't see why this is even considered an open question.

The Deoxys-Speed being uber argument isn't about individual pokemon becoming less viable, its about team combinations becoming essentially unusable. The statistics only show how much an individual pokemon is used, not how it is actually used in the context of the team. Pokemon is a team game, so individual stats just aren't as significant in every situation. The method that "definitely works to detect centralization" ignores this. Sure, the usages of most OU pokemon have been steady, but this is a sign of the individual pokemon being good enough to use on its own. As ipl has described, and I have experienced as well, Deoxys-Speed is killer to offensive teams. Deoxys-Speed doesn't hurt the usage of individual pokemon, it hurts certain combinations of those pokemon by preventing them from being effective together and that in turn centralizes the game by removing potential usable strategies.

Sweeper teams, which were immensely popular and effective at the start of D/P, are basically unusable now with the advent of Deoxys-Speed and Wobbuffet. Also, D-S and Wobbuffet have essentially eliminated the Choice Scarf from having an impact, as ipl said. The game has turned into "bulky offense", as people like myself and (especially) ipl predicted, because any other kind of strategy is rendered unusable by Deoxys-Speed and Wobbuffet.

That is the argument that still exists.

 

[Hipmonlee]

I cant be bothered searching through every argument I have ever made, but I am pretty sure the majority of mine were countered with "you should discuss something else". Honestly I dont really have the energy for this forum, but I am going to post a quick summary of my problems with your stats.

They are based only on the ladder. Ladder battling and tournament battling or non-tournament/ladder competitive battling are actually quite different. In ladder, you most of your battles will be against poor quality opposition, so you need to build teams designed to battle poor quality oposition. For example, a move like hypnosis is a high risk high reward move that would be a smart thing to employ when you know you have a high quality opponent, but it is significantly less useful on Ladderbot.

Your definition of overcentralisation is over-simplistic. Your definition of OU is arbitrary, and it doesnt consider things like variety of movesets or items just numbers of pokemon. Scarf Garchomp and SD Garchomp are basically two different pokemon. I would suggest that there is greater difference between them than between DD Salamence and DD Dragonite.

We use weighted stats but the weighted stats are weighted arbitrarily.

I am not sure about the value of considering pokemon used by people who suck at pokemon.. I know as a highly able battler I am biased here, but I think that the whole point of the overcentralisation argument is based on increasing the number of legitimate strategies available to a player. The fact that a lot of people are using illegitimate strategies (whether knowingly or not) shouldnt really influence our ruleset.

Have a nice day.

 

[Cathy]

Honestly I dont really have the energy for this forum

I can definitely sympathise with this. My goal has always been simply to avoid being perpetually indecisive, and allow us to reach conclusions. Given that we (Shoddy Battle) unbanned two pokemon, a decision had to be reached on them. We were not simply going to allow them to be in "testing" forever, and I believe that the method I applied was the best that could be done with what was available.

They are based only on the ladder. Ladder battling and tournament battling or non-tournament/ladder competitive battling are actually quite different. In ladder, you most of your battles will be against poor quality opposition, so you need to build teams designed to battle poor quality oposition. For example, a move like hypnosis is a high risk high reward move that would be a smart thing to employ when you know you have a high quality opponent, but it is significantly less useful on Ladderbot.

This may be, but as far as I am aware there has never been an effort to aggregate statistics from "tournament matches", and the purpose of our tests was to test for the ladder environment anyway. If statistics from "tournament matches" are produced I will happy to analyse them.

Your definition of OU is arbitrary

Any definition of OU is going to be "arbitrary" in that there is no place where the numbers drop off, but it doesn't really matter since the size of OU is merely being used for comparative purposes.

In any case, I assumed there was a broad consensus in favour of the "top 75% of cumulative usage frequency" definition. It wasn't even conceived by me, so it's not really "my definition". It was originated by dragontamer (with 95% instead) and then X-act later suggested 75%.

and it doesnt consider things like variety of movesets or items just numbers of pokemon. Scarf Garchomp and SD Garchomp are basically two different pokemon. I would suggest that there is greater difference between them than between DD Salamence and DD Dragonite.

Fair enough but really there are technical issues in play here. The more sophisticated the analysis, the more scripts that need to be written, and no one is volunteering to write them. At some time in the future I would really like to do a more sophisticated analysis, but right now my rudimentary approach is better than simply being indecisive.

We use weighted stats but the weighted stats are weighted arbitrarily.

As with the definition of OU, I cannot imagine how they could not be weighted "arbitrarily". Every conceivable weighting would be "arbitrary". In any case, what I said about things not having become more centralised applies to the unweighted list as well.

I am not sure about the value of considering pokemon used by people who suck at pokemon.. I know as a highly able battler I am biased here, but I think that the whole point of the overcentralisation argument is based on increasing the number of legitimate strategies available to a player. The fact that a lot of people are using illegitimate strategies (whether knowingly or not) shouldnt really influence our ruleset.

Perhaps we could somehow include a factor based on whether the team is winning battles. These are the sort of things I would really like to experiment with, and really are good ideas. But as I said I don't see anybody volunteering to write these scripts. Most of my efforts are met by people saying they won't accept anything "statistically based", rather than actual volunteering to help.


I concede that there is room for improvement, but I am doing the best we can do with what is available. I would like to experiment with other definitions of these terms and whatnot. I really would. Most of the time people seem to want to work outside of the entire empirical framework, but I am open to improving the empirical framework. The only limitation is really the effort involved to write the scripts (and the fact that not all of the information is available, but most of it is).

 

[X-Act]

Unbanning things has the following two responses:

1. "This would change the metagame. I love how the new metagame would turn out!"
2. "This would change the metagame. I hate how the new metagame would turn out!"

People who actually play on the ladder have vouched to the change of the metagame. It may not be overcentralised, but the metagame has changed. It now depends on whether we like the changes or not.

Any change would boil down to voting for whether you love the new metagame better than the one before it or not. I think that if and when we vote for Deoxys-S and Wobbuffet, subconsciously people will vote ONLY on whether they like the new metagame better than the old one or not. There are VERY subjective reasons as to why people would like a metagame or not. Here are some reasons:

• This change has fucked up/improved my team, so I vote no/yes
• This change has turned the metagame into a stallfest/pure attack, and I hate/love this
• This change has made a lot of Pokemon usable/unusable, and I hate/love this
• This change has made Pokemon a luckfest, and I hate/love this

etc. I'm not saying that all, or indeed any, of the above are good ways to reason about an unbanned Pokemon, but I'm sure that these would be among the reasons why people say 'no' or 'yes' to a new Pokemon.

This is true for Deoxys-S, Wobbuffet, Darkrai, Latias, Arceus, evasion clause, OHKO moves, species clause, sleep clause... anything you care to unban.

So, bottom line is: I think it's high time to go for a vote on Wobbuffet, and also for Deoxys-S, from people who actually play, as Jumpman16 said. (That means leave me out from the voting, as I don't play.) Just rest assured that the 'no' or 'yes' votes would be made for different reasons individually.

 

[Jumpman16]

I've already answered these questions, in multiple places. (So has Obi.) See, for example, this post. I don't want to repeat myself here, so to be brief, the evidence shows that the game has not become more centralised, and the arguments usually presented in response to this are poor and easily refuted (I've refuted them all in many places).

I'm not asking whether or not we think Wobby is overcentralizing the metagame, I'm asking what we should be looking at now in the standard metagame as it's being used. Trust me, I know how poor the usual arguments regarding Wobby are. You may or may not have read the 5,000+ words or so I posted going back and forth with SubVersion in my Stark Thread, but I'm pretty sure actual arguments on the Wobbuffet issue aren't going to go anywhere without a proper analysis of factual evidence.

My biggest fear is that Wobby's #43 in weighted usage the last two months, a usage that clearly in no way indicates it is too powerful for the metagame, is due to the people seriously not using it because "it's boring" or "it's not fun" or even "they didn't know they were allowed to use it," as Maniaclyrasist suggested to me on AIM, since it's not in the OU tier but in Limbo. This, I feel, is a legitimate concern, and I wonder if the best way to go about addressing it, if a "plea" to "use Wobbuffet more" didn't work, is indeed to put it in Smogon's OU tier.

However, there's certainly no harm in analysing battle logs or what-have-you, but I'm not sure what they would really prove.

In order to ignore the existing evidence with regard to Wobbuffet, you have to develop a different theoretical basis for the ban list than preventing overcentralisation. Even if Smogon wants to do this, for the purposes of the Shoddy Battle ladder, this is the only criterion and Wobbuffet does not fulfill it at this time. I don't consider this an open issue.

Again, the "existing evidence" may or may not be as accurate as we like, since over and over people post that they're not using Wobbuffet because it's boring or not fun. That said, I think you're assuming that my main issue is "Should we move Wobby to the OU tier?" as though I'm at odds with what's going on on the Shoddy ladder, when in actuality I have absolutely no problem making Wobby officially OU if that even a small part of the reason people aren't using it.

To put it in plain, objective terms for everyone reading this thread: if the people not using Wobbuffet on the ladder because and only because it's not officially in Smogon's OU tier would all start using Wobby next month and directly effect Wobbuffet rising to #1 on June's weighted ladder or even the unweighted ladder when we officially move it to Smogon's OU tier, would there or would there not be a stronger case that it is too powerful for OU?

I mean, suppose there are 10 or 20 more people like ipl, or people who would be as successful as ipl was on the ladder if they "knew they were allowed to use Wobby". Wouldn't there be much more reason to consider it actually uber? Even if Shed Shell and U-turn usage, which were two of the previous expected barometers of "Wobby overcentralization" that did not in practice indicate any such overcentralization, do not rise after say the second week of June when the 10 or 20 enlightened Wobby users start to own the top 20 of the ladder, would it even matter? It is a very easy argument to make that Shed Shell/U-turn usage did not go up because Wobby was actually "bottom third in terms of usage" and therefore didn't cause enough people to want to employ those expected barometers of Wobby overcentralization, but it's still therorymon and I don't even have to assume that Shed Shell/U-turn usage would go up if the so-called enlightened Wobby users take Wobby to #1 on the ladder, because regardless it will have proven to be the #1 most used pokemon on the ladder.

I don't think anything in those last two paragraphs is too outlandish, because, again, it's only in terms of the argument that people aren't using Wobbuffet because it's not officially in Smogon's OU Tier. I don't actually think that a large number of people are not using Wobby because of this, or at least I hope not. At any rate that concern can be addressed by just moving it to OU.

As I posted in the species clause topic itself, testing it is more complex than testing a pokemon because you can't really test it. If you take away species clause and pokemon X becomes ridiculously broken and the game is centralised around it, then you have two choices: reinstate species clause or ban pokemon X. It is not as simple as just testing a pokemon.

We'll cross that bridge when we get to it. My point is that we stand about four or five bridges away from that species clause bridge, and those in our community who post and support threads in Stark asking if Darkrai should be tested or if Mew should be tested seem to think we are capable of flying.

 

[Cathy]

I see what you mean now about understanding how Wobbuffet has changed the metagame. I don't think this should really be considered when deciding whether to ban it per se, but having a good understanding of this is definitely important. I suppose one important question is: what indicators are there of how the metagame has changed?

The pokemon being used frequently is apparently not good enough, as I've seen people allude to vague words like "strategies". What is the plan to quantify the type of "strategies" being used? I've actually been giving this some thought but it is nontrivial.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

The idea of popular voting to determine rules seems silly. If we did that, Blissey would have been banned long ago...

Anyway, I really don't understand the opposition to the statistical argument about Deoxys-S and Wobbuffet. Both have over 40 Pokemon used more commonly than them, and there was no centralization when either was added. The same species of Pokemon continued to be used. I won't say that they didn't do anything, but it seems pretty obvious that any changes observed when they were added had a pretty high chance of being where the game was going anyway. I especially find the argument that Wobbuffet is unstoppable silly. If he were really so incredible, wouldn't his use be a bit higher? Everyone seems to "agree" that Electivire sucks; why is he used WAY more than Wobbuffet even when you weight the skilled players (and the weighting factor is substantial)? Clearly something is amiss when "bad" Pokemon are used substantially more than "broken" Pokemon.

There is some definite legitimacy in the argument about building teams that need to mostly counter bad players, but unless you carefully only use the ladder when no good players are signed on, your team will actually have to beat them once in a while. I don't think this would precipitate as radical of a change as it might seem; the main change would be a shift toward Pokemon who are more reliable. Status moves like Hypnosis with relatively high miss rates and Pokemon with generally unpredictable outcomes would be avoided. However, notice that Wobbuffet is neither of these. Every single move Wobbuffet has has 100% accuracy, and unless you are deathly afraid of crits, etc. (which could happen to anything), he pretty much does the same thing whenever you use him. Status is also one of Wobbuffet's biggest concerns. Wouldn't we expect him to benefit from the different format? If anything, it seems like our ladder statistics are biased toward Wobbuffet seeing more play, not less.

Also, as Colin has been saying, we have to stick to facts to make decisions. We can look at facts from all sorts of angles, but we're going to be doing nothing but spinning our wheels and making fools of ourselves if we decide that we don't want to use data to decide policies about the game. I think some people want the "good old days" where we didn't have any real data about the game and it was just an elite chatting in private that decided all policy. I remember when Celebi was unbanned in RSE; it just came out of nowhere for everyone, and no one really understood why or even how the decision was made (I'm not saying it didn't turn out well; I'm just saying how it looked to someone who was outside of the decision making circle). It seemed really unfair and arbitrary to anyone not involved as it looked like it was for literally no reason, and it was "disenfranchising" insofar as there seemed like there was nothing you could do to influence it (winning a bunch with a Pokemon didn't have any impact at all).

Also, I'm sorry to point out the elephant in the room, but a lot of us don't seem to really play the game much at all anymore. Look at the top battlers on Shoddy Battle:

http://shoddybattle.com/leaderboard

How many of those are notable smogon users? A few names certainly stand out (such as husk and VIL), but a lot of others don't. I don't know how many are aliases from around here, but it's an easy guess that over half of the top 100 aren't even badgeholders here on smogon. A big part of the top metagame right now isn't here right now involved (and, like the ladder or not, it's the center of the DP metagame as of now), and I don't think that making decisions here or in other channels with limited input is going to be fair to them when many of us lack both the drive and the DP experience to be able to do what they're doing. We can still be stewards to the metagame, but we have to realize that our 100% subjective judgments shouldn't be the end all.

 

[Jumpman16]

Colin, I think "qualify" is a better way to think of it as opposed to "quantify", and that's why I feel analyzing raw battle logs is better than trying to draw conclusions from how many usages of Shed Shell or U-turn there are "the number of viable pokemon in the standard metagame", which are all quantitative.

For what it's worth, I just moved Wobbuffet from the Limbo tier to the OU tier. I've also encouraged people to post logs in my Stark thread, but the reason I made this thread here is to see what ideas Policy Reviewers have about analyzing these, or if this is even the best way to analyze if Wobby is too strong for the standard metagame. I guess we'll see what happens now.

 

[Earthworm]

(A lot of this post is directed towards Colin)

I am currently in agreement with imperfectluck and X-Act on this matter, and my 'subjective' vote would be to keep Wobbuffet in the Limbo or Uber tier. There is very little strategy involved with dealing with Wobbuffet due to the lack of choice when Wobbuffet enters play, and since the Wobbuffet user decides when and if the opponent is to come up against Wobbuffet I do not find it very 'fair' that such a Pokemon should even exist (dammit GameFreak...), let alone become unbanned. The number of otherwise perfectly viable strategies that are ruined is quite ridiculous, and there is very little the Wobbuffet user's opponent can do about it.

However I am sure those statements have been produced many times before so they will probably have little effect on the outcome, as we seem to be basing the tier list off of 'overcentralisation' rather than the effect Wobbuffet can have on gameplay.

I am wondering though (and forgive me if I missed this somewhere else, I am pretty lazy!), why was Wobbuffet selected to be unbanned from Standard Ladder Play rather than something like Lati@s w/o Soul Dew, Darkrai, Mew or some other form of Deoxys?

As for Deoxys-S, I am aware that a Tournament was held officially on the Shoddy Battle forum and that Deoxys-S was not a particularly overpowering force (it is actually more of a balancing one in my opinion) so there was at least some kind of good reasoning behind it rather than (correct me if I am wrong) 'Wobbuffet will be unbanned now and its future ban status will be based solely on usage statistics which are arguably related to it and which are used to determine whether Wobbuffet is causing overcentralisation' which; in my opinion; is only half of what Smogon's tier list should be based off. If a 'test' was committed to so readily with Wobbuffet, what is holding back the immediate unbanning of the various other Pokemon whose tier is being debated? The UU discussion thread's arguments have little to do with usage statistics and I find the arguments much more reasonable than the ones presented that are based purely off of statistics.

(I know I don't normally make posts like this but I really don't like Wobbuffet being moved down like that )

 

[gengod]

Just placing Wobbuffet into the OU tier is all fine and good for trying to come to a conclusion but I really don't think this is the way we should go about deciding his tier status. Personally I agree with Hipmonlee's post in this thread as well as the majority of what Subversion posted in the thread in Stark.

This is simply not only just a matter of statistics, as they can only show so much and will always follow some arbitrary definition. The general consensus of the community is that it simply does not want Wobbuffet, to play with or much less play against. If we take a look at every Wobbuffet thread posted within the last few months you will see that the general feel of the discussion is always negative and only a handful of people even want Wobbuffet allowed.

Even after Wobb is unbanned we are still going to see complaint after complaint about it's inclusion into OU. Sure you can always say that the majority of the community and players on Shoddy aren't able to make the decison regarding it's tier status due to whatever reason, but their opnions can't simply be ignored in favour of statistics.

 

[Spaniard]

Ok wobbuffet hasn't changed the metagame (I agree with imperfectluck's post). It's true that wob is not a very used poke. However I hate every encounter with it.

I switch my swampert in to counter zapdos, then I use stealth rock while he switches to wobbuffet. I get encored. He switches to garchomp and swords dances.

Overcertralised or not, very used or not, what the hell should I do now?

That isn't fair play. Actually I'm gonna post a battle log against Mystica where she brutalizes me with wob. You can't say that I'm no rival for her, so I asume that wob just gave her a big advantage.

 

[Spaniard]

Rules: Ladder Match, Sleep Clause, Freeze Clause, OHKO Clause, Evasion Clause, Species Clause, Strict Damage Clause
spaniard sent out Gengar (lvl 100 Gengar ?).
Mystica sent out Jolteon (lvl 100 Jolteon ?).
Stark has entered the room.
Tombola Man has entered the room.
spaniard: hi
Jolteon used Thunderbolt.
Gengar lost 100% of its health.
spaniard's Gengar fainted.
---
Mystica: heya
PedanticPinguster has entered the room.
spaniard switched in Swampert (lvl 100 Swampert ?).
Gandalf der blaue has entered the room.
Mystica switched in Wobbuffet (lvl 100 Wobbuffet ?).
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
Pointed stones float in the air around your foe's team!
---
Wobbuffet used Encore.
Swampert got an encore!
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
---
Encore prohibits the use of this move.
toByggI has entered the room.
Wobbuffet used Tickle.
Swampert's attack was lowered.
Swampert's defence was lowered.
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
---
Stark has left the room.
Valvalias has entered the room.
spaniard: that strategy
Wobbuffet used Tickle.
Swampert's attack was lowered.
Swampert's defence was lowered.
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
---
Mystica: yup lol
Wobbuffet used Tickle.
Swampert's attack was lowered.
Swampert's defence was lowered.
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
---
Gandalf der blaue: Mystica abuses broken Wobb? :)
Mystica: not really lol
Mystica: i just use this team for the hell of it
spaniard: pursuit abuse
spaniard: :p
Mystica: when i dont feel like battling seriously
Encore prohibits the use of this move.
Tombola Man has left the room.
Wobbuffet used Tickle.
Swampert's attack was lowered.
Swampert's defence was lowered.
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
---
Encore prohibits the use of this move.
Wobbuffet used Tickle.
Swampert's attack was lowered.
Swampert's defence was lowered.
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
---
PedanticPinguster: use your gravity team >.>
Mystica: i dont have one
Encore prohibits the use of this move.
Mystica: i should make one though...
Mystica switched in Tyranitar (lvl 100 Tyranitar ?).
Tyranitar's Sand Stream whipped up a sandstorm!
A sandstorm brewed!
Pointed stones dug into Tyranitar.
Tyranitar lost 12% of its health.
Swampert used Stealth Rock.
But it failed!
The sandstorm rages.
---
PedanticPinguster: make one gravity ftw
Encore prohibits the use of this move.
Mystica: i will lol
Mystica: gravity bliss
Tyranitar used Pursuit.
Swampert lost 100% of its health.
spaniard's Swampert fainted.
Tyranitar lost 10% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
---
Mystica: =)
spaniard: :p
BassKite has entered the room.
spaniard switched in Garchomp (lvl 100 Garchomp ?).
Mystica: btw thanks for bringing in pert, i hate that fucker
Gandalf der blaue: with hp ground
Mystica: why hp ground?
Garchomp used Earthquake.
It's super effective!
Tyranitar lost 78% of its health.
Mystica's Tyranitar fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
---
Mystica switched in Wobbuffet (lvl 100 Wobbuffet ?).
Pointed stones dug into Wobbuffet.
Wobbuffet lost 12% of its health.
PedanticPinguster: cause it rules with gravity
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Wobbuffet lost 44% of its health.
Wobbuffet used Encore.
Garchomp got an encore!
The sandstorm rages.
Wobbuffet is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Wobbuffet lost 6% of its health.
Wobbuffet's leftovers restored its health a little!
Wobbuffet restored 6% of its health.
---
Mystica switched in Mismagius (lvl 100 Mismagius ?).
Pointed stones dug into Mismagius.
Mismagius lost 12% of its health.
Mismagius makes ground moves miss with Levitate!
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Garchomp's attack missed!
The sandstorm rages.
Mismagius is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Mismagius lost 6% of its health.
Mismagius's leftovers restored its health a little!
Mismagius restored 6% of its health.
---
Gandalf der blaue: i think it hits flyers iwhiel gravity is in effect
spaniard switched in Tyranitar (lvl 100 Tyranitar ?).
Tyranitar's Sand Stream whipped up a sandstorm!
Mismagius used Calm Mind.
Mismagius's special attack was raised.
Mismagius's special defence was raised.
The sandstorm rages.
Mismagius is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Mismagius lost 6% of its health.
Mismagius's leftovers restored its health a little!
Mismagius restored 6% of its health.
---
PedanticPinguster: yes
Mismagius used Hidden Power.
It's super effective!
Tyranitar lost 71% of its health.
Tyranitar used Dark Pulse.
It's super effective!
Mismagius lost 62% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
Mismagius is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Mismagius lost 6% of its health.
Mismagius's leftovers restored its health a little!
Mismagius restored 6% of its health.
Tyranitar's leftovers restored its health a little!
Tyranitar restored 6% of its health.
---
Mismagius used Hidden Power.
It's super effective!
Tyranitar lost 35% of its health.
spaniard's Tyranitar fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
Mismagius is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Mismagius lost 6% of its health.
Mismagius's leftovers restored its health a little!
Mismagius restored 6% of its health.
---
spaniard switched in Garchomp (lvl 100 Garchomp ?).
Mystica switched in Jirachi (lvl 100 Jirachi).
Pointed stones dug into Jirachi.
Jirachi lost 6% of its health.
Garchomp used Dragon Claw.
It's not very effective...
Jirachi lost 16% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
Jirachi's leftovers restored its health a little!
Jirachi restored 6% of its health.
---
Gandalf der blaue: mamoswine would rule in gravity
spaniard switched in Skarmory (lvl 100 Skarmory ?).
Jirachi used Wish.
Jirachi made a wish!
The sandstorm rages.
Jirachi's leftovers restored its health a little!
Jirachi restored 6% of its health.
---
PedanticPinguster: you think
Mystica: i wonder why gracvity isn't used more often
PedanticPinguster: >.<
Jirachi used Stealth Rock.
Skarmory used Whirlwind.
Mystica switched in Wobbuffet (lvl 100 Wobbuffet ?).
Pointed stones dug into Wobbuffet.
Wobbuffet lost 12% of its health.
The wish came true!
Wobbuffet restored 50% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
Wobbuffet is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Wobbuffet lost 6% of its health.
Wobbuffet's leftovers restored its health a little!
Wobbuffet restored 6% of its health.
---
Wobbuffet used Encore.
Skarmory got an encore!
Skarmory used Whirlwind.
Mystica switched in Jolteon (lvl 100 Jolteon ?).
Pointed stones dug into Jolteon.
Jolteon lost 12% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
Jolteon is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Jolteon lost 6% of its health.
---
Gandalf der blaue: lol
PedanticPinguster: the same reason sun/rain team arn't
Jolteon used Thunderbolt.
It's super effective!
Skarmory lost 100% of its health.
spaniard's Skarmory fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
Jolteon is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Jolteon lost 6% of its health.
---
PedanticPinguster: if there was a pokemon
spaniard: damn
spaniard: misprediction
PedanticPinguster: that made gravity happen
spaniard switched in Garchomp (lvl 100 Garchomp ?).
Pointed stones dug into Garchomp.
Garchomp lost 6% of its health.
Mystica: yeah i amost use baton pass
Mystica: lol
Gandalf der blaue: oO
PedanticPinguster: it would probably be uber ._.
PedanticPinguster: but that's not the point
Mystica switched in Mismagius (lvl 100 Mismagius ?).
Pointed stones dug into Mismagius.
Mismagius lost 12% of its health.
Mismagius makes ground moves miss with Levitate!
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Garchomp's attack missed!
The sandstorm rages.
Mismagius is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Mismagius lost 6% of its health.
Mismagius's leftovers restored its health a little!
Mismagius restored 6% of its health.
---
Gandalf der blaue: garchomp :P
Gandalf der blaue: new trait
spaniard switched in Cresselia (lvl 100 Cresselia ?).
Pointed stones dug into Cresselia.
Cresselia lost 12% of its health.
Mismagius used Shadow Ball.
It's super effective!
Cresselia lost 41% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
Mismagius is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Mismagius lost 6% of its health.
Cresselia is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Cresselia lost 6% of its health.
Mismagius's leftovers restored its health a little!
Mismagius restored 6% of its health.
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Mismagius used Shadow Ball.
It's super effective!
Cresselia lost 40% of its health.
Cresselia used Psychic.
Mismagius lost 13% of its health.
Mystica's Mismagius fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
Cresselia is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Cresselia lost 6% of its health.
Cresselia's leftovers restored its health a little!
Cresselia restored 6% of its health.
---
Mystica switched in Jolteon (lvl 100 Jolteon ?).
Pointed stones dug into Jolteon.
Jolteon lost 12% of its health.
Jolteon used Hidden Power.
Cresselia lost 7% of its health.
spaniard's Cresselia fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
Jolteon is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Jolteon lost 6% of its health.
---
spaniard switched in Garchomp (lvl 100 Garchomp ?).
Pointed stones dug into Garchomp.
Garchomp lost 6% of its health.
PedanticPinguster: horray chomp can hit one more poke SE
Tombola Man has entered the room.
spaniard: gg
Gandalf der blaue: 2
Mystica: gg
PedanticPinguster: >.<
Garchomp used Earthquake.
It's super effective!
Jolteon lost 56% of its health.
Mystica's Jolteon fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
---
Stark has entered the room.
Mystica switched in Wobbuffet (lvl 100 Wobbuffet ?).
Pointed stones dug into Wobbuffet.
Wobbuffet lost 12% of its health.
PedanticPinguster: oh yeah 2
Mystica: unless this crits
Stark has left the room.
Gandalf der blaue: gogo crit
spaniard: sand veil
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Wobbuffet lost 38% of its health.
Wobbuffet used Counter.
Wobbuffet's attack missed!
The sandstorm rages.
Wobbuffet is buffetted by the sandstorm!
Wobbuffet lost 6% of its health.
Wobbuffet's leftovers restored its health a little!
Wobbuffet restored 6% of its health.
Mystica: HAHHAAHAHAHAHAHA
Gandalf der blaue: lol
PedanticPinguster: lol
spaniard: lol
Mystica: shit ._.
BassKite: .
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Wobbuffet lost 30% of its health.
Mystica's Wobbuffet fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
---
BassKite: ._.
Mystica switched in Jirachi (lvl 100 Jirachi).
Pointed stones dug into Jirachi.
Jirachi lost 6% of its health.
Gandalf der blaue: counter can miss? wtf
Garchomp used Earthquake.
It's super effective!
Jirachi lost 81% of its health.
Jirachi used Body Slam.
Garchomp lost 22% of its health.
The sandstorm rages.
Jirachi's leftovers restored its health a little!
Jirachi restored 6% of its health.
---
Mystica: goddamnit
Garchomp used Earthquake.
It's super effective!
A critical hit!
Jirachi lost 9% of its health.
Mystica's Jirachi fainted.
The sandstorm rages.
---
Mystica switched in Garchomp (lvl 100 Garchomp ?).
Pointed stones dug into Garchomp.
Garchomp lost 6% of its health.
Mystica: tetehee!
spaniard: well
Gandalf der blaue: xD
Mystica: teehee*
PedanticPinguster: SHOMPEH
Gandalf der blaue: sand veil!!
spaniard: you win after all
spaniard: gg
Mystica: broken pokemon UNITE!
Mystica: gg lolo
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Garchomp lost 53% of its health.
Garchomp used Dragon Claw.
Garchomp's attack missed!
The sandstorm rages.
Garchomp's leftovers restored its health a little!
Garchomp restored 6% of its health.
---
Mystica: oh my god
Gandalf der blaue: xD
PedanticPinguster: lol
Gandalf der blaue: i knew it
Mystica: what the fuck...
spaniard: god
Valvalias: Lmao
PedanticPinguster: xD
Garchomp used Earthquake.
Garchomp lost 47% of its health.
Mystica's Garchomp fainted.
spaniard wins!
PedanticPinguster: xDDDDDDDDD
Tombola Man: brightpowder
Tombola Man has left the room.
spaniard: warstory
Gandalf der blaue: if you are a gentleman you would forfeit
Valvalias: (>'.')> There you go Mystica
Mystica: jesus fucking christ
Mystica: bad fucking game lol
spaniard: yeah
PedanticPinguster: warstory pl0x
Gandalf der blaue: lol
spaniard: You deserve the victory
BassKite has left the room.
Mystica has left the room.
Gandalf der blaue has left the room.
Valvalias has left the room.
PedanticPinguster: warstory it
PedanticPinguster: SOMEONE!
spaniard: ok
PedanticPinguster: *yay*
PedanticPinguster has left the room.
toByggI: hey spaniard
spaniard: yes?
toByggI: nice game =)
spaniard: thx
toByggI has left the room.

 

[obi]

Any change would boil down to voting for whether you love the new metagame better than the one before it or not. I think that if and when we vote for Deoxys-S and Wobbuffet, subconsciously people will vote ONLY on whether they like the new metagame better than the old one or not. There are VERY subjective reasons as to why people would like a metagame or not. Here are some reasons:

However, just because it changed after the unbanning of certain Pokemon doesn't mean it changed because of those Pokemon. People blame Deoxys-S for the decline of hyper-offensive teams, but maybe they declined because of a standard (and predictable) pendulum swing? Take a look at the game right before Deoxys-S was unbanned. Then look at the game a month or so before it was banned. To the best of my recollection, things were about as different then as they were a month after they were unbanned. In other words, Deoxys-S and Wobbuffet have not necessarily been the cause of any non-minor changes. Their lack of use means most people rarely take them into account when building a team (I don't).

I am currently in agreement with imperfectluck and X-Act on this matter, and my 'subjective' vote would be to keep Wobbuffet in the Limbo or Uber tier. There is very little strategy involved with dealing with Wobbuffet due to the lack of choice when Wobbuffet enters play, and since the Wobbuffet user decides when and if the opponent is to come up against Wobbuffet I do not find it very 'fair' that such a Pokemon should even exist (dammit GameFreak...), let alone become unbanned. The number of otherwise perfectly viable strategies that are ruined is quite ridiculous, and there is very little the Wobbuffet user's opponent can do about it.

If your argument is simply "It removes options from the game", would you also favor banning Dugtrio, Magnezone, and all other trappers? They have the same effect. Yes, there are some Pokemon they can't trap, but there are also some Pokemon they can trap that Wobbuffet cannot trap. They can still trap Pokemon that use Role Play and Pokemon that have Shadow Tag, which Wobbuffet cannot do.

Would you also favor banning the move Taunt? That removes an entire class of moves from the game.

How about Encore? Disable? Trick + Choice item?

If you're going to draw the line at Wobbuffet for "it removes options", what is your reasoning for stopping there?

This is simply not only just a matter of statistics, as they can only show so much and will always follow some arbitrary definition. The general consensus of the community is that it simply does not want Wobbuffet, to play with or much less play against. If we take a look at every Wobbuffet thread posted within the last few months you will see that the general feel of the discussion is always negative and only a handful of people even want Wobbuffet allowed.

I wouldn't be surprised if we could get a poll that says Garchomp or Blissey ought to be banned by "the majority". We could go to Serebii right now and find a lot of people who say "Ban legends!". Unless you want to do these, then it's fairly obvious that a pure 'majority' isn't enough.

 

[gengod]

I wouldn't be surprised if we could get a poll that says Garchomp or Blissey ought to be banned by "the majority". We could go to Serebii right now and find a lot of people who say "Ban legends!". Unless you want to do these, then it's fairly obvious that a pure 'majority' isn't enough.

Sure you can always say that the majority of the community and players on Shoddy aren't able to make the decison regarding it's tier status due to whatever reason, but their opnions can't simply be ignored in favour of statistics.

That is why i posted the above paragraph mentioning the "majority.

If you think that the majority isn't enough, then why don't we simply take a vote regarding the tier status of Wobbuffet amongst the members in Policy Review. I'm sure that would resolve the issues we have without asking "the pure majority" to help resolve/deal with these issues.

 

[jrrrrrrr]

However, just because it changed after the unbanning of certain Pokemon doesn't mean it changed because of those Pokemon. People blame Deoxys-S for the decline of hyper-offensive teams, but maybe they declined because of a standard (and predictable) pendulum swing? Take a look at the game right before Deoxys-S was unbanned. Then look at the game a month or so before it was banned. To the best of my recollection, things were about as different then as they were a month after they were unbanned. In other words, Deoxys-S and Wobbuffet have not necessarily been the cause of any non-minor changes. Their lack of use means most people rarely take them into account when building a team (I don't).

Well considering that the almost universally accepted "playstyle" of D/P was heavy offense before the unbanning of these two pokemon, then suddenly this idea fell off the face of the pokemon planet after their use, there is much more to believe here than you are implying. Causation vs correlation, I know, but you can't use this to completely dismiss the obvious metagame changes that have come about as D-S and Wobba have been allowed (the ones that you admit have occured).

Even the threat of these pokemon existing in OU has to be taken into account. Your statement of "most people rarely take them into account when building a team" is extremely short-sighted and ignores pretty much everything that I've ever learned about pokemon, although I can't speak for everyone here. If we are going to dismiss "nobody wants wobb in ou" arguments, there is no reason to accept "nobody even thinks about wobb" either.

Or maybe their lack of use is because people take them into account so much that they are becoming less effective in OU?

If your argument is simply "It removes options from the game", would you also favor banning Dugtrio, Magnezone, and all other trappers? They have the same effect. Yes, there are some Pokemon they can't trap, but there are also some Pokemon they can trap that Wobbuffet cannot trap. They can still trap Pokemon that use Role Play and Pokemon that have Shadow Tag, which Wobbuffet cannot do.

Would you also favor banning the move Taunt? That removes an entire class of moves from the game.

How about Encore? Disable? Trick + Choice item?

If you're going to draw the line at Wobbuffet for "it removes options", what is your reasoning for stopping there?

I really don't want to get infracted for insulting a staff member, so I am just going to address each point individually instead of just saying "that isn't relevant"

Dugtrio, Magnezone and Trapinch (the only other ability trappers I could think of other than Tracers) are not in the same league as Wobbuffet. They do not have "the same effect". They do not restrict as many options nearly as effectively as Wobbuffet does. The only pokemon that Wobbuffet can not trap is Wobbuffet, whereas Magnezone is restricted to only Steel-types (most of which it wont come in on) and Dugtrio is restricted to grounded pokemon (most of which it wont come in on). That is quite a difference especially when you consider that Wobbuffet also has that massive HP stat, Counter/Mirror Coat, Encore, etc etc. I really don't even know how you could make this comparison.

Role Play is not used by anything.

Taunt requires that you use a turn in battle. You are putting yourself at risk while you are taunting, and the effects are easily removed by either waiting it out or by switching. Wobbuffet's ability does not have these drawbacks and again is not an accurate comparison.

Encore is nice, except hardly anything learns it, and Wobb is extremely slow, so you would just get your Encore encored while it gets a free switch-out.

Disable is not used by anything.

Trick is not used by anything. (oh wait alakazam, rotom and lopunny use it...sorry)

The reasoning behind stopping at Wobbuffet is because it is basically brings matches to a complete halt at the whim of the user. It completely changes the pace of a match just by bringing it out. Dugtrio and Magnezone, and other trappers, do not have the same effect and actually have weaknesses that can be exploited without sacrificing much team-wise.

I wouldn't be surprised if we could get a poll that says Garchomp or Blissey ought to be banned by "the majority". We could go to Serebii right now and find a lot of people who say "Ban legends!". Unless you want to do these, then it's fairly obvious that a pure 'majority' isn't enough.

Although I agree with you here, the "majority" should have quite a large say as to what goes on in their game. A simple poll is not enough, although the results would certainly be interesting. Even a poll of the members of this TPR forum would be really interesting to see, just to get a common idea of where "we" all stand.

How can we just ignore the fact that the vast majority of policy makers that play the game EVERY SINGLE DAY are being ignored while people who rarely play, if ever, seem to be in charge of these discussions. Us active players have spoken, and we loathe the idea of Deoxys-e and Wobbuffet in OU (Garchomp too, which I actually feel is a more important matter but oh well) yet it seems as if our opinions mean nothing.

 

[IggyBot]

I'm jumping in here and agreeing with Maniac, jrrrrrrr, Earthworm, IPL, Spaniard, and EVERYONE else who I have talked to that plays.

There is more to judging centralisation that just pure usage statistics, despite what people who don't play, or play very little tend to lead others to believe. Other things, such as the sets and items used before and after have to be taken into account as well. Unfortunatly, there is no way to view this data at this time, which means that all we have been going on are statistics that only show a small part of what we really need to know.

Deoxys-E doesn't make other pokemon less viable exactly, but it does shut certain sets down and make some items obsolete on pokemon. Deoxys-E also makes certain combinations of pokemon almost unusable, like IPL said. Offensive teams that rely on resistances and smart playing used to be just as effective as stall, or bulky sweepers are now ripped to shreds by Deoxys-E. This means that these teams need a serious revamp to work, and shifts the whole metagame in a different direction.

Wobbuffet is an interesting case. How can Wobbuffet centralise anything exactly, when it is impossible to play pokemon against it? Wobbuffet isn't going to change anything when it comes to usage statistics because it doesn't just make certain pokemon ineffective. Wobbuffet plays completely differently than anything else ever introduced into OU. You (Obi) may argue that Dugtrio and Magnezone can trap just like Wobbuffet, and even pokemon that Wobbuffet can't trap. However, 1 on 1, two Wobbuffet's aren't going to do anything to one another, so Wobbuffet trapping another Wobbuffet is usless anyways. As for Role Play, let's look at what learns it:

Alakazam
Hypno
Mr. Mime
Spinda
Stantler

None of those pokemon are even OU. Alakazam and Hypno even learn Taunt, which means that Role Play is obsolete on them anyways.

The majority of this forum, with the exception of the same select few agree with the general majority, in that we want Wobbuffet to stay uber. I really don't see what is keeping this arguement alive. We can argue statistics all we want here, but like I said, there is much more to centralization than pure usage.

 

[Earthworm]

If your argument is simply "It removes options from the game", would you also favor banning Dugtrio, Magnezone, and all other trappers? They have the same effect. Yes, there are some Pokemon they can't trap, but there are also some Pokemon they can trap that Wobbuffet cannot trap. They can still trap Pokemon that use Role Play and Pokemon that have Shadow Tag, which Wobbuffet cannot do.

Would you also favor banning the move Taunt? That removes an entire class of moves from the game.

How about Encore? Disable? Trick + Choice item?

If you're going to draw the line at Wobbuffet for "it removes options", what is your reasoning for stopping there?

Wobbuffet is unique in the fact that it has a trapping ability which stops almost everything from escaping it as well as Encore, which effectively limits your choices to a total of one move. Additionally, it can be very difficult to see coming, and every single time a move like Stealth Rock, Spikes, etc. is used by a slower Pokemon you are risking the game unless your team happens to have the perfect counter to whatever strategy they employ.

Most of the time Trick, Taunt and other moves will leave you with at least two options: Attack or Switch. Wobbuffet removes one of these options, which in my opinion is removing one too many.

 

[Hipmonlee]

There is obviously a point for degrees here. Dugtrio and Wobbuffet limit options but also adds the option of switching to Dugtrio or Wobbuffet. What needs to be considered is whether the limitation of options caused by Dugtrio or Wobbuffet is greater or less than the options it adds. Options added include things like using dugtrio to trap magnezone to protect skarmory. The nature of the two pokemon is similar, but that doesnt mean they should both be OU..

Also if you look at the weighting of statistics, I took a quick look at how heavily weighted pokemon are, and while I was far from thorough, it looks like Wobbuffet benefits more from heavier weightings than any other pokemon. Second I saw was Celebi and then Deoxys was third. Though I will repeat that this was a far from comprehensive look.

The point I am trying to make, is that the statistics are a useful tool, but they need to be thoroughly evaluated, and not just followed blindly.

Have a nice day.

 

[obi]

I fail to see how you'd use anything but the actual measure of how centralized things are to measure centralization.

 

[Tangerine]

If your argument is simply "It removes options from the game", would you also favor banning Dugtrio, Magnezone, and all other trappers? They have the same effect. Yes, there are some Pokemon they can't trap, but there are also some Pokemon they can trap that Wobbuffet cannot trap. They can still trap Pokemon that use Role Play and Pokemon that have Shadow Tag, which Wobbuffet cannot do.

The thing with Dugtrio is that he's not stopping things with Levitate/Flying, or Physical walls anytime soon. Magnezone isn't taking down anything that's not steel either, and has that terrible 4x EQ weak to boot. WHY wobbuffet makes stall teams much more difficult to play is that Wobby's ability to do precisely this - trap the ever present physical walls and kill them, or bring a free turn to another Pokemon so it can finish the job.

Saying that "Oh Dugtrio can trap stuff with Role Play and Shadow Tag"... I'm not sure if that's even a valid point in this argument, considering I haven't seen anything that ever uses Role Play, and the only Pokemon with Shadow Tag is Wynaut and Wobbuffet, which Dugtrio shouldn't really be trying to trap unless it's within killing range.

Would you also favor banning the move Taunt? That removes an entire class of moves from the game.

How about Encore? Disable? Trick + Choice item?

One could conceivably think of Wobbuffet as "THE counter" for stalling teams just like Taunt/Trick does for walls and etc.

There are of course two differences. One is scale - one is a counter to an entire team or strategy (wobbuffet), versus one is a counter to one Pokemon (taunt/Trick).

The thing with Taunt and Trick is that one can conceivably deal with them just like we do when a Pokemon we send out is countered - we switch. it is a completely different story with Wobby since it does it to an entire team which is something you can't do anything about, which is why there's a lot of calling for it to be banned,.

Anyway, how about this proposal? If we can conceivable define a team as "stall" and "offensive" and "bulky offensive", and label a team as such (perhaps give this feature to only the top 100 in the ladder, who would be capable of labeling their own teams I suppose) and see how Wobbuffet and Deoxys E does against each - IE if Wobby vs Stall Teams has a significantly higher win ratio against stall teams than the others then we will find that Wobby *is* indeed limiting options.

Another way to conceivably see if the metagame is changing is perhaps make a statistics for the teams used by the top 100 in shoddy ladder? (filter it by IP or something so you can get rid of dupes) I mean if most of the teams get there by "Bulky Offensive" then we can see that that is the dominating strategy, etc.