Needs More Info Show the banlist for Monotype

Show that Pokemon like Dracovish, Galarian Darmanitan, Cinderace and Spectrier aren't banned in the tier. This also applies to the inverse situation, when Pokemon like Magearna and Urshifu Rapid Strike weren't banned in OU but were in Monotype (pre Crown Thundra). I don't think it'd be a problem to just throw these under OU.
 
I think it should be shown like the regular OU banlist (under OU, in the Ubers section). Really what I suggested is just taking Pokemon that aren't banned from Monotype from the Ubers section and putting them in the OU section in the teambuilder (when you're building for Monotype) and putting any Pokemon that is banned in Monotype but not in OU in the Ubers section (there aren't any right now that I'm aware since Shifu was banned)… I hope I'm not being too confusing.
 
It happens with most of the OMs, which always confused me. I think the best way to work for most of them is like, for example, OU does.
unknown.png


In 90% of the OMs, Ubers are banned, then why shouldn't it be clear in the tier info instead of showing like 40 mons nobody is going to read. It could be perfectly fixed showing another section in Banlist/Ruleset with Unbans - (Ubers unbanned in this format)

unknown.png

unknown.png

Now you have 12 banned mons instead of 45 and you don't have to reread the whole banlist to see if a Uber mon is unbanned, as it is totally clear in the Unbans

This can perfectly apply for Monotype and almost any Other Metagame.

E: yeah, I missed some ubers when editing, maybe I missed more, and that's the point, I can't remember all ubers when building, so this would be a huge help.
 
Last edited:
It happens with most of the OMs, which always confused me. I think the best way to work for most of them is like, for example, OU does.
unknown.png


In 90% of the OMs, Ubers are banned, then why shouldn't it be clear in the tier info instead of showing like 40 mons nobody is going to read. It could be perfectly fixed showing another section in Banlist/Ruleset with Unbans - (Ubers unbanned in this format)

unknown.png

unknown.png

Now you have 12 banned mons instead of 45 and you don't have to reread the whole banlist to see if a Uber mon is unbanned, as it is totally clear in the Unbans

This can perfectly apply for Monotype and almost any Other Metagame.

E: yeah, I missed some ubers when editing, maybe I missed more, and that's the point, I can't remember all ubers when building, so this would be a huge help.
That'd be perfect, thank you so much for the suggestion.

Honestly I feel like, as a bigger project, there could be a rework of the teambuilder page, at least for monotype, making it similar to Natdex: you have Ubers, OU (Pokemon that reach a certain usage stat) and UU (for those who don't). Since monotype doesn't have UU, there's no need for BL. This would help immensely because, for example, something like Klefki is currently RU (?) and it's shown there in the teambuilder for monotype, while, in reality, Klefki is one of the highest ranking Pokemon in the VR for Fairy (which isn't by any means one of the best types, but still). Seeing Klefki so low is, in my opinion, fairly deceiving for newcomers... But that's for another topic, hahah.
 
It happens with most of the OMs, which always confused me. I think the best way to work for most of them is like, for example, OU does.
unknown.png


In 90% of the OMs, Ubers are banned, then why shouldn't it be clear in the tier info instead of showing like 40 mons nobody is going to read. It could be perfectly fixed showing another section in Banlist/Ruleset with Unbans - (Ubers unbanned in this format)

unknown.png

unknown.png

Now you have 12 banned mons instead of 45 and you don't have to reread the whole banlist to see if a Uber mon is unbanned, as it is totally clear in the Unbans

This can perfectly apply for Monotype and almost any Other Metagame.

E: yeah, I missed some ubers when editing, maybe I missed more, and that's the point, I can't remember all ubers when building, so this would be a huge help.
Speaking as an OM Leader, I'd have to disagree with condensing the banlist into "Ubers" for simplicity - the entire point of the expanded banlist is to divorce the idea of "ubers are what is banned in OU" from OMs - we made the conscious decision to tell people to put in the full set of "Ubers" mons in the banlist so that OMs are not unnecessarily affected by what happens in OU - bans and unbans do not carry over to OMs so that they have more autonomy, and are not unduly affected by what happens in OU. What may be "Ubers" in OU may not necessarily be so in OMs, and what may be "Ubers" in OMs may not necessarily be so for OU.

Also, putting the "unbans" section just entirely defeats the effort that we put in to separate OU's banlist from OMs, and is just basically telling newcomers that we follow OU's banlist, when we do not do that at all - we ban similar mons, but we do not follow it wholesale.
 
Speaking as an OM Leader, I'd have to disagree with condensing the banlist into "Ubers" for simplicity - the entire point of the expanded banlist is to divorce the idea of "ubers are what is banned in OU" from OMs - we made the conscious decision to tell people to put in the full set of "Ubers" mons in the banlist so that OMs are not unnecessarily affected by what happens in OU - bans and unbans do not carry over to OMs so that they have more autonomy, and are not unduly affected by what happens in OU. What may be "Ubers" in OU may not necessarily be so in OMs, and what may be "Ubers" in OMs may not necessarily be so for OU.

Also, putting the "unbans" section just entirely defeats the effort that we put in to separate OU's banlist from OMs, and is just basically telling newcomers that we follow OU's banlist, when we do not do that at all - we ban similar mons, but we do not follow it wholesale.

This is a point yeah, as doing what I suggested would turn every OM in a constant update of the info whenever a mon is banned or unbanned from OU. I still think that we need more simplicity, though, as the entire banlist of +40 Pokemon doesn't appeal at all to be read and really encourages to believe every Uber is banned, as it is almost impossible to deduct what Ubers are unbanned and what non-Ubers are banned. Example in AAA again, a new player would never be able to deduct Genesect and Landorus are unbanned and Kartana is banned.

Again, I can agree simplifying it to Ubers might be inaccurate, but we need a way to turn it more simple and accessible to new players. Thanks for answering!
 
You could ban Restricted Legendary for a bit of a shorter list (and then do further bans/unbans from there). Unlike Ubers, that list will never change.
 
In a general sense, having the teambuilders for OMs, Monotype, VGC, etc show what is actually banned / unbanned instead of showing the banlist of another format (OU for many OMs and Monotype, DOU for VGC, Ubers/AG for some other OMs, etc) would be very nice if that's at all feasible.

What should show when you do /tier [format] is a different issue and I don't really have an opinion on that, just figured i'd bring up the teambuilder part of it.
 
Show that Pokemon like Dracovish, Galarian Darmanitan, Cinderace and Spectrier aren't banned in the tier. This also applies to the inverse situation, when Pokemon like Magearna and Urshifu Rapid Strike weren't banned in OU but were in Monotype (pre Crown Thundra). I don't think it'd be a problem to just throw these under OU.

Agree with this 100%, a small quality of life change like this would help newcomers a lot. It's certainly a small barrier to entry but one none the less that I think could be fixed. Great suggestion.
 
Back
Top