So basically testing multiple Pokemon at once is not likely to work?The disadvantage of this is that it can lead to the most dominating Pokemon during the suspect being banned for still being broken, after which point it becomes clear said Pokemon was keeping the others in check so now they're broken.
What's so bad about this? Don't broken Pokemon stop being broken if they're easy enough to check? If broken Pokemon are always broken, why do different formats have different banlists?“Broken checking broken” is generally against the tiering policy, so this is unlikely.
A Pokemon can stay un-banned if it's a little bit broken, right? I think sometimes the top 3-6 Pokemon in a format/metagame would be broken if not for the other 2-5 Pokemon checking them. If multiple broken Pokemon are un-banned at the same time, they might in theory (yes I realize this is only in theory) form a new top of the metagame. It would change the metagame a lot, but just because something changes the metagame a lot doesn't mean it's broken, right?Additionally, something requiring one of the other drops to check it would still be heavily centralizing, so just adding one or two checks (that in and of themselves would also have limited checks) would be unlikely to change whether it was considered broken.

















