To back up finch, here’s some info for newer players (mostly those who joined smogon in gen 8): surveys are a pretty new thing for tiering, pre SS quick bans were done with pretty much zero warning. The council pretty rarely communicated what their plans were, and that’s just the way things were back then. Surveys are clearly popular and help an astronomical amount with transparency, which is why I think this ban is so controversial, even if it adheres to all policy. I’m personally not super pleased with it, but let’s avoid toxicity. It’s perfectly ok to air your grievances about this decision but let’s keep it civil please
-
The moderators of this forum are Finchinator, Ruft, ausma, 658Greninja, kd458, FayaWizard, Srn, TPP, and viivian.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion v2 [Update on Post #5186]
- Thread starter TPP
- Start date
- Status
Yeah essentially. I think it could ease some of the arguments you deal with if there were an article/thread/resource etc. that delineates clear definitions, guidelines, and standards for everything. It would be similar to the tiering policy standard but more robust. Essentially, if someone says you broke precedent you can point to it and say “hey this ban fit criteria X,y,z under the rules and therefore was within our powers”
I think a lot of these angry posts surrounding the Volc ban is it was so sudden and such a swing in the council voting that people felt they had no warning.
Likening King's Rock to Volcarona is a false flag. The King's Rock ban is clearly and plainly obvious on why it is uncompetitive. It gives you an extra (but not guaranteed) chance to flinch. Flinching is already a pretty uncompetitive mechanic, especially when it's not guaranteed. Losing a big game because of a 1-of-5 icicle spear flinched you, not allowing you to otherwise kill a Cloyster would probably be the most tilting thing I could imagine.
Volcarona is not "luck based," or at least not fully. Yeah, Flame Body can be a pain in the ass, but other mons have Flame Body, nor is it Volcarona's whole gimmick. Volcarona is (as you probably well know) a super strong setup sweeper that can cater to its checks by swapping Teras/Movesets. The problem is is that while it VERY WELL could have been too strong, the community as a whole seems to feel that the QuickBan was unprecedented, unnotified, and did not take a majority view into its implementation. I was lurking on Smogon when the King's Rock ban was pushed through, and I can say that it received nowhere near as much backlash as the recent Volcarona quickban. (TBH I can't remember any backlash, but I'm sure someone will find a post or two calling it the worst decision ever).
And, to avoid double-posting...
Fingers crossed it's a Suspect Test announcement!
I don't even think the Volc ban was made with no warning. 4 OU Council members made write-ups indicating that they were leaning towards banning Volc before today, so if you didn't see it coming, you clearly failed to read the room as the OU Council was very clearly showing that it viewed Volc as problematic.
Let me guess, tera made volc even more problematic than it already was?
Yeah that’s a good point. I still think the swing from 0-9 to 7-2 shocked a lot of people. that and Zama-H not getting banned.
i like discussing stuff but I feel like sv ou discussion has been a lot more aggressive to council than ss ou. theyre just some people. its fair to be annoyed at things but the vitriol is a little bit wild.
in general u dont have to post/can take a break and come back when you feel less heated. go look at a frog for me :)
but more importantly bax stocks are on an all time rise baby lets gooooo
in general u dont have to post/can take a break and come back when you feel less heated. go look at a frog for me :)
but more importantly bax stocks are on an all time rise baby lets gooooo
No tera preview doesnt fix everything but it sure makes the meta better than it currently is. Tera eases the guesswork of trying to figure out potential tera types. This makes game-planning more effective.
Terastilization brings in another layer of gameplay and is innovative to pokemon. It promotes more critical thinking during real time. Players have to constantly think on their toes and some like myself like this aspect of the game. Tera allows for more creativity to make different sets and teams than we've ever seen before.
You cant prepare for everything in the meta, but you sure can prepare for the most common and dangerous threats in the meta. There’s always a chance you can lose uncommon tera type/ set combination but thats not inherently bad. You could not have possibly prepared for gimmick/niche situations but it possible to prepare for common terastilization situations.
Terastilization adds more depth of gameplay because you have to use Tera as a resource to win. As players we are now innovating new strategies with tera in mind to beat the opponent. Some like the challenge of preparing for many types of situations tera can present. After all Pokémon has always been a game of read/react and prediction based actions.
One thing I don’t think people are quite mentioning enough in conversation of tiering policy is how uniquely difficult this generation is to tier well.
Would I have banned volc myself? Eh, probably not. Was this some hugely unprecedented crazy surprising move? Absolutely not. People have been talking about Volc being problematic for like 6 months at this point. Whether you think it should have been banned or not based on survey responses is one thing but this is not some shocking decision with no warning. Maybe you think some things are more broken, that’s fine, but it’s not like they banned some balanced mon out of nowhere.
Maybe it could’ve been a suspect, but between power creep dumping in such a HUGE amount of new broken mons and tera enabling so many pre-existing mons to be so strong AND new batches of strong mons being added every few months, it’s truly difficult to imagine a version of events where every possibly broken mon gets a suspect. Even with reduced suspect test durations and very aggressive and consistent tiering action, there’s still been a large amount of possibly broken/ suspectible mons in the meta. It’s been that way since day 1, and in a world where tera exists that is simply just going to be how the meta is. If not for these aggressive QBs then gen 9 would be 90% suspect test. Until or unless tera gets banned, we’re just going to be swimming around with like a dozen mons that maybe could just be banned.
The council is gonna retest tera soonish. They’re gonna test/retest a bunch of other things after that. Then DLC 1 is going to make the meta insane again. Repeat cycle. This is both the most difficult generation to tier well and the best, most proactive and transparent council we have ever had. If the cost for that is an occasional quick ban that maybe could’ve been a suspect, that is so completely worth it. It’s hard to imagine any way that the council could have navigated the incredibly messy and difficult generation they’ve been given. This is not a normal generation. We are in what is literally the most power crept generation with a mechanic just balanced enough to not be quick banned, but just bannable enough that it pushes like 30 mons into potentially broken territory. Outlining tiering policy is more difficult now than ever, and that should be acknowledged in the discussion.
Would I have banned volc myself? Eh, probably not. Was this some hugely unprecedented crazy surprising move? Absolutely not. People have been talking about Volc being problematic for like 6 months at this point. Whether you think it should have been banned or not based on survey responses is one thing but this is not some shocking decision with no warning. Maybe you think some things are more broken, that’s fine, but it’s not like they banned some balanced mon out of nowhere.
Maybe it could’ve been a suspect, but between power creep dumping in such a HUGE amount of new broken mons and tera enabling so many pre-existing mons to be so strong AND new batches of strong mons being added every few months, it’s truly difficult to imagine a version of events where every possibly broken mon gets a suspect. Even with reduced suspect test durations and very aggressive and consistent tiering action, there’s still been a large amount of possibly broken/ suspectible mons in the meta. It’s been that way since day 1, and in a world where tera exists that is simply just going to be how the meta is. If not for these aggressive QBs then gen 9 would be 90% suspect test. Until or unless tera gets banned, we’re just going to be swimming around with like a dozen mons that maybe could just be banned.
The council is gonna retest tera soonish. They’re gonna test/retest a bunch of other things after that. Then DLC 1 is going to make the meta insane again. Repeat cycle. This is both the most difficult generation to tier well and the best, most proactive and transparent council we have ever had. If the cost for that is an occasional quick ban that maybe could’ve been a suspect, that is so completely worth it. It’s hard to imagine any way that the council could have navigated the incredibly messy and difficult generation they’ve been given. This is not a normal generation. We are in what is literally the most power crept generation with a mechanic just balanced enough to not be quick banned, but just bannable enough that it pushes like 30 mons into potentially broken territory. Outlining tiering policy is more difficult now than ever, and that should be acknowledged in the discussion.
I think you're thinking about precedent in the wrong way here. It might not have broken tiering precedent but at no other point has a Pokemon who averaged at a 3.0 on the tiering survey for action been quickbanned, let alone unanimously. Volcarona wasn't even on the survey at all - I know there was fifty write ins about it but there was four times many as that for tera, which wasn't even voted on (and for what it's worth, absolutely should be determined by public suspect anyways).
If we were quickbanning anything that at one point had more support for a suspect than Urshifu did on this last survey, we would have also banned Gholdengo, Garganacl, Kingambit, Sneasler, and Zama-H (and, granted, Volcarona). but none of those ever recieved a ban slate outside of very early meta or so much as a test (currently, I'm aware there's a Zama test in the pipeline). That's what makes it feel unprecedented to a lot of people, is that the tiering survey has usually served as a stringent guideline for quickbans. To go from saying Garganacl, who at one point had a qualified number of 3.29, was "well behind support for other suspects and bans" and simply "being monitored", to unanimously banning a Pokemon with less than that does feel kind of unprecedented, even if it doesn't actually break tiering precedent.
Even if the post had been like "we're quickbanning these two but immediately testing them from ubers so we can do tours without them but still have a proper suspect" the council wouldn't be getting anywhere near this much pushback. Ubers did exactly that with caly-s, a Pokemon with a legitimate chance of seeing a 100% ban vote and which is so much further above the rest of its tier than rs and volc are combined here. Even if they both end up getting banned it would be much more in line with the survey results and probably quiet most of this.
Lastly, take care of yourself! This must be incredibly draining for you. Go for a walk or something and try and clear your head. Your commitment to responding is admirable but don't let it come to the point of genuine stress.
If Zamazenta gets the boot, would it be possible to retest it if the dlc introduced the perfect counter or would it stay banned because having to run a certain mon isn’t good? Like shouldnt skeledirge and dondozo wall it? Is the issue being forced to run a specific mon as counterplay? Seems the issue is that forcing a person to use a mon is not good despite the fact that a standard team normally has at least one mon that is on most other teams. I think the issue is not that Zamazenta is unbeatable, but that it would force you to run certain mons. It’s also not like these mons are only used to beat zam, i mean they are pretty good even without zam. There is probably examples of mons that only gets beaten by certain pokemon, but what makes zamazenta different?
Man, has this been one hell of a generation -- and it's only getting started. At the end of it all I think I'll just make a wall of text somewhere explaining the chaos that is Paldea. Because:
- We had bans going left and right (many of which are needed I don't need a world with Flutter Mane)
- People are mad about the tiering action (or were mad previously, but we're beyond that. Also, this is just inevitable people get mad over tiering action a lot)
And just general power creep. GF has no boundaries when making pokemon -- only design philosophies. I HOPE with every fiber in my soul that we find the AV Toxapex of the WCoP. Or in other words, a niche meta development that was actually important for the tier. Black & White be damned with the meta now. The only thing stopping it is the eventual DLC releasing even more cracked things
All that being said, I haven't played too many games yet. Gonna play this tier and share my thoughts on it sometime next week.
- We had bans going left and right (many of which are needed I don't need a world with Flutter Mane)
- People are mad about the tiering action (or were mad previously, but we're beyond that. Also, this is just inevitable people get mad over tiering action a lot)
And just general power creep. GF has no boundaries when making pokemon -- only design philosophies. I HOPE with every fiber in my soul that we find the AV Toxapex of the WCoP. Or in other words, a niche meta development that was actually important for the tier. Black & White be damned with the meta now. The only thing stopping it is the eventual DLC releasing even more cracked things
All that being said, I haven't played too many games yet. Gonna play this tier and share my thoughts on it sometime next week.
Urshifu & Volc are borderline for me. Probably wouldn't have QB'd them but certainly understand the decision. They were managable, but you had to tread on eggshells constantly to keep them in check. Either way, with Zamazena-C, Eleki, Magearna and Pao gone, I think the meta will finally begin to settle. Nothings overtly broken anymore so I'm curious to see where the meta ends up in the immediate future.
Side note, Finch's comment about the how smogon had a history of being fairly privatlely run has gotten me interested in the history of Smogon Leadership. Does anyone have an idea where I could find resources about a history of how smogon was run, and the people in charge & changing attitudes of things such as surveys, suspects & QB?
Side note, Finch's comment about the how smogon had a history of being fairly privatlely run has gotten me interested in the history of Smogon Leadership. Does anyone have an idea where I could find resources about a history of how smogon was run, and the people in charge & changing attitudes of things such as surveys, suspects & QB?
Since it has been brought up, I just wanted to agree with Vert's Post. What's the point of the community doing a survey? If decisions like these are going to happen. What I will say is that the timing of all this is what messed everything up. We had a 6-3 vote within' the council which resulted 
and 
staying in OU. Surely after, the survey was given to us to gather feedback of the meta. And finally we had an emergency voting just to fix the previous situations of Pao and Crowned in OU. What I am trying to say is that survey should have been withhold until the council made a decision on Pao and Crowned. At best if they wanted to keep the results, we should have been giving a second survey after the bans if anything. 
Based on the results, it's hard to justify a QB on
(2.66 overall and a 3) and 
while 
(was around a 3.7 on both metrics) gets a suspect test. While has received a good amount of "written-in mentions" we still don't have the actually numbers to warrant a QB. Both Shifu-R and Moth have never been banned from OU as well.
While the council made the decision to QB both Mons due to an unanimous decision, they should have taking account of the survey from the community as well. We should have been given a suspect test to determine the fate of Urshifu-R and Volcarona.
and staying in OU. Surely after, the survey was given to us to gather feedback of the meta. And finally we had an emergency voting just to fix the previous situations of Pao and Crowned in OU. What I am trying to say is that survey should have been withhold until the council made a decision on Pao and Crowned. At best if they wanted to keep the results, we should have been giving a second survey after the bans if anything. Based on the results, it's hard to justify a QB on
(2.66 overall and a 3) and while (was around a 3.7 on both metrics) gets a suspect test. While has received a good amount of "written-in mentions" we still don't have the actually numbers to warrant a QB. Both Shifu-R and Moth have never been banned from OU as well.While the council made the decision to QB both Mons due to an unanimous decision, they should have taking account of the survey from the community as well. We should have been given a suspect test to determine the fate of Urshifu-R and Volcarona.
Last edited:
RE: Surveys,
The OU tiering surveys are something we introduced last generation and I have championed during my tenure as TL. They did not exist for the entire history of Smogon prior, but I found it most appropriate to have a regular feature after TDK introduced it, so I made them often.
So far this generation, we had a good trend going:
Then, we had the quickbans on Regieleki and Magearna. The second quickban only being Magearna made a lot of people mad at the process and results, so we changed the vote threshold upon community prompting here. Given this, it felt appropriate to hold a community survey to see if we should vote again sooner than anticipated. I put up another survey before Magearna was even banned on PS to see if another emergency vote was needed like we had on Regieleki the week prior, and sure enough, it was. We banned Chien-Pao and Zamazenta-Crowned.
Prior to this weekend's vote, we had 3 big bans (Magearna, Chien-Pao, and Zamazenta-Crowned) implemented on PS since a good portion of the survey results went up. Given this, the survey's purpose was to focus on the potential for an emergency vote, which we did imply. It feels inappropriate to use responses from a metagame that is multiple bans dated to dictate the radar or the proceeding vote, so we did not.
To me, the issue seems like the fact that this was not communicated sufficiently on my end, for which I apologize as I have had a very busy week, and we need to adjust our tiering process surrounding releases, for which I created a thread on here and have been reading every post possible here. The Volcarona ban half of the council posted their thoughts on prior and it was included in the radar, so I think the effort was good, but the overall logistics could have been better.
I find it unfair for people to say we ignore surveys or just do what we want given the track record I outlined above surveys have quite literally had more say than either tier leader so far this generation, and it's not particularly close. Community input drives OU and will continue to do so. I do think there is room for improvement though; sudden releases like HOME are unprecedented and finding the right pace and process has been very challenging, but more experience will help and input guide us moving forward. Personally I want to try some type of ongoing/rolling survey during release periods where people can respond intermittently and we can collect data as it goes -- may be too idealistic, may end up just as weekly surveys instead of monthly, or may be somewhere in-between, but we have been and will continue to be committed to both using community data and improving our processes.
The OU tiering surveys are something we introduced last generation and I have championed during my tenure as TL. They did not exist for the entire history of Smogon prior, but I found it most appropriate to have a regular feature after TDK introduced it, so I made them often.
So far this generation, we had a good trend going:
- Terastallization had survey support, so it got suspected
- Chien-Pao had survey support, so it got suspected
- Espathra got overwhelming survey support, so it got quickbanned
- Garganacl/Volcarona/Shed Tail received middling support that was all about equal and HOME dates were coming up, so we waited
- Shed Tail (month later) got overwhelming survey support, so it got quickbanned
Then, we had the quickbans on Regieleki and Magearna. The second quickban only being Magearna made a lot of people mad at the process and results, so we changed the vote threshold upon community prompting here. Given this, it felt appropriate to hold a community survey to see if we should vote again sooner than anticipated. I put up another survey before Magearna was even banned on PS to see if another emergency vote was needed like we had on Regieleki the week prior, and sure enough, it was. We banned Chien-Pao and Zamazenta-Crowned.
Prior to this weekend's vote, we had 3 big bans (Magearna, Chien-Pao, and Zamazenta-Crowned) implemented on PS since a good portion of the survey results went up. Given this, the survey's purpose was to focus on the potential for an emergency vote, which we did imply. It feels inappropriate to use responses from a metagame that is multiple bans dated to dictate the radar or the proceeding vote, so we did not.
To me, the issue seems like the fact that this was not communicated sufficiently on my end, for which I apologize as I have had a very busy week, and we need to adjust our tiering process surrounding releases, for which I created a thread on here and have been reading every post possible here. The Volcarona ban half of the council posted their thoughts on prior and it was included in the radar, so I think the effort was good, but the overall logistics could have been better.
I find it unfair for people to say we ignore surveys or just do what we want given the track record I outlined above surveys have quite literally had more say than either tier leader so far this generation, and it's not particularly close. Community input drives OU and will continue to do so. I do think there is room for improvement though; sudden releases like HOME are unprecedented and finding the right pace and process has been very challenging, but more experience will help and input guide us moving forward. Personally I want to try some type of ongoing/rolling survey during release periods where people can respond intermittently and we can collect data as it goes -- may be too idealistic, may end up just as weekly surveys instead of monthly, or may be somewhere in-between, but we have been and will continue to be committed to both using community data and improving our processes.
I believe that this is the cause for the issue that most people have, or at least one of the big issues regarding the QuickBan. It has been honestly a very good change regarding the implementation of surveys, as they allow for a lot of community input. The issue I feel most people have is that while Most if not All of the previous bans have been either backed up by unanimous consensus from the wider community or popular vote thru suspect tests/surveys, the sudden lack of either of these for the Volcarona QuickBan leaves a lot to be desired. The track record is good in the past, but this falls away from the track record, for the worse.
I definitely agree with you here:
The main problem that I and others have is that not only has the Council appeared to forgo this trend for the Volcarona QuickBan, it also happened to do it for one of the more appreciated & used mons in the tier. Volcarona was definitely a sizeable factor in the SVOU metagame (#17 in usage) and people would be rightfully surprised and even dismayed that such a well-recognized OU mainstay would be Quickbanned with such meager input from the community. 50 write-ins is obviously decent amount, but I don't feel that's anywhere NEAR quickban-worthy. (See Terastalize 200+)
I wouldn't blame the communication issue solely on you, Finchinator. I feel a lot of people underestimated how strongly the council felt about Volcarona (I know I did) and thus didn't expect it to be Quickbanned. I personally was predicting a suspect test.
Lastly, I and many others appreciate the work that the OU council does for the game as a whole. However, I feel that is important to recognize the majority general community consensus on these recent events is disagreement, and that something needs to be done. Whether that something is suspecting Volc and Urshifu, reaffirming the decision (and establishing the finality of the OU council's word) or something in between is up to the council. I wish you good luck and good judgment, as now, I will perform an action rarely seen from Smogon Users: Taking a shower.
Good night, all.
Okay, my last post was probably way too snarky but if you're gonna delete it can you at least answer the question myself and others have posed?
The surveys have been a wonderful addition and you've done well following them up to this point, but why is this quickban slate so at odds with what the survey actually suggested should happen?
Why were these "middling support" but when Urshifu-R received less ban support than either of these did in its survey it ended up on a QB slate and was banned unanimously?
The surveys have been a wonderful addition and you've done well following them up to this point, but why is this quickban slate so at odds with what the survey actually suggested should happen?
Last edited:
Holy shit y'all quickbanned Volcarona? Hahaha oh no!
I ain't reading back 10+ pages of text, but of course people be mad. Quickbans are for Pokemon who are immediately obviously broken. Volcarona was in OU for 6+ months this generation. Nothing has changed for it after Home was released. If something sat in OU for that long with no mechanics change, you can't ban it without a vote.
I ain't reading back 10+ pages of text, but of course people be mad. Quickbans are for Pokemon who are immediately obviously broken. Volcarona was in OU for 6+ months this generation. Nothing has changed for it after Home was released. If something sat in OU for that long with no mechanics change, you can't ban it without a vote.
Then why quickban it if it wasnt even in the most recent survey, and was only notable for receiving a full quarter of the suggestions tera got? Its clear that the fervor is recent and unwarranting of such rapid and drastic measures, when the only indication of such was a couple of teasing posts from the council on high, oh graceful they be?
It is illogical that the most recent results we have on Volc were so long ago, yet only now is action being taken so suddenly.
I do appreciate the speed at which shit is removed, but with how much is being removed, it makes me ask if we are removing broken, or kneecapping the power level of the meta. After all, many have said that volc was one of the best checks to Valiant, so who knows what repercussions this may have down the line.
After reading through 10 pages of incoherent screaming, I think it's time I add what I hope is my slightly more coherent screaming on all the random shit being said
"Volc didn't deserve a QB"
I think this isn't an unreasonable point, since volc definetely does not match up to what is generally considered the agreed threshold of brokenness for a QB, but council was put in a very awkward situation here of A. WCoP is coming up and yes, it is a reasonable move that I've seen before in other tiers to QB a mon for a tour and then suspect it down as soon as possible. Tour do matter, especially the biggest tour in Smogon, and it would be extremely bad for Smogon and the tour players if the tour was allowed to take place in a broken meta.However, there also is the problem that a volc suspect would delay further tiering action (remember how chi-yu's ban got delayed by a month during the tera suspect?), which would also suck. Unless you do believe Volc is balanced, there was no good way to handle this, and I think the Council did the best they could.
"Council is ignoring the general playerbase"
I don't think this is entirely fair because A. volc has been a complained about mon for basically the entire generation (and the 3 generations before it,) and B. Smogon explicitly caters to the most competitive play. Casual play, while given some conderation, have always explicitly been secondary, hence why garganacl has never been tested. Also, it's really funny to see people trying to use irl political theory to dictate Smogon tiering policy.
"Finch is gaslight/gatekeep/girlbossing the thread"
I... what? The evidence here seems to be A. People being nice to finch??????? and B. Finch complaining about gettting hate on their own twitter account. Truly one of the takes of all time
"Volc didn't deserve a QB"
I think this isn't an unreasonable point, since volc definetely does not match up to what is generally considered the agreed threshold of brokenness for a QB, but council was put in a very awkward situation here of A. WCoP is coming up and yes, it is a reasonable move that I've seen before in other tiers to QB a mon for a tour and then suspect it down as soon as possible. Tour do matter, especially the biggest tour in Smogon, and it would be extremely bad for Smogon and the tour players if the tour was allowed to take place in a broken meta.However, there also is the problem that a volc suspect would delay further tiering action (remember how chi-yu's ban got delayed by a month during the tera suspect?), which would also suck. Unless you do believe Volc is balanced, there was no good way to handle this, and I think the Council did the best they could.
"Council is ignoring the general playerbase"
I don't think this is entirely fair because A. volc has been a complained about mon for basically the entire generation (and the 3 generations before it,) and B. Smogon explicitly caters to the most competitive play. Casual play, while given some conderation, have always explicitly been secondary, hence why garganacl has never been tested. Also, it's really funny to see people trying to use irl political theory to dictate Smogon tiering policy.
"Finch is gaslight/gatekeep/girlbossing the thread"
I... what? The evidence here seems to be A. People being nice to finch??????? and B. Finch complaining about gettting hate on their own twitter account. Truly one of the takes of all time
And shed tail was allowed for pretty much the entirety of SPL? And Esparthra for a few weeks too? council aren’t doing it for tournament reasons if shed tail and esparthra was literally allowed during one of the most important tours as well…
I’d argue that council does listen to most of the playerbase and they try to accomodate for that, however the issue is because of this top players opinions are being invalidated? If 80% of 1300-1600 claim that volc is broken and needs a quickban then so be it but if literally every high ladder player wants a suspect to gauge the opinions of good players that hits reqs it would be a lot better wouldn’t it? Not to mention that many players are just sheep from what I’ve seen tbh; someone says dire claw is op and now the whole community is being brainwashed into SNEASLER getting put on the radar LOLOLOL when the mon is B tier at best
As someone helping prep teams for OCE in WCOP this ban is literally very inconvenient because the banning of volc which is a HO staple and Shifu which is used in many different archetypes such as balance and screens makes team building and stuff for WCOP, as well as the meta that the WCOP players will be playing in for the first few weeks, extremely unbalanced and hard to prep for.
Having 2 very staple mons in the meta game suddenly quickbanned before WCOP is imo a lot worse than keeping them, since they are no where close to the Regieleki or Magearna level of OP. It should be fine to play a WCOP with these mons in it if broken shed tail and esparthra did not fuck with SPL
He’s entitled to express how he feels. And that's the perfect platform to do it. Me personally, I don't have a problem with it.
Hopefully in the coming weeks, we'll get another survey to voice our opinions and maybe get a retest down the line. :)
Man, I just really hate the gen 9 meta. The top mons feels barely uncheckable, Tera makes everything coinflips, removes counterplay, and makes it so nothing can ever truly counter anything because they can just use a different Tera, which is why the meta is so chaotic right now. This, plus the fact that Gamefreak gave us about 50 balance breakers to make pure stall and balance unviable makes me, as a balance player, just sad. I doubt any bans will happen that will really fix the shitstorm. Tera ban would help a lot but at this point I doubt that'll happen. I really can't play this meta anymore.
Specs V. Garg. (Landorus-Therian) @ Choice Specs
Ability: Intimidate
Tera Type: Grass
EVs: 4 Def / 252 SpA / 252 Spe
Modest Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Earth Power
- Psychic
- Sludge Bomb
- Tera Blast
Y'know, im warming up to Landorus. Who knew it could nab the gargs. The grass is because the water garg is the most common, so ive heard.
Ability: Intimidate
Tera Type: Grass
EVs: 4 Def / 252 SpA / 252 Spe
Modest Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Earth Power
- Psychic
- Sludge Bomb
- Tera Blast
Y'know, im warming up to Landorus. Who knew it could nab the gargs. The grass is because the water garg is the most common, so ive heard.
- Status