I highly doubt any type of entry hazard is banned. Personally lean towards doing nothing right now and we can always discuss Ghold if it becomes an issue, which it doesn’t feel to be right now
-
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 v4 [Gouging Fire is banned]
- Thread starter TPP
- Start date
The Meta I just think is in a tricky position where, as noted, the concern is less overtly broken stuff than threat saturation. Gouging Fire sentiment is shifting to, if not a DNB, at the very least is less of the slam dunk its 4.1 Survey Score would have suggested, with a decent amount of counterplay options being discussed in the thread. It might be easier to account for if so many of its best checks weren't heavily burdened glues like Tusk or stuff that it has teammates to prey on like Raging Bolt or Ogerpon-W exploiting bulky Waters while being extremely relevant offensive threats themselves.
I think the main issue is that no threat sticks out as something the community can agree should be banned, but having this many really powerful threats to account for means experimentation happens around whatever is trending high moreso than itself finding new ideas for their own sake. GF, RB, and Ogerpon-W might all be pretty fine mons in their own right, but it can feel constraining needing a team to deal with all 3 at once.
I think the main issue is that no threat sticks out as something the community can agree should be banned, but having this many really powerful threats to account for means experimentation happens around whatever is trending high moreso than itself finding new ideas for their own sake. GF, RB, and Ogerpon-W might all be pretty fine mons in their own right, but it can feel constraining needing a team to deal with all 3 at once.
to greener pastures, i suppose. i don't really see much reason to stick to current gen ou if no one can agree on what to do to balance it, or what balance even is. the only thing virtually everyone seems to agree on is that the current tier is not good, but people have fundamentally incompatible visions of what a good tier is and how to build it. the only feasible way to lower the power level of the tier to an acceptable point would be kokoloko and that got shot down by the community (including myself) before anyone realized just how bad the threat saturation and community indecision was. unfortunately, the most likely future i can see is a series of surveys with the competitive and fun scores steadily going down but nothing getting acted on. the best move right now, i think, is to see whether other tiers and oms have anything worthwhile to offer
Last edited:
I can agree that dealing with Gholdengo as pokemon is no problem. It’s easy to kill and manageable on the defensive side. The issue lies with its contribution to the hazard control problem. Without Golden Joe, Defog would actually be viable in OU thus giving us more tools to fight against hazards. Who knows we could even see some niche picks outside of OU see some usage for their ability to Defog.
If we are being real the problem with defog in this metagame isn't really gholdengo, but the defoggers themselves imo. they just don't offer a whole lot in a meta where role compression is crucial and every mon does so many things, and i don't think we would see a significant rise in defoggers (besides on stall) even if ghold was banned.
It isn't.
Cheryl.
Celesteela is Life
Nah, that discussion would just lead to the same circle of arguments that have been regurgitated over the past year and have ultimately lead to nothing. Especially in this era of indecisiveness and division in the community, there is literally 0 chance anything would come out of another Tera discussion.
In my personal opinion if Gholdengo wasnt in Gen 9 we wouldn’t be having this discourse of not being able to remove hazards. The only other ghost to block rapid spin in OU is dragapult after all. Imo if Good as Gold wasnt an ability we would have defog usage.
my friends, i invite you to gaze into my crystal ball and see the future of the sv ou tera suspect. the mystical spirits have revealed four separate outcomes to me:
- a tera suspect is held, with the only options being "ban" and "no ban". in line with the last two surveys, "ban" loses in a landslide, and tera remains unrestricted for the rest of the gen
- a tera suspect is held, with the options being a ranked-choice vote between "tera ban", "tera blast ban", and "no ban". (no other restriction option has enough support to include in the suspect, so they don't bother splitting it up into "action" and "no action" like last time.) "no ban" voters, who make up approximately half of the voterbase according to the last two surveys, overwhelmingly rank "ban" last. "ban" voters are split between ranking "no ban" last (seeing any restriction as better than nothing) or ranking "tera blast ban" last (seeing anything besides a full ban as a half-measure that solves nothing). "tera blast ban" voters are similarly split, with some ranking "ban" last (preferring to preserve the mechanic even at the cost of keeping tera blast) and some ranking "no ban" last (preferring to have something happen to tera blast even at the cost of losing the rest of the mechanic). "no ban" gets a plurality, with "tera blast ban" a close-ish second and "ban" trailing behind in third. as no restriction option wins a supermajority, nothing happens, and tera remains unrestricted for the rest of the gen
- a tera blast suspect is held, either after the results of the tera suspect in option 2 or after recognition that a full ban is very unlikely. the "no action" camp all votes dnb, while the "full ban" camp is split between ban ("it's better than nothing") and dnb ("it doesn't solve the real problem"). "ban" fails to even reach a majority, and tera remains unrestricted for the rest of the gen
- no suspect is held due to the "action" side consistently floundering in surveys, and tera remains unrestricted for the rest of the gen
the two viable spinners, one of which is niche (treads), both pose significant risk to gholdengo, hampering its ability to effectively spinblock them
they would also be the only two viable spinners in a post-ghold meta, as all the other spinners have crippling flaws that the absence of gholdengo cannot overcome
the only true beneficiary of a gholdengo ban in terms of the hazards would be corviknight - that’s it. we wouldn’t have good defoggers taking root in the meta because they do not exist.
that would leave us with one means of removal central to the metagame (tusk), and two that are peripheral, rather than what we have now being one central & one peripheral. not much of a difference at all
once again, the issue is not gholdengo. shit is a red herring. it is the discrepancy between ease of setting hazards & prevention/removal, due to the imbalanced nature of hazards/removal distribution this gen - especially when considered numerically & functionally
The time when there was significant interest in a Tera suspect is long gone. Most of the people who want one either don't play SV anymore or can't get reqs, so there likely won't even be a Tera Blast suspect as the unrestricted Tera camp has fully won out.
I would say that there are two broad categories for getting rid of hazards.
1. Hazard deterrence. These don't directly get rid of hazards, but there existence deters people from setting them up. The two prime examples of this are cinderace and hatterene, though any mon that can come in easily on hazard setters and threaten the opposing team with big damage/setup sweep. can be included in this category. This is your ursaluna's/choice users/volcs. I could also include defiant, competitive and contrary mons on this list if we are talking about sticky webs.
2. Hazard removal. These directly remove hazard by getting them fully off the field regardless of how many hazards are on either sides of the field. This can be further divided into rapid spinners (and mortal spin), defoggers and tidy up users. All of these have different levels of reliability depending on the opposing team, though tidy up is the most reliable in my opinion.
A team can have one of these methods, but not the other, though you can get away with having neither if you have many HDB users. I would recommend both methods should be on a team.
1. Hazard deterrence. These don't directly get rid of hazards, but there existence deters people from setting them up. The two prime examples of this are cinderace and hatterene, though any mon that can come in easily on hazard setters and threaten the opposing team with big damage/setup sweep. can be included in this category. This is your ursaluna's/choice users/volcs. I could also include defiant, competitive and contrary mons on this list if we are talking about sticky webs.
2. Hazard removal. These directly remove hazard by getting them fully off the field regardless of how many hazards are on either sides of the field. This can be further divided into rapid spinners (and mortal spin), defoggers and tidy up users. All of these have different levels of reliability depending on the opposing team, though tidy up is the most reliable in my opinion.
A team can have one of these methods, but not the other, though you can get away with having neither if you have many HDB users. I would recommend both methods should be on a team.
Last edited:
Yes, but in practice it's not that bad here. Ghold cannot easily switch in on Earth Power without Air Balloon, which Glimm often runs. Even switching into Glimm is often risking the Air Balloon which it might need for other threats. Also, Ghold usage isn't nearly as high as it used to be. Many hazard stack teams don't even run it because you can just hit things hard.
Also, any Steel type in the tier can spin block Glimm just like any Ghost can spin block other spinners. It's not a unique trait to Ghold. I know some people feel that it's ridiculous on top of all the other blocking it already does, but it's really not that much of a difference in practice.
The biggest thing that limits Glimmora as an anti-hazard option by itself is the fact that many of its sets are suicide leads or other sets that aren't exactly meant for longevity. But it is useful as a T-spikes absorber as well in mirror matchups or in general. In testing, I have found that Mortal Spin Glimmora + one other thing like Tusk, Hatt, or Cinderace was generally enough to deal with most hazard situations for most teammates. At least on non-stall teams. I don't play stall much. The point is it's a decent removal option. Maybe other people have different experiences?
F: Ban Heavy Duty Boots. Kids have it too easy these days, we need to get back to early gens when you had two or three viable Rapid Spinners and no Defog. Suffering builds character.
:insert grumpy old man from Up:
Heavy Duty Boots are doing some heavy duty lifting, but we've seen a lot of variety in ways to deal with hazards; everything from bringing Defog anyway, to HO maintaining pressure and never allowing hazards to go up, to Hatterene and Cinderace making them a risk to set, to the old Superman archetypes coming back, to a couple excellent Rapid Spinners, to alternatives like Mortal Spin and Tidy Up. I would not be surprised if some madlad started using Torkoal as a rapid spinner on a semi-sun team and made it work.
Yes, hazard stack has not been this strong and this common in, literally, well over a decade, but that doesn't mean hazards need to be nerfed. Counterplay options exist, and "I don't like it" is not a valid reason to ban things.
Please show me this mass of defoggers that isn't "Corviknight now gets 25% usage," because I'm just not seeing it. Mandibuzz is a fine mon in OU already, though really limited only to more defensive teams, but other options are flawed: Scizor hasn't kept up with power creep and defog alone wouldn't justify it, Talonflame has a niche on stall but Gholdengo already doesn't want to switch in, and Weezing-Galar can already run Neutralizing Gas to defog on Gholdengo, so it'd just be the Levitate sets that gain.
I don't think he'd be too viable but I feel like Quaquaval is a mon that's definitely held back from Rapid Spinning by an inability to break through Gholdengo sufficiently enough to deter blocking a Spin.
Levitate vs NG would probably not even be a question, for Defog sets or otherwise, if Gholdengo wasn't a thing Weezing had to consider both blocking Defog and taking free turns off it. It'd still be a C Tier, maybe B- at most optimistic with some other meta shifts, but I am reasonably confident that Gholdengo presense is a massive weight on it
I do think it is underselling Weezing a bit to say it'd be "just" the Levitate sets that gain from Gholdengo's removal, given it's a losing match-up that Weezing retreats from even after the Defog. NG isn't nearly as valuable as the Ground Immunity AND SR-neutral Spikes immunity without Boots for the two niches of Hazard Removal and a Physical check to several Mons, hardwalling Great Tusk as either a setter or an Offensive mon and being able to outrun and burn Adamant Kingambit late game, for example.
Levitate vs NG would probably not even be a question, for Defog sets or otherwise, if Gholdengo wasn't a thing Weezing had to consider both blocking Defog and taking free turns off it. It'd still be a C Tier, maybe B- at most optimistic with some other meta shifts, but I am reasonably confident that Gholdengo presense is a massive weight on it
luckie
unluckiest player
Hard agree, mainly because I'm basically the former. SV is fun to watch but Tera (in addition to the questionable at best balancing on Gamefreak's part) makes it frustrating to play and I don't really want to spoil the fun of the people who do find it enjoyable, especially when people who want the ban are either far and few in between or are extremely silent. I do like keeping up with what happens though, SV is definitely the OU of all time lmao
Last edited:
Quaq does have knock off, which is scary for ghold as it 2hit ko's it, meaning that it can't switch in easily. A simple set of rapid spin, aqua step cc(or low kick if you are me to destroy incoming bolt's with tera grass) and knock could be good. Quaq definetely is great, and just feels underexplored a bit.
Geezing would become better, that is true, but it wouldn't be by a lot. It can deal amazingly well with tusk, but its main issue is that is has to rely on pain split to have recovery, which is not good. Sure, it can run lefties over HDB unlike other defensive mons, but that's not enough. Neutralising gas also helps dealing with garg and other annoying mons that rely on their abilities, so NG would still be considered sometimes, though it would be more of a fringe choice (sad that misty surge will never be used).
Ghold's removal from the metagame would make the hazard metagame better, that is true, but it would not be to a significant degree. Only corv and geezing would benefit, and geezing still has problems outside of ghold.
Well you don't "beat" Gholdengo" straight up with NG. That's never been the point. The point is you can Defog without caring about it switching into to you. This is a direct counter to Ghold's removal blocking. Who cares if it retreats after it cleared the hazards and did it's job? Also, you could run a fire move to catch Ghold on the switch if it was really that important to you.
The other main niche NG has is countering Gliscor passive healing and Regenerator mons. This is arguably the most important one.
There are also several other obscure benefits like countering weather or grassy terrain situationally. You probably don't run it for that, and it tends to be highly situational, but it's nice when you have it in the right spot.
This is true of offensive Gholdengo, but defensive doesn't really fear anything from an unboosted Quaq once its item is gone (which can happen even without Knock Off given its commonly Balloon)
252 Atk Quaquaval Knock Off (97.5 BP) vs. 252 HP / 196+ Def Gholdengo: 158-186 (41.7 - 49.2%) -- guaranteed 3HKO
252 Atk Quaquaval Knock Off vs. 252 HP / 196+ Def Gholdengo: 106-126 (28 - 33.3%) -- 0.1% chance to 3HKO
252 Atk Quaquaval Knock Off (97.5 BP) vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Gholdengo: 210-248 (66.6 - 78.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 Atk Quaquaval Knock Off vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Gholdengo: 140-166 (44.4 - 52.6%) -- 20.7% chance to 2HKO
Knock Off still has benefits I imagine Quaquaval would run it for anyway (besides Item removal it nails Dragapult on a switch in given it'd fear it as a Status setter and, in this case, Spinblocker), but I don't think consistent Gholdengo match-up would be one of them.
Also, try modest scarf kyurem. It is so great outspeeding dragapults that think they can get a quick draco off, but then get pounded by freeze dry. You have to run modest to ohko dragapult though.
252 Atk Quaquaval Knock Off vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Gholdengo: 140-166 (44.4 - 52.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after 1 layer of Spikes
252 SpA Gholdengo Thunderbolt vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Quaquaval: 252-298 (81 - 95.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
Even thunderbolt can't ohko it, which most ghold don't run anyways and the weaker shadow ball is doing 63% max.
If they are defensive, well then they are better against quaq, but they have lost air balloon, meaning something like lando is much better against it.
Quaq is good against ghold with knock off, as only one set actually doesn't fear it too much. And even then, they have to lose an item for that to happen. I think quaq is a consistent ghold matchup.
Sure, but it still can't come in for free, as losing its balloon is already good enough team support. The second serious of calcs shows that ghold can't even try to get sneaky to try to outspeed it as quaq naturally outspeeds it. With a bit of chip, which is going to happen if it doesn't have a balloon, ghold is two hit ko'd.
252 Atk Quaquaval Knock Off vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Gholdengo: 140-166 (44.4 - 52.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after 1 layer of Spikes
252 SpA Gholdengo Thunderbolt vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Quaquaval: 252-298 (81 - 95.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
Even thunderbolt can't ohko it, which most ghold don't run anyways and the weaker shadow ball is doing 63% max.
If they are defensive, well then they are better against quaq, but they have lost air balloon, meaning something like lando is much better against it.
Quaq is good against ghold with knock off, as only one set actually doesn't fear it too much. And even then, they have to lose an item for that to happen. I think quaq is a consistent ghold matchup.
Gholdengo is absolutely the problem. It's relatively fast, has the movepool and stats to beat both good spinners and the typing to invalidate glimmora as a spinner entirely, and blocks defog outside of legitimate memes or talonflame. Gholdengo wasn't busted before hisuian samurott dropped because clicking a hazard in that environment took your turn. Gholdengo, even if it's worse than it was before, is still genuinely insane and is warping the metagame around it because hazard removal isn't real. Gholdengo invalidates all but 1 of the OU hazard removers and cinderace isn't even real hazard removal. I genuinely think if we don't ban Gholdengo now, the legacy playerbase will ban it in like 7 years. Make the metagame better now or we're never going to have a good CGAT gen 9 OU
not to be mean, but reading this feels like you don't even play the tier. You could argue that ghold's presence was overbearing in the previous Hstack meta and i'd completely agree, but as of right now you mostly see ghold on some webs HO. The main reason why removal is scarce right now isn't really because of ghold, but because most of the mons that got it are NOT good. Let's say ghold was to be banned, do you really think glimm would find space as a long term spinner? Or that defoggers would suddenly spike in usage?
Glimm isn't even built like that, it does not have the bulk nor the survivability to be consistent hazard removal, and the mons with defog are just plain bad, they get taken advantage of so so easily.
Similar threads
