Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion v4 [NEW TIERING RESULTS POST 11597]

Has anyone been using or facing off against that stall team with Hydrapple, Gliscor, Blissey, Dondozo, Clodsire, and Alomomola? This team might be the most braindead team I've ever used. Got up to 1500 with it and still climbing with no sign of stopping. I would have never thought that sticky hold would be the preferred ability on hydrapple but a knock off absorber is very important. The only thing I feel like is a major threat is archalodon which clodsire kinda beats. If that gets banned I feel like this team will get spammed on the ladder very hard.
 
Has anyone been using or facing off against that stall team with Hydrapple, Gliscor, Blissey, Dondozo, Clodsire, and Alomomola? This team might be the most braindead team I've ever used. Got up to 1500 with it and still climbing with no sign of stopping. I would have never thought that sticky hold would be the preferred ability on hydrapple but a knock off absorber is very important. The only thing I feel like is a major threat is archalodon which clodsire kinda beats. If that gets banned I feel like this team will get spammed on the ladder very hard.
Yes I have faced it a lot. Another major threat to it is sinistcha, which can set up on blissey or clodsire (you have to tera poison though, but if you strength sap enough, clods bulldozes do less than you heal with lefties.) Then you can pp stall or sweep the entire team.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2053716566
This replay shows how much it can dominate it, and I was quite unlucky with my burns.
 
Yes I have faced it a lot. Another major threat to it is sinistcha, which can set up on blissey or clodsire (you have to tera poison though, but if you strength sap enough, clods bulldozes do less than you heal with lefties.) Then you can pp stall or sweep the entire team.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2053716566
This replay shows how much it can dominate it, and I was quite unlucky with my burns.
One question I ask is why is it recommended to use calm mind on blissey even though it doesn't usually run any special moves? I usually run shadow ball to defeat ghost types. Most opposing calm minders usually run psyshock or stored power so I don't really see a reason to try to match them
 
Also if two of those teams face off against each other and we assume both players don't make any major blunders, is it even possible for either of them to make any progress? All pokemon asside from gliscor have boots and gliscor and hydrapple are perfect knock off absorbers. The only optimal play is to keep switching so you don't use pp
 
One question I ask is why is it recommended to use calm mind on blissey even though it doesn't usually run any special moves? I usually run shadow ball to defeat ghost types. Most opposing calm minders usually run psyshock or stored power so I don't really see a reason to try to match them
Also if two of those teams face off against each other and we assume both players don't make any major blunders, is it even possible for either of them to make any progress? All pokemon asside from gliscor have boots and gliscor and hydrapple are perfect knock off absorbers. The only optimal play is to keep switching so you don't use pp
You use calm mind on blissey so as to not get snowballed by special attackers, it's more for the defense boost than the sp.Attack boost, like how clod on these sets uses amnesia. You can also usually tell which mons run psyshock or stored power and shut them down quicker/chip them with dondozo.
Technically there isn't a lot you can do when facing against one of these opposing teams using it as there isn't a lot to do, the best you could is predict a switch with gliscor and knock off the HDB, but that is going to be rare, so yeah not much to do.
 
What are cores people are using with raging bolt? I've been favoring a core with rillaboom for Terrain + lefties recovery, and I was wondering. It's a really strong mon, and so far the only problematic mon I'm conflicted on whether I'd like gone. If you haven't tried it yet, I highly recommend it, it does have similarities to gambit, but it's more difficult to deal with what checks it game to game, and it needs a boost or 2 without booster to actually secure games.
 
Last edited:
Also if two of those teams face off against each other and we assume both players don't make any major blunders, is it even possible for either of them to make any progress? All pokemon asside from gliscor have boots and gliscor and hydrapple are perfect knock off absorbers. The only optimal play is to keep switching so you don't use pp
Hydrapple stall mirror match is difficult to make progress on. Two experienced players will probably spend a few turns with Mirror Gliscor until they realize they need their PP. But when making switchs, the opposing Gliscor can punish by taking away the item from everything except Hydrapple and poisoning half the team with Poison Jab, where what really matters is Alomomola and Hydrapple.
Terastal Ice Hydrapple must be activated ASAP, Hydrapple has good damage against practically everything that is not Clodsire, but this one, because it has boots, does not have passive item recovery.
Using less IV/Nature Speed on Dondozo and Alomomola helps with a possible Struggle mirror or better control Wish support.
I don't know and I hope to continue not knowing if this would lead to the 1000 turns clause.
 
You do realize you posted another solution to the tera debate: ban tera fairy?

To move things on, wouldn't the Lati appreciate to Stellar as well? I saw Flygon a few pages ago, on this thread, where it got some sun. And I ran a calc vs bulky Dragonite and compared it to Garchomp. To save you some time, its beat but by damage roll percentage. If that make any sense? LOL
Excuse me? All of your "solutions" aren't solutions at all and just scream of "I LOST TO THIS ON LADDER BAN IT". Open tera/team sheet at minimum has precedent from VGC. Also stellar tera sucks ass you don't lose your weaknesses, actually gain a weakness, and the boost to your moves is both one time and weaker so why would lati want it
 
Thanks to the heads up.

My interpretation of Stellar is simple: it's a bug fix for terastallization i.e. it's not a broken mechanic anymore. If only we could have gotten similar for Dynamax.
A Lati would want stellar because it has a Levitate and it would use its original typing two STAB offensively as opposed to exhausting tera on possibly the incorrect Pokemon.
What would Stellar do for Lati in that case? Why not just...stay as it's original two typings?
 
Last edited:
We're working with the assumption a Lati is terastallized and comparing it's drawbacks when compared to a Normal terastallization, such as, say, Poison type. I prefer Stellar because it also hits tera'd Pokemon for chip and the Latis are good exhausts for tera imo. As I mentioned, this is working off the assumption/gameplan a Lati will tera.

Now, Lati isn't OU so as you might have known, Stellar doesn't do anything due to other roadblocks and such. But I do wish I could give you a useful calc to sell it to you better!
I think you fundamentally misunderstand what the stellar tera actually does. It doesn't remove any of the original weaknesses you have (it might actually be good for some defensive pokemon otherwise). What it does is give moves of all types a mediocre 1 time boost and makes tera blast stronger at the cost of lowering your attacking stats (I also think this boost is one time as well but I haven't used stellar enough to know for sure and I'm too lazy to open a new tab). That's it. Stellar Tera doesn't DO anything defensively and the only thing it does offensively is give each of your moves a one time boost and maybe give a weakness to something else that is also running a subpar tera type. Stellar Tera isn't even good for in game raids, what chance did it have in Smogon OU.
 
Think u guys u should def ban archaludon, im not good enough to get reqs for gen9 so ill not partake but its so cringe seeing a rain team maybe every 1 in 3 games with the same thing pelipper arch barra raging bolt then the last gren or kingambit or kingdra l0l not that i have a problem i havnt lost much vs those guys but very diverse meta much waow
 
Think u guys u should def ban archaludon, im not good enough to get reqs for gen9 so ill not partake but its so cringe seeing a rain team maybe every 1 in 3 games with the same thing pelipper arch barra raging bolt then the last gren or kingambit or kingdra l0l not that i have a problem i havnt lost much vs those guys but very diverse meta much waow
There are good arguments to ban Arch, but this one is pretty flawed and subjective. Diversity regardless, my ladder experience has been different from yours: Rain is not uncommon, but definitely not 1 in 3 games, neither in mid, nor in high ladder. People have been ripping teams instead of building their own forever and Rain is undeniably a good team to rip, but that by itself shouldn't be used as an argument for a Ban, only if it proves (and for me it didn't) to be actually broken.

Edit: Also, if usage Stats were to be used as an argument to ban something, then Kingambit should be the target. Mon hit 33% usage last month (which actually is 1 in 3 games) and fits in all kind of structures as a very strong win condition in late game.
 
There are good arguments to ban Arch, but this one is pretty flawed and subjective. Diversity regardless, my ladder experience has been different from yours: Rain is not uncommon, but definitely not 1 in 3 games, neither in mid, nor in high ladder. People have been ripping teams instead of building their own forever and Rain is undeniably a good team to rip, but that by itself shouldn't be used as an argument for a Ban, only if it proves (and for me it didn't) to be actually broken.

Edit: Also, if usage Stats were to be used as an argument to ban something, then Kingambit should be the target. Mon hit 33% usage last month (which actually is 1 in 3 games) and fits in all kind of structures as a very strong win condition in late game.
kingambit should be banned anyway dude is the definition of uncompetitive and will actively end you the moment you tera your fighting type (sometimes by necessity) to deal with something else. I despise him
 
Hello everyone, this post is a little bit off-topic, but I would like to attempt to apply a bit of game theory to the current state of the metagame, particularly when it comes to match-ups in the tournament scene.

For the sake of simplicity, and given that players generally have preferences when it comes to the playstyles they are comfortable with, I will assume a scenario where 2 different players, paired against each other, must choose between the 2 playstyles they are most comfortable with.

Perhaps an approach that bears some similarities with reality could be:


Player 1:

-Grassy Terrain BO
-Rain


Player 2:

-Sun
-Stall

Let´s assume that there is a certain average Win Rate for the 4 possible match-ups, and that both players must play a multitude of rounds, say a Bo5.

Our objective is to determine the Probability Distribution between which playstyle to bring, that maximizes one´ Win Rate, assuming the opponent does the same. Both of the players are rational and have access to information about the average Win Rate for all 4 match-ups.

Consider the following Win Rates from Player 1´s perspective

GTerrain vs Sun - 35%
Gterrain vs Stall - 60%

Rain vs Sun - 70%
Rain vs Stall - 30%

Assuming that there is no possibility of a tie in either of the 4 match-ups, the addition of Player 1´s winrate with Player 2´s winrate for a particular match-up must equal 1.


Now, let´s put ourselves in Player 1´s shoes, if we bring Grassy Terrain, we are favored to win in case Player 2 brings Stall, but probably lose in case they bring Sun. If we bring Rain, we probably lose when Player 2 brings Stall, but probably win when Player 2 brings Sun.

Does this mean the ideal probability distribution is a 50/50?
It would for sure, in case the Win Probabilities were all either 100% or 0%, but in this case there is a slight discrepancy.
Let´s use some math to figure the ideal probability distribution.

In order to do this, we must find a function that describes Player 1´s Win Rate, where the variables are his Probability of Bringing GTerrain, his Probability of bringing Rain, the probability of Player 2 bringing Sun, and the probability of Player 2 bringing Stall.

W = Win Rate

P(G) = Probability of bringing Grassy Terrain
P(R) = Probability of bringing Rain
P(Su) = Probability of Player 2 bringing Sun
P(St) = Probability of Player 2 bringing Stall


Our Win Rate Function is :

W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.35 ) + (P(G) x P(St) x 0.6 ) + (P(R) x P(Su) x 0.7 ) + (P(R) x P(St) x 0.3 )

Confusing? It´s pretty simple actually. This Function consists of a sum of 4 parts. Each part corresponds to a different match-up. The probability of each match-up is the product of the probability of each playstyle, for example, the probability of a Grassy Terrain vs Sun Match-up is the product of the probability of Player 1 bringing Grassy Terrain with the probability of player 2 bringing Sun. After we do this, we can multiply each individual match-up probability with it´s expected Win Rate, sum the obtained values and obtain the final Win Rate.

There are still a few problems, the most notable one, is that this Function still has 4 variables, but worry not, we can get rid of 2 immediately.
How? Well, since Player 1 can either bring Grassy Terrain or Rain, this means that:

P(G) + P(R) =1

or

P(R) = 1- (PG)

The same thing applies to Player 2

P(Su) + P(St) = 1

or

P(St) = 1 - P(Su)

Let´s go back to our Win Rate Function and simplify it!

W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.35 ) + (P(G) x (1-P(Su)) x 0.6 ) + ((1-P(G)) x P(Su) x 0.7 ) + ((1-P(G)) x (1-P(Su))x 0.3 )

After doing some math, this can be simplified to:

W = (-0.65 x P(G) x P(Su)) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1

Alright, so we have simplified our Win Rate Function the most we could, but what does this all mean?

Currently we have a function that describes our Win Rate based on 2 variables, the Probability of us bringing Grassy Terrain, which is under our control, and the probability of Player 2 bringing Sun, which is not. This means that we can not simply calculate the maximum value of the function and claim that this is our maximum possible Win Rate. It would be, in case Player 2 was stupid, but Player 2 is also trying to maximize it´s own Win Rate, meaning we need to do a little bit more work to find our Nash Equilibrium.

Let´s start with calculating Player 2´s own Win Rate Function.

Since Player 2 Wins Whenever Player 1 Loses W2 = 1-W

1-W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.65 ) + (P(G) x (1-P(Su)) x 0.4 ) + ((1-P(G)) x P(Su) x 0.3 ) + ((1-P(G)) x (1-P(Su))x 0.7 )

(=) (After Some Math)

W = (-P(G) x (13/20 P(Su) - 3/10)) + 2/5 P(Su) + 0.3


Now that we have 2 functions that describe Player 1´s Winrate, one directly, and the other via the ammount of times player 2 loses, we can match one to the other:

(-0.65 P(G) P(Su)) -0.4 P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1 = (-P(G) (13/20 P(Su) - 3/10)) + 2/5 P(Su) + 0.3 (=)

P(Su) = (3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G))

This gives us the relation between the Probability of Player 2 bringing Sun in the Nash Equilibrium and the probability of Player 1 bringing Grassy Terrain in the Nash Equilibrium. Now, we can simply substitute P(Su) in the Win Rate Expression to get a one variable functon.


W = (-0.65 x P(G) x P(Su)) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1

(=)

W = (-0.65 x P(G) x ((3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G)))) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 ((3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G))) +1

(=) (After a bit of math)

1707592471541.png


This means we can now find the ideal probability distribution for player 1 by graphing the function!

1707593492337.png


Looking at this graph, and considering the maximum Win Probability is 1, while the Maximum probability of choosing a Grassy Terrain team is 1, we conclude that Player 1 must choose the Grassy Terrain Option, approximately 46% of the time, chosing Rain, the other 54%.

In theory, this probability distribution between the playstyles he should bring maximize his winning chances against Player 2, however, we also conclude that there is some mistake in our calculations, since the Win Probability can not be 1, or 100%, as shown in the graph.

Analysing this result, it seems logical that the probability of bringing Rain is superior to the probability of bringing Grassy Terrain, since the sum of Grassy Terrain´s Win Rates, 35% vs Sun and 60% vs Stall equals 95%, a little bit less than the sum of Rain´s Win Rates, 30% vs Stall and 70% vs Sun equals 100%.

Regardless, I am pretty sure I made some mistake along the way, and it would be really interesting if someone could expand on the subject and perhaps find my mistakes.

I think applying Game Theory to Pokemon is not a waste of time, and it could expand our knowledge about the metagame.

Thanks for Reading!
 
Hello everyone, this post is a little bit off-topic, but I would like to attempt to apply a bit of game theory to the current state of the metagame, particularly when it comes to match-ups in the tournament scene.

For the sake of simplicity, and given that players generally have preferences when it comes to the playstyles they are comfortable with, I will assume a scenario where 2 different players, paired against each other, must choose between the 2 playstyles they are most comfortable with.

Perhaps an approach that bears some similarities with reality could be:


Player 1:

-Grassy Terrain BO
-Rain


Player 2:

-Sun
-Stall

Let´s assume that there is a certain average Win Rate for the 4 possible match-ups, and that both players must play a multitude of rounds, say a Bo5.

Our objective is to determine the Probability Distribution between which playstyle to bring, that maximizes one´ Win Rate, assuming the opponent does the same. Both of the players are rational and have access to information about the average Win Rate for all 4 match-ups.

Consider the following Win Rates from Player 1´s perspective

GTerrain vs Sun - 35%
Gterrain vs Stall - 60%

Rain vs Sun - 70%
Rain vs Stall - 30%

Assuming that there is no possibility of a tie in either of the 4 match-ups, the addition of Player 1´s winrate with Player 2´s winrate for a particular match-up must equal 1.


Now, let´s put ourselves in Player 1´s shoes, if we bring Grassy Terrain, we are favored to win in case Player 2 brings Stall, but probably lose in case they bring Sun. If we bring Rain, we probably lose when Player 2 brings Stall, but probably win when Player 2 brings Sun.

Does this mean the ideal probability distribution is a 50/50?
It would for sure, in case the Win Probabilities were all either 100% or 0%, but in this case there is a slight discrepancy.
Let´s use some math to figure the ideal probability distribution.

In order to do this, we must find a function that describes Player 1´s Win Rate, where the variables are his Probability of Bringing GTerrain, his Probability of bringing Rain, the probability of Player 2 bringing Sun, and the probability of Player 2 bringing Stall.

W = Win Rate

P(G) = Probability of bringing Grassy Terrain
P(R) = Probability of bringing Rain
P(Su) = Probability of Player 2 bringing Sun
P(St) = Probability of Player 2 bringing Stall


Our Win Rate Function is :

W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.35 ) + (P(G) x P(St) x 0.6 ) + (P(R) x P(Su) x 0.7 ) + (P(R) x P(St) x 0.3 )

Confusing? It´s pretty simple actually. This Function consists of a sum of 4 parts. Each part corresponds to a different match-up. The probability of each match-up is the product of the probability of each playstyle, for example, the probability of a Grassy Terrain vs Sun Match-up is the product of the probability of Player 1 bringing Grassy Terrain with the probability of player 2 bringing Sun. After we do this, we can multiply each individual match-up probability with it´s expected Win Rate, sum the obtained values and obtain the final Win Rate.

There are still a few problems, the most notable one, is that this Function still has 4 variables, but worry not, we can get rid of 2 immediately.
How? Well, since Player 1 can either bring Grassy Terrain or Rain, this means that:

P(G) + P(R) =1

or

P(R) = 1- (PG)

The same thing applies to Player 2

P(Su) + P(St) = 1

or

P(St) = 1 - P(Su)

Let´s go back to our Win Rate Function and simplify it!

W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.35 ) + (P(G) x (1-P(Su)) x 0.6 ) + ((1-P(G)) x P(Su) x 0.7 ) + ((1-P(G)) x (1-P(Su))x 0.3 )

After doing some math, this can be simplified to:

W = (-0.65 x P(G) x P(Su)) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1

Alright, so we have simplified our Win Rate Function the most we could, but what does this all mean?

Currently we have a function that describes our Win Rate based on 2 variables, the Probability of us bringing Grassy Terrain, which is under our control, and the probability of Player 2 bringing Sun, which is not. This means that we can not simply calculate the maximum value of the function and claim that this is our maximum possible Win Rate. It would be, in case Player 2 was stupid, but Player 2 is also trying to maximize it´s own Win Rate, meaning we need to do a little bit more work to find our Nash Equilibrium.

Let´s start with calculating Player 2´s own Win Rate Function.

Since Player 2 Wins Whenever Player 1 Loses W2 = 1-W

1-W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.65 ) + (P(G) x (1-P(Su)) x 0.4 ) + ((1-P(G)) x P(Su) x 0.3 ) + ((1-P(G)) x (1-P(Su))x 0.7 )

(=) (After Some Math)

W = (-P(G) x (13/20 P(Su) - 3/10)) + 2/5 P(Su) + 0.3


Now that we have 2 functions that describe Player 1´s Winrate, one directly, and the other via the ammount of times player 2 loses, we can match one to the other:

(-0.65 P(G) P(Su)) -0.4 P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1 = (-P(G) (13/20 P(Su) - 3/10)) + 2/5 P(Su) + 0.3 (=)

P(Su) = (3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G))

This gives us the relation between the Probability of Player 2 bringing Sun in the Nash Equilibrium and the probability of Player 1 bringing Grassy Terrain in the Nash Equilibrium. Now, we can simply substitute P(Su) in the Win Rate Expression to get a one variable functon.


W = (-0.65 x P(G) x P(Su)) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1

(=)

W = (-0.65 x P(G) x ((3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G)))) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 ((3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G))) +1

(=) (After a bit of math)

View attachment 603249

This means we can now find the ideal probability distribution for player 1 by graphing the function!

View attachment 603251

Looking at this graph, and considering the maximum Win Probability is 1, while the Maximum probability of choosing a Grassy Terrain team is 1, we conclude that Player 1 must choose the Grassy Terrain Option, approximately 46% of the time, chosing Rain, the other 54%.

In theory, this probability distribution between the playstyles he should bring maximize his winning chances against Player 2, however, we also conclude that there is some mistake in our calculations, since the Win Probability can not be 1, or 100%, as shown in the graph.

Analysing this result, it seems logical that the probability of bringing Rain is superior to the probability of bringing Grassy Terrain, since the sum of Grassy Terrain´s Win Rates, 35% vs Sun and 60% vs Stall equals 95%, a little bit less than the sum of Rain´s Win Rates, 30% vs Stall and 70% vs Sun equals 100%.

Regardless, I am pretty sure I made some mistake along the way, and it would be really interesting if someone could expand on the subject and perhaps find my mistakes.

I think applying Game Theory to Pokemon is not a waste of time, and it could expand our knowledge about the metagame.

Thanks for Reading!
Nooooooo, save these posts for Team Europe Discord, there is no need to enlighten the forums!
 
Has anyone been using or facing off against that stall team with Hydrapple, Gliscor, Blissey, Dondozo, Clodsire, and Alomomola? This team might be the most braindead team I've ever used. Got up to 1500 with it and still climbing with no sign of stopping. I would have never thought that sticky hold would be the preferred ability on hydrapple but a knock off absorber is very important. The only thing I feel like is a major threat is archalodon which clodsire kinda beats. If that gets banned I feel like this team will get spammed on the ladder very hard.
Yes. D-Speed + Kyurem wrecks it. I've been trying to test D-Speed + other wallbreakers and haven't run into it so far. But most of the few stall games I played seemed to be a favorable matchup.
 

awyp

'Alexa play Ladyfingers by Herb Alpert'
is a Forum Moderatoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Hello everyone, this post is a little bit off-topic, but I would like to attempt to apply a bit of game theory to the current state of the metagame, particularly when it comes to match-ups in the tournament scene.

For the sake of simplicity, and given that players generally have preferences when it comes to the playstyles they are comfortable with, I will assume a scenario where 2 different players, paired against each other, must choose between the 2 playstyles they are most comfortable with.

Perhaps an approach that bears some similarities with reality could be:


Player 1:

-Grassy Terrain BO
-Rain


Player 2:

-Sun
-Stall

Let´s assume that there is a certain average Win Rate for the 4 possible match-ups, and that both players must play a multitude of rounds, say a Bo5.

Our objective is to determine the Probability Distribution between which playstyle to bring, that maximizes one´ Win Rate, assuming the opponent does the same. Both of the players are rational and have access to information about the average Win Rate for all 4 match-ups.

Consider the following Win Rates from Player 1´s perspective

GTerrain vs Sun - 35%
Gterrain vs Stall - 60%

Rain vs Sun - 70%
Rain vs Stall - 30%

Assuming that there is no possibility of a tie in either of the 4 match-ups, the addition of Player 1´s winrate with Player 2´s winrate for a particular match-up must equal 1.


Now, let´s put ourselves in Player 1´s shoes, if we bring Grassy Terrain, we are favored to win in case Player 2 brings Stall, but probably lose in case they bring Sun. If we bring Rain, we probably lose when Player 2 brings Stall, but probably win when Player 2 brings Sun.

Does this mean the ideal probability distribution is a 50/50?
It would for sure, in case the Win Probabilities were all either 100% or 0%, but in this case there is a slight discrepancy.
Let´s use some math to figure the ideal probability distribution.

In order to do this, we must find a function that describes Player 1´s Win Rate, where the variables are his Probability of Bringing GTerrain, his Probability of bringing Rain, the probability of Player 2 bringing Sun, and the probability of Player 2 bringing Stall.

W = Win Rate

P(G) = Probability of bringing Grassy Terrain
P(R) = Probability of bringing Rain
P(Su) = Probability of Player 2 bringing Sun
P(St) = Probability of Player 2 bringing Stall


Our Win Rate Function is :

W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.35 ) + (P(G) x P(St) x 0.6 ) + (P(R) x P(Su) x 0.7 ) + (P(R) x P(St) x 0.3 )

Confusing? It´s pretty simple actually. This Function consists of a sum of 4 parts. Each part corresponds to a different match-up. The probability of each match-up is the product of the probability of each playstyle, for example, the probability of a Grassy Terrain vs Sun Match-up is the product of the probability of Player 1 bringing Grassy Terrain with the probability of player 2 bringing Sun. After we do this, we can multiply each individual match-up probability with it´s expected Win Rate, sum the obtained values and obtain the final Win Rate.

There are still a few problems, the most notable one, is that this Function still has 4 variables, but worry not, we can get rid of 2 immediately.
How? Well, since Player 1 can either bring Grassy Terrain or Rain, this means that:

P(G) + P(R) =1

or

P(R) = 1- (PG)

The same thing applies to Player 2

P(Su) + P(St) = 1

or

P(St) = 1 - P(Su)

Let´s go back to our Win Rate Function and simplify it!

W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.35 ) + (P(G) x (1-P(Su)) x 0.6 ) + ((1-P(G)) x P(Su) x 0.7 ) + ((1-P(G)) x (1-P(Su))x 0.3 )

After doing some math, this can be simplified to:

W = (-0.65 x P(G) x P(Su)) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1

Alright, so we have simplified our Win Rate Function the most we could, but what does this all mean?

Currently we have a function that describes our Win Rate based on 2 variables, the Probability of us bringing Grassy Terrain, which is under our control, and the probability of Player 2 bringing Sun, which is not. This means that we can not simply calculate the maximum value of the function and claim that this is our maximum possible Win Rate. It would be, in case Player 2 was stupid, but Player 2 is also trying to maximize it´s own Win Rate, meaning we need to do a little bit more work to find our Nash Equilibrium.

Let´s start with calculating Player 2´s own Win Rate Function.

Since Player 2 Wins Whenever Player 1 Loses W2 = 1-W

1-W = (P(G) x P(Su) x 0.65 ) + (P(G) x (1-P(Su)) x 0.4 ) + ((1-P(G)) x P(Su) x 0.3 ) + ((1-P(G)) x (1-P(Su))x 0.7 )

(=) (After Some Math)

W = (-P(G) x (13/20 P(Su) - 3/10)) + 2/5 P(Su) + 0.3


Now that we have 2 functions that describe Player 1´s Winrate, one directly, and the other via the ammount of times player 2 loses, we can match one to the other:

(-0.65 P(G) P(Su)) -0.4 P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1 = (-P(G) (13/20 P(Su) - 3/10)) + 2/5 P(Su) + 0.3 (=)

P(Su) = (3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G))

This gives us the relation between the Probability of Player 2 bringing Sun in the Nash Equilibrium and the probability of Player 1 bringing Grassy Terrain in the Nash Equilibrium. Now, we can simply substitute P(Su) in the Win Rate Expression to get a one variable functon.


W = (-0.65 x P(G) x P(Su)) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 P(Su) +1

(=)

W = (-0.65 x P(G) x ((3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G)))) -0.4 x P(G) + 0.4 ((3/10 P(G) -0.1) : (-1/4 + 1/4P(G))) +1

(=) (After a bit of math)

View attachment 603249

This means we can now find the ideal probability distribution for player 1 by graphing the function!

View attachment 603251

Looking at this graph, and considering the maximum Win Probability is 1, while the Maximum probability of choosing a Grassy Terrain team is 1, we conclude that Player 1 must choose the Grassy Terrain Option, approximately 46% of the time, chosing Rain, the other 54%.

In theory, this probability distribution between the playstyles he should bring maximize his winning chances against Player 2, however, we also conclude that there is some mistake in our calculations, since the Win Probability can not be 1, or 100%, as shown in the graph.

Analysing this result, it seems logical that the probability of bringing Rain is superior to the probability of bringing Grassy Terrain, since the sum of Grassy Terrain´s Win Rates, 35% vs Sun and 60% vs Stall equals 95%, a little bit less than the sum of Rain´s Win Rates, 30% vs Stall and 70% vs Sun equals 100%.

Regardless, I am pretty sure I made some mistake along the way, and it would be really interesting if someone could expand on the subject and perhaps find my mistakes.

I think applying Game Theory to Pokemon is not a waste of time, and it could expand our knowledge about the metagame.

Thanks for Reading!
sparknotes version: gen 9 is a matchup fish
 
Also if two of those teams face off against each other and we assume both players don't make any major blunders, is it even possible for either of them to make any progress? All pokemon asside from gliscor have boots and gliscor and hydrapple are perfect knock off absorbers. The only optimal play is to keep switching so you don't use pp
Okay so I hope this answers your question, but the whole point of stall, ESPECIALLY against other stalls or fat teams, is progress making, and thats why they have hazards, and toxic, and knock off. This is because your goal is bit by bit progress play, to position yourself for a win over the course of the game, not just in that singular turn. Against opposing stall teams, if you are trying to win, your goal is to force knock off on their opposing mon(s), and all the while pressuring their knock absorbers, to slowly chip down their progress mons and eventually eliminating them. Its a very nuanced style, and people who call it unskilled clearly don’t play stall, and would rather just complain about another playstyle because they don’t know how to combat it.
 
First, yes. And when they eventually realize that removing individual mons will never fix this tier...
Removing tera wouldn't overwhelmingly improve the tier, the only two mons that are broken because of tera is regieleki and esparthra, and most likely esparthra will be banned again even without tera. It ain't going to happen, people do not want it, so we just have to ban what is broken.

IDK man, looking at the Views From the Council thread, the only consensus we've come to so far is that everything sucks. Nobody can agree on what to do, we got good players on every side of the spectrum suggesting Weather bans, booster energy bans, bans of like 6 different individual pokemon, banning tera, banning tera blast but not tera, nerfing specific teamstyles to maybe get a less matchup-fishy state, etc. People are bringing out previous tiering policy with Soul Dew again for christs sake. It's pretty clear there's nothing to be done that's gonna make even the majority people happy unless you ban like half the tier, a bunch of strategies, and Tera, and then something else will be broken. We've been given a heaping load of bullshit from gamefreak this generation, and trying to balance will always be a fool's errand. My perspective at least for now is we just need a shift in perspective; We're never gonna be able to fully manage it, so why not just embrace it? I know I, at least, have had more fun playing with the broken shit than against it. IDK, maybe it's a stupid, but I wouldn't ban anything (besides arch)
I feel like once we deal with rain (note, arch) and then sun, then the meta might actually be good. While I do want kyurem and moon to be banned, I can barely live with them around, so I can deal with it. It feels like this is the most diverse meta we have had and with the weathers gone, we may go back to the great days of the diverse early DLC2 meta.
 
Man I love Great Tusk. Spins rocks for my Moltres (which I need to support my Hoopa) and beats Gambit lategame or forces tera. Also a goated cleaner after a Rapid Spin.

Great Tusk @ Leftovers
Ability: Protosynthesis
Shiny: Yes
Tera Type: Steel
EVs: 252 Atk / 6 SpD / 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Close Combat
- Headlong Rush
- Ice Spinner
- Rapid Spin

I feel like Temper Flare could even be better than Ice Spinner to deal with Skarm and Corv easier.
 
There are good arguments to ban Arch, but this one is pretty flawed and subjective. Diversity regardless, my ladder experience has been different from yours: Rain is not uncommon, but definitely not 1 in 3 games, neither in mid, nor in high ladder. People have been ripping teams instead of building their own forever and Rain is undeniably a good team to rip, but that by itself shouldn't be used as an argument for a Ban, only if it proves (and for me it didn't) to be actually broken.

Edit: Also, if usage Stats were to be used as an argument to ban something, then Kingambit should be the target. Mon hit 33% usage last month (which actually is 1 in 3 games) and fits in all kind of structures as a very strong win condition in late game.
ngl i just wanted it to get banned so i could laugh at all those people spamming rain teams, but my intrusive thoughts aside, if im to contribute something of worth u usually need to avoid hitting the archaludon in rain to avoid giving it too many def boost meanwhile its happily firing away its electro shots at your team, usually it gets a 2 pokemon for 1 trade or at worst 1 for 1 bare min, def not broken heh
 
Removing tera wouldn't overwhelmingly improve the tier, the only two mons that are broken because of tera is regieleki and esparthra, and most likely esparthra will be banned again even without tera. It ain't going to happen, people do not want it, so we just have to ban what is broken.
I disagree. Removing Tera is the path to a balanced metagame. The matchup flipping bullshit will be gone, Tera Blast will be gone, and mons that require defensive Tera as the only counterplay will be suspect tested and subsequently banned from the tier. Tera centralizes the tier around the best Tera users and their checks. If you want a diverse and balanced tier, stop protecting Tera. Balanced meta and Tera are incompatible.
 
Top