Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion v4 [Volcarona Banned]

Sleep is gone. Kyurem is being suspected. And I missed a lot for OU man (over 100 pages of discussion). Sadly, I am now returning to hell. I'd ask what happened, but I'll figure it out honestly.
Rekless_Zombie I'm getting the brainrot meds...
To pull a long story short, shit is fucked up
Triple weather is hype. It's the type of thing that you know probably won't work at tippy top level, but it's one of the best experiences in Pokemon to see how far you can get with it. I remember one time, I think in gen 6, there was a quad weather doubles team that won a room tournament match with Scarf Weather Ball Roserade, which got a ko every turn by having the right teammate switch in to change the weather hit something super effectively at the start of each turn.
Triple anything is hype, really. Like that triple dinosaur team from a while back, or triple genies in doubles.
Triple or even double weather sounds goofy asf and I think thats funny
 

Karxrida

Eventide
is a Community Contributor Alumnus
Thinking about it more, with Sun + Rain you don't even need run the weather rocks on both setters. Torkoal has Rapid Spin, so you can just give it Heavy Duty Boots and have that be your hazard removal (without complete fear of Gholdengo) while also reseting the weather timer. And Walking Wake can still come in on whatever weather and nuke things, ensuring you don't have your game plan totally compromised.

I think this could work?
 
Last edited:
but as I have stated before, I believe the council vote made 'public opinion' practically irrelevant, which is what I argue in that quote.
first of all, public opinion supported the sleep ban according to the survey. second, even if it hadn't, why should "public opinion" even be relevant to matters of policy in the first place? and third, and this is an open question for every anti-ban person, would you be saying any of this if the result had gone the other way? because i bet that if the council had voted against a sleep ban you'd be praising them for "standing against the tyranny of the majority" right now, even though the thing you criticized (the act of holding a council vote) would be unchanged. all of this so-called "dissatisfaction with the process" would have been nonexistent if every part of the process was identical except for the results of the council vote
 
Last edited:
I could see Double Weather as an Anti-Meta idea if you can fit Pokemon that use but don't NEED the weather (i.e. Raging Bolt or Roaring Moon as compared to Lilligant-H or Barraskewda), Walking Wake being a prominent option since it works under both for nukes regardless.

The big hurdle would be what kind of defensive Backbone the team has, if any, and having to really deal well with Hazards due to Torkoal and Pelipper both necessitating Boots and thus not being the safest KO switch-ins.
 
I could see Double Weather as an Anti-Meta idea if you can fit Pokemon that use but don't NEED the weather (i.e. Raging Bolt or Roaring Moon as compared to Lilligant-H or Barraskewda), Walking Wake being a prominent option since it works under both for nukes regardless.

The big hurdle would be what kind of defensive Backbone the team has, if any, and having to really deal well with Hazards due to Torkoal and Pelipper both necessitating Boots and thus not being the safest KO switch-ins.
Raging bolt also csn abuse both weathers if you use thunder.
 
first of all, public opinion supported the sleep ban according to the survey. second, even if it hadn't, why should "public opinion" even be relevant to matters of policy in the first place? and third, and this is an open question for every anti-ban person, would you be saying any of this if the result had gone the other way? because i bet that if the council had voted against a sleep ban you'd be praising them for "standing against the tyranny of the majority" right now, even though the thing you criticized (the act of holding a council vote) would be unchanged. all of this so-called "dissatisfaction with the process" would have been nonexistent if every part of the process was identical except for the results of the council vote
I think the issue is less with the outcome (i'm fine with it, if sleep's too unmanageable then sure, ban it)
but with the way it was handled; since it kinda happened out of the blue- and I know you'll cite the discussion thread on it, but for people who weren't following that one thread, it sure felt like that.

this does make me wonder, if next gen brings back the tapu's (or god forbid, real terrain setters) would we revert back to the sleep clause of old if sleep becomes managable?
 
Raging bolt also csn abuse both weathers if you use thunder.
I use the Term "need" in this case to distinguish how consistent the mon is without their ideal weather. Thunder vs Thunderbolt is a legitimate consideration depending on how often you expect 1 or the other weather, but it does make RB questionable under Sun for Protosynthesis.
 
I could see Double Weather as an Anti-Meta idea if you can fit Pokemon that use but don't NEED the weather (i.e. Raging Bolt or Roaring Moon as compared to Lilligant-H or Barraskewda), Walking Wake being a prominent option since it works under both for nukes regardless.

The big hurdle would be what kind of defensive Backbone the team has, if any, and having to really deal well with Hazards due to Torkoal and Pelipper both necessitating Boots and thus not being the safest KO switch-ins.
"defensive backbone"? c'mon, this is gen 9, we don't need that shit anymore

in seriousness, archaludon is mandatory on any team with rain on it, so that can serve as a solid switch-in to a lot of physical hits and many resisted special ones. so can gouging fire in a pinch, even though it's not usually used for that. and of course the entire team becomes the defensive backbone if you use a screen setter
 
For an example: Imagine if the Tera suspect was like this. You either wanted a full ban or complete uinrestricted. If we look at the results we got, Full Ban was a very small percentage of the Yes Action people. Removing all the restrictions to place on Tera leaves a lot of people on a side they don't completely agree with, and the ban/noban ratio looks like 20/80 instead of the 59.9/40.1 we got (which I am totally not salty about at all nope never why would you think that I swear).
Straight from the original Terastallization Tiering Discussion Thread, opening post:
Finchinator said:
Restriction
(...)
In addition, we are working under the premise that if any restriction does get implemented and the mechanic still proves problematic afterwards, then at this point we would be far more likely to cut any losses and not try any further restrictions, but rather an outright ban. This means that the focus of this will be to see if there is any plausible restriction to Terastallization that could balance it enough to remain in the metagame rather than being on trying to preserve as much as possible on the basis that it can always be further restricted, which we will not waste the bulk of the generation on leveling out.
Sleep was already restricted, which is the critical, yet often ignored, difference.
 
since it kinda happened out of the blue- and I know you'll cite the discussion thread on it, but for people who weren't following that one thread, it sure felt like that.
isn't that the fault of the people who didn't look at the thread for not informing themselves? it's not the council's responsibility to make sure everyone knows everything all the time. also, this is more open communication and community input than we've ever gotten for policy changes in the past. before this gen, it was limited to policy review threads, but the "views from the council" thread is more visible and accessible by anyone and serves as a preliminary option to policy review threads. why is this only a problem for anti-ban people now, when it's resulted in an outcome they don't like, as opposed to any time before now, when the community had less input?
this does make me wonder, if next gen brings back the tapu's (or god forbid, real terrain setters) would we revert back to the sleep clause of old if sleep becomes managable?
sleep moves clause is likely going to be the default for future gens from now on because it's cart-accurate. it never really mattered how much or how little of a problem sleep was, that just sparked the discussion (this gen) and nudged public opinion enough towards the right option to finally implement it. what always mattered was that the clause directly clashed with smogon's policy of tiering in a cart-accurate way
 
???

in what universe is it not consistent. KR is banned for being a purely uncompetitive item.
I see your point, but I respectfully disagree.

Imo banning King’s Rock instead of Cloyster is like banning Air Slash instead of Shaymin Sky.

King’s Rock can be held by essentially anything, while Air Slash also has a wide distribution.

King’s Rock has a 10% flinch chance, while Air Slash has a 28.5% (accuracy adjusted) chance.

Furthermore, King’s Rock and Air Slash see no competitive use outside of their sole abusers (thus banning Air Slash could also be argued to have no collateral damage).

The bottom line is only Shaymin S was broken with Air Slash while only Cloyster was broken with King’s Rock, so until another abuser pops up it makes more sense to ban Shaymin S and Cloyster.

For example, if Zapdos was oppressing the metagame with Static or Kyurem was BSing past its checks with freeze, we’d ban Zapdos and Kyurem opposed to Static and Ice Beam/Freeze Dry.

In all of these cases, you could argue like you did and say “ X item/move was banned for it’s Y RNG% thus making it uncompetitive”, but in reality it’s more nuanced than that.

If you don’t think this is how the tiering policy works, read the councils’ posts on sleep and Darkrai carefully. They clearly make a point to mention that sleep was broken on more than just Darkrai (also valiant and lilligant).

Because if sleep was only broken on Darkrai, we’d ban Darkrai and not sleep. Wouldn’t matter that sleep was RNG based/uncompetitive; Darkrai would be banned. But because there are multiple abusers, we ban sleep. My point is I don’t get why this logic doesn’t apply to King’s Rock/Cloyster.
 
I see your point, but I respectfully disagree.

Imo banning King’s Rock instead of Cloyster is like banning Air Slash instead of Shaymin Sky.

King’s Rock can be held by essentially anything, while Air Slash also has a wide distribution.

King’s Rock has a 10% flinch chance, while Air Slash has a 28.5% (accuracy adjusted) chance.

Furthermore, King’s Rock and Air Slash see no competitive use outside of their sole abusers (thus banning Air Slash could also be argued to have no collateral damage).

The bottom line is only Shaymin S was broken with Air Slash while only Cloyster was broken with King’s Rock, so until another abuser pops up it makes more sense to ban Shaymin S and Cloyster.

For example, if Zapdos was oppressing the metagame with Static or Kyurem was BSing past its checks with freeze, we’d ban Zapdos and Kyurem opposed to Static and Ice Beam/Freeze Dry.

In all of these cases, you could argue like you did and say “ X item/move was banned for it’s Y RNG% thus making it uncompetitive”, but in reality it’s more nuanced than that.

If you don’t think this is how the tiering policy works, read the councils’ posts on sleep and Darkrai carefully. They clearly make a point to mention that sleep was broken on more than just Darkrai (also valiant and lilligant).

Because if sleep was only broken on Darkrai, we’d ban Darkrai and not sleep. Wouldn’t matter that sleep was RNG based/uncompetitive; Darkrai would be banned. But because there are multiple abusers, we ban sleep. My point is I don’t get why this logic doesn’t apply to King’s Rock/Cloyster.
do you want king's rock maushold in the tier?
 
I’m tired of trying to get Reqs and losing. I think I might make a new alt called, “Crushing Your Req Dream.” and just target anyone I see trying to make reqs, cause I’m mean that way. :blobpex:
 
I see your point, but I respectfully disagree.

Imo banning King’s Rock instead of Cloyster is like banning Air Slash instead of Shaymin Sky.

King’s Rock can be held by essentially anything, while Air Slash also has a wide distribution.
This is something I disagree with.
Air Slash gets a pass because Special Flying type moves are very uncommon.
Your options are;
-Aeroblast (signature move to an Uber)
-Bleakwind Storm (signature move)
-Oblivion Wing (Signature moves to an Uber and said Uber isn't in the game)
-Hurricane (inaccurate and less distribution)
-Air Cutter (60 BP and isn't even 100% accurate)
-Gust (40 BP)
-HP Flying (no longer in the game)
-Tera Blast (requires you to use Tera)
Besides Hurricane and Tera Blast, you're basically left with Air Slash for usable STAB for special flying types. Banning Air Slash essentially eliminated the STABs of several Flying types.
Honestly I would be for banning Air Slash, as well has Iron Head, Zen Headbutt, Dark Pulse, etc. if reliable commonly distributed alternatives existed. I honestly would be down to ban flinching moves besides Fake Out if all the moves that can flinch got regular alternatives. Because otherwise, you're literally just using those moves just to cheese wins.
But yeah, that's the big difference between Air Slash and King's Rock. Some Pokemon would lose vital STAB or coverage they need and would cause a ton of collateral damage. Cloyster loses the "I will cheese past my checks by RNGing them to death" item which it doesn't really need.
 
Because if sleep was only broken on Darkrai, we’d ban Darkrai and not sleep. Wouldn’t matter that sleep was RNG based/uncompetitive; Darkrai would be banned. But because there are multiple abusers, we ban sleep. My point is I don’t get why this logic doesn’t apply to King’s Rock/Cloyster.
because, much like sleep showed this last two weeks, something inherently uncompetitive can eventually be abused by anything. do we need to let someone cook with weavile + razor fang/king's rock + beat up before it's obvious that's a problem?
 
because, much like sleep showed this last two weeks, something inherently uncompetitive can eventually be abused by anything. do we need to let someone cook with weavile + razor fang/king's rock + beat up before it's obvious that's a problem?
I mean, yeah that's how it should work. If people started popping off with Hypnosis Gengar or Golduck in rain then yeah I would consider Sleep to be more problematic then it was at the time of the ban. Just there were so few abusers compared to mons that actually got Sleep moves that I and others thought it was worth while to suspect the individual mons rather than the mechanic.
 
because, much like sleep showed this last two weeks, something inherently uncompetitive can eventually be abused by anything. do we need to let someone cook with weavile + razor fang/king's rock + beat up before it's obvious that's a problem?
Beat Up King's Rock Weavile was a not inconsiderable part of the reason why it was banned. Contrary to seemingly popular belief, it wasn't just Cloyster that was abusing it.

At the end of the day, we lose pretty much nothing of serious competitive value by banning King's Rock. The only Pokemon that would actually use it are Skill Link/multihit users, on which it's broken. So we can ban every Skill Link/Beat Up user that could potentially abuse King's Rock just so hardstuck 1300s players can use it on mons that would be much better off using other items, or we can just ban the item, which half-decent players aren't going to use on non Skill Link/multihit Pokemon anyways.

King's Rock is also inherently uncompetitive by any definition of the term, in much the same way as Brightpowder (I'd also put Quick Claw and Focus Band in this category as well but whatever). I don't see any inherent value in keeping an item legal if the item does literally nothing other than take control out of both player's hands.

Regardless though, none of these are pressing issues right now and there's like 15 other things I'd rather tackle first before we seriously worry about Focus Band lol. But unbanning King's Rock would be a step in the wrong direction.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 5, Guests: 20)

Top