pokemon in general is a guessing game tho, so your argument isn't really the greatest on that front. I understand where you're coming from, but look at it this way: both players knowing each other's tera means there's actually skill in predicting when each will tera and how to be in a favorable position when it happens
-
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.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion
- Thread starter TPP
- Start date
- Status
I am someone who is 100% for tera in the meta game. For me it makes games more exciting and the unpredictability keeps players on their toes. Predictability is boring and if someone doesn’t want tera they can go play a past meta game.
It opens up so many possibilities to team-building which I think is great. There doesn’t have to be a linear way of teambuilding because terastillizing a Pokémon can completely change the way it is played.
The mechanic adds more strategy to the game. I view as the most valuable resource in todays meta. How and when you use it can determine the outcome of a game.
It poses many questions in the players head such as:
What tera types should I put on my Pokémon? Which Pokémon should I tera? At what point of the battle should I tera (early or late game)? Does terastillizing this Pokémon give me enough value? Should I use my tera defensively or offensively? , etc.
Lets not act like it gives an unfair advantage to one side because both players have access to tera. The great thing is that it can only be used once per battle.
Sure you can get tilted when the opponent gets a suprise tera and shifts the game. But it works both ways so you can also do the very same in your favor.
I feel like the players who complain about tera arent using it to their full advantage, while their opponent has. Their is skill in predicting opponents tera and using your own tera at opportunistic times. If you cant adapt to the meta game then …… git gud.
It opens up so many possibilities to team-building which I think is great. There doesn’t have to be a linear way of teambuilding because terastillizing a Pokémon can completely change the way it is played.
The mechanic adds more strategy to the game. I view as the most valuable resource in todays meta. How and when you use it can determine the outcome of a game.
It poses many questions in the players head such as:
What tera types should I put on my Pokémon? Which Pokémon should I tera? At what point of the battle should I tera (early or late game)? Does terastillizing this Pokémon give me enough value? Should I use my tera defensively or offensively? , etc.
Lets not act like it gives an unfair advantage to one side because both players have access to tera. The great thing is that it can only be used once per battle.
Sure you can get tilted when the opponent gets a suprise tera and shifts the game. But it works both ways so you can also do the very same in your favor.
I feel like the players who complain about tera arent using it to their full advantage, while their opponent has. Their is skill in predicting opponents tera and using your own tera at opportunistic times. If you cant adapt to the meta game then …… git gud.
I'm more pro-Tera than I am not. I just think it would be kind of a shame to get rid of such an interesting mechanic wholesale, if only to create a more distinct metagame with its own interesting twists. I know this is the part that gets quoted in someone else's post about how the metagame should be competitive first and fun second, but fun being second still means it's important. Plus I'm of the mind that Tera isn't really comparable at all to Dynamax, which bottlenecks all strategy to be about it while Tera can be a win condition but is much more flexible.
Predictability? We had plenty of variety in past tiers without needing an unbalanced mechanic. Those metas weren't full of predictability, they had stability, which is important for a comp game.
Team building isn't linear in past generations so it's not like this mechanic is necessary (and more possibilities isn't always a good thing as TOO MANY things can end up in a meta where there's too much to account for and nowhere near enough resources to account for them).
Not really no, not in the way you'd think anyways. It's a pretty poorly balanced mechanic and I'll get to that in a sec...
In many instances, the person who teras first is actually disadvantaged because now the opponent can very well use the appropriate tera (if necessary) to respond. Basically it's this: information in Pokemon battles is very important, and by terastilizing first you give your opponent a huge amount of info that they can use to turn the tables. Now obviously sometimes the person who teras first can still be advantaged, but this tends to apply largely on especially excellent Pokemon or certain match ups. And in some matchups, pokemon can abuse stab tera to make some situations heavily skewed in their favor unless the opponent manages to have a specific tera to counter.
Or there are matchups where forcing your opponent to tera reactively to check your dangerous Pokemon just results in something else on your team now having free reign to run your opponent over (example: Espathra before being banned forcing tera dark clodsire which now loses to the Valiant it was put on a team to check).
Err no offense but this isn't exactly a good defense of tera. This just sounds like lesser stability.
So those good players who dislike tera and its issues... They're just not using it right? Is that what you're saying?
Also wanted to respond to this just because the dynamax v tera comparisons have always rubbed me the wrong way. Yes it isn't broken like dynamax was. But that should not be a standard we set anything to because that's so unrealistic to achieve. It's also a more nuanced discussion than that. Dynamax was fairly cut and dry but tera is more complex in its impact and should be discussed as such.
Sorry to interrupt the current discussion been trying to get this in tbe right place for a while
Anyways here's a set I found is quite neat and wanted to share.
Kingambit @ Lum Berry
Ability: Supreme Overlord
Shiny: Yes
Tera Type: Flying
EVs: 204 HP / 252 Atk / 16 Def / 36 SpD
Adamant Nature
- Iron Head
- Tera Blast
- Sucker Punch
- Brick Break
I've noticed that there was a lot of Burns and Such running around and Kingambit HATES being statused, especially burn. So I thought well..what if I gave it the Lum Berry and it works like a charm. The Lum berry allows Kingambit to continue its momentum in battle or give it a safe switch out from an incoming burn. Tera Flying gives it a resistance from Close Combats and Body Press (from Corviknight or the like) and gives it a full immunity to Earthquake and Headlong Rush. In fact it can even have the possibility to OH KO Tusk with a Tera Flying Tera Blast. Brick Break for other Kingambit or whatever may have you didn't know of another move. Iron Head and Sucker Punch for stab. The EVs are really weird but this makes it pretty bulky, it can definitely take a hit. I'm pretty sure Headlong Rush 2 hit KOs with these EVs if you don't Tera
However I'm still new to the format, I just wanted to share this. Im sure the set can be changed however you wish.
Anyways here's a set I found is quite neat and wanted to share.
Kingambit @ Lum Berry
Ability: Supreme Overlord
Shiny: Yes
Tera Type: Flying
EVs: 204 HP / 252 Atk / 16 Def / 36 SpD
Adamant Nature
- Iron Head
- Tera Blast
- Sucker Punch
- Brick Break
I've noticed that there was a lot of Burns and Such running around and Kingambit HATES being statused, especially burn. So I thought well..what if I gave it the Lum Berry and it works like a charm. The Lum berry allows Kingambit to continue its momentum in battle or give it a safe switch out from an incoming burn. Tera Flying gives it a resistance from Close Combats and Body Press (from Corviknight or the like) and gives it a full immunity to Earthquake and Headlong Rush. In fact it can even have the possibility to OH KO Tusk with a Tera Flying Tera Blast. Brick Break for other Kingambit or whatever may have you didn't know of another move. Iron Head and Sucker Punch for stab. The EVs are really weird but this makes it pretty bulky, it can definitely take a hit. I'm pretty sure Headlong Rush 2 hit KOs with these EVs if you don't Tera
However I'm still new to the format, I just wanted to share this. Im sure the set can be changed however you wish.
good set but Low Kick > Brick Break
Unless your team is severely weak to screens HO, Low Kick is generally better than Brick Break, because just about everything you'd click a Fighting move against is going to weigh enough for Low Kick to be the stronger move.
Other than that, it should work fine. Kingambit isn't reliant on his item to function, and beating Bulkarona reliably is a pretty good trick.
You talk about tera causing an unbalanced meta and wanting stability, etc. That causes the metagame to become stagnant. Just look at gen 8 with no gimmick. Many players grew bored of the metagame and were ready to move on.
Adaptation is a big part of playing this game. If you dont like tera go play past gens. Gen 9 with the tera mechanic is what makes it fresh and unique.
I made this comment specifically thinking of Srn's pro-ban comment that compared it to Dynamax, so someone has it backwards here. Dynamax isn't a standard of brokenness, it's a reference to what something looks like when a mechanic warps an entire game around it rather than supplementing it. I think Tera is much more the latter, but some kind of fine-tuning for it to remove unpredictability would make for a better game than removing it entirely in my opinion.
Gen8 was a great tier that was well liked (generally) by those who played the tier. The metagame also was not "stagnant" and saw plenty of innovation throughout. Regieleki+Gapdos cores? Hail becoming a truly viable weather in OU? Rillaboom+Bulky lefties Blaziken? We saw all kinds of changes to the meta, including the return of Gastrodon which had largely been absent from the tier, as well as RotomW. And Volcanion became a big part of the tier too. All while stuff like Future Sight Lele came into existence too. Some people stopped playing the tier which happens with any tier. But claiming it happened because there was no gimmick is laughable and unprovable.
By the way, stability doesn't cause a stagnant metagame. Not generally anyways. Broken Pokemon do because they centralize the metagame around them in a very unhealthy way.
You'll find many people, even people who find tera to be problematic (myself included) actually think the mechanic is interesting. But that doesn't detract from the fact that those people also acknowledge the mechanic has problems in regards to balance. Regarding "what makes gen9 fresh and unique", even if we theoretically axed tera, this gen is so wildly different on account of powercreep, new mons, wide hazard distribution and more that it would still be very fresh and unique.
Also, good players don't have problems with adapting. They have "adapted" with tera, and that doesn't necessarily change one's opinion. You can adapt to an unbalanced Pokemon. Doesn't make them less unbalanced.
I mean Tera sort of both supplements the game but also warps it around it. Right now it's semi tolerable just because of a small pool of Pokemon, but we'll see the impact of the mechanic greatly intensify as we gain more mons back (HOME bringing many old and new faces especially).
For me, the concern regarding trying to remove unpredictability, which is only one side of the issue, is that it does nothing to address another issue (the way tera inflates the list of mons needed to be account for). I'm just not sure what could be done to solve both issues without greatly neutering the mechanic to the point of being unrecognizable.
You may not believe it, but I actually clarified this in my semina.. ok here
I only compare the two to show why an argument defending tera is flawed. For example:
Believe it or n...
gen 8 did become stagnant and there is a huge base of players who disliked it because nothing made it different.
How is tera not balanced?
Both player have access to it and can use it whenever they want.
I would agree with you if only one player could tera because you have an advantage but here both can. Its up to the player to prepare for opponents possible tera and use their own tera to try and win. Expect the unexpected is a good saying.
Just because you can’t predict an opponents tera type doesnt make it unbalanced. Unpredictability does not equate an unbalanced mechanic. Terastillization doesn’t automatically make you win the game. Its based on positioning just like Pokémon usually is.
Also if only new pokemon were introduced with no new gimmick this gen would be the same as the rest of them. Terastillization makes the gen unique . We get new mons every gen so Pokemon needs something different to engage the players. New mons aint enough.
Oh, wow, fair play, you really didn't say Tera was like Dynamax. I guess I was just wro-
-Ah. So the comparison was made on your side. My comment stands.
I don't think you mean it's 1:1 and more that you can point of what's similar between them. I also don't think they're totally alike aside from some things. But like, this is a thing you said. The very next paragraph after what you quoted at me. I have, in fact, read what you've posted. So, is the analogy only made for the sake of argument, or is it "comparable" to Dynamax on its own? Or do I need to present an argument to you in favor of Tera that you can't find a way to retrofit onto Dynamax first?
No it doesnt. I wasn't defending tera lol.
1) "If your argument defending tera can also be used to defend dmax, it's probably not a great one because dmax was indefensible."
When I compared the low opportunity cost and flexibility of tera to that of dmax, I was not defending tera. As such, I am not contradicting myself here. In fact, let's flip my statement 1).
2) "If your argument attacking tera can also be used to attack dmax, it's probably a great one because dmax was indefensible."
Just because I think statement 1) is correct, that doesn't mean the statement 2) double negative is correct. In this case, I think it's not a bad foundation to draw the comparison that I did.
The only argument in favor of Tera that I'd like to see is one that I haven't already addressed months ago.
if we unban koraidon then both players would have access to koraidon, that doesn't mean koraidon should be unbanned.
tiering policy is not based on what "engages the players"
"Huge base of players" you have zero way to prove this. And way to not respond to any of my examples I gave of how it wasn't stagnant.
I gave multiple examples in my first reply to you. Also "both players can use it" doesn't make it automatically balanced. See
This leans into
You can't always be equipped to handle your opponents tera because there just isn't enough resources. You can always end up weak to some less common but still viable tera set and end up disadvantaged when you get fooled by it midgame through no fault of your own. The very concept of tera in its current state spits on the idea of preparing in builder because there isn't enough resources.
No. But a mechanic which
No it wouldn't be the same. It's not just new mons. It's new moves, new items, abilities, mechanic changes (recovery move nerf, ability/move power nerf) which result in different metagames. This alone is plenty able to engage players (old gen tiers like adv and dpl are still played and well liked without any need for a gimmick). You don't need a fancy gimmick to do that.
I based it the same way that you said it was "generally" liked. From sources like these forums, discords, and media like youtube (poketubers). There was large consensus that gen 8 was inferior to past gens. Those examples of pokemon you gave dont matter since every gen comes up with innovative sets
the point you gave to tera being unbalanced:
This doesnt prove that tera is unbalanced at all. Terastillization is another layer of gameplay added to the mix. Its about positioning yourself to have the best chance to win. Whether you tera early, late or whatever it may be it's all about strategy. The best players know how to use it wisely.
You talk about some pokemon abusing tera to heavily skew the situation in their favor. Isn't that what Pokemon is about? Using a move (or in this case a mechanic) to advance yourself in the game and beat the opponent.
No matter what, tera or no tera, no single team will always be equipped to handle every team. Matchups may be in your favor and sometimes they wont. So what difference does it make. The best thing a player can tell themselves is expect the unexpected. Do we know every set the opponent has in a non-tera meta? Of course not. But the best thing we can do is prepare for possibilities. Its a similar concept with predicting teras.
But if we had a poll asking people "do you just want new pokemon next generation?" or "do you want new pokemon plus new gameplay mechanics (gimmick) next generation?" a majority of people would choose the latter (gimmick).
Regardless, we can agree to disagree. I love the terastillization mechanic becuase its really fun. I think its great for the game. It adds excitement and new strategies in Pokemon.
I think further down the road people will appreciate terastillization more.
People who actually used the SS OU forums? Or people who didn't? Tiering surveys also showed overall the tier was good in the end. You cite discord, but if that was actually the case why was.it never reflected in survey results? And lastly citing poketubers is uh... Something.
Mentions that many innovations happened in the metagame, which is the opposite of stagnant
You: that doesn't count!!
Hm.
You basically didn't address anything I said and just kind of repeated what you said before that I responded to. Which is really rather frustrating.
We're discussing a mechanic that is discussed for being potentially unbalanced. There's a cost and sometimes risk associated with choosing moves in the builder and in battle. There is zero opportunity cost for tera and very little risk for often a huge reward. A Pokemon terastilizing out of a bad match up and getting extra turns of set up or just denying revenge killing attempts and killing back instead... That's not really strategy nor is it really balanced.
The difference is that past generations you could reasonably still play your way out of bad match ups with smart strategy and careful moves. Identifying key elements and actions to take and avoid. It was very rare to end up facing teams you simply auto lost to outright. You couldnt prep for everything, but you could make a consistent enough team that let you have good chances to fight back even in bad match ups. Tera isn't so nice. You can prep for something like standard Kingambit sets, but throw in tera and it becomes much less easy. Great Tusk is often a defacto Gambit check until tera flying happens. Volcarona can help play around it with burn threats until tera fire happens. And sometimes tera dark alone can solo endgame scenarios and there isn't really much one can do.
I'm sorry but "expect the unexpected" is complete non advice and does not actually help in game or builder at all. You say prepare for possibilities but I explained why that's not realistic in a meta with as many dangerous mons as there is (an issue bound to get much much much worse as HOME and dlc happen).
You have absolutely zero basis for that claim. I'm sorry but please don't make unverifiable claims you can't back up. It's not constructive for discussion.
you want proof?
not only does the SM ladder have a much higher playerbase as you can see by the differential, but it is also a great testing ground due to most players using good team structures here.
Gen8's ladder is extremely degenerate and full of stall & cheese. you can be 1700s+ ELO and still play people such as seer boy2, Lt_Alt1, Talon5, etc. spamming cringe like porygon-z rain, alakazam stall, drampa semi-trick room, and obstagoon rotom-h balance. anyone who still ladders this format will be able to attest to this. the current SS ladder is a human rights violation
let's take a look at tour statistics as well, since i know a lot of elitists love to say "ladder ain't shit" even though (a) half of these guys can't break 2k ELO once OLT season starts, and (b) most of our users are ladder players to begin with...
round 7 sample:
"man i'm really excited for SS this week of Smogon Tour, just thinking about it gives me chills KEK"
> said no one
the last point i'd like to make is that no one gives a shit about SS when it comes to spectating either. take a look at how much hype ORAS SSNL finals or BW SSNL finals have. but SS SSNL finals? **crickets** hell, i don't think anyone even clicked the thread to begin with LOL
listen, i really don't give a flying fuck if you think Gen8 is good. i have plenty of friends who like SS in fact. but to sit up here and imply that running gastrodon, volcanion, rotom-w, fat rillaboom cores, or future sight tapu lele is mind-blowing innovation is blasphemy and borderline delusional. tapu lele in particular didn't even have future sight prior to SS bro. no wonder it "came into existence!" i'm not even going to address zapdos-g + regieleki-- if you think this core is actually being used in high-level play then you need to spend as much time watching tournaments as you are reading Pinkacross RMT's
i fuck w/ Pinkacross though, he's fire
personally i think SS is a dogshit tier not only because of how stale it is, but also due to how it's accepted that relying on static & flame body hax to check everything is "competitive" / healthy counter-play. heavy-duty boots should've been banned too; i'm still amazed we got a fuckin' melmetal suspect test instead. these are discussions for another time however, if the tier ever gets re-visited. the main thing i wanted to point out with this post was the statistics.
____
i will address why i think tera should stay unrestricted later this week. all i'll say for now is every proposed restriction is cringe. i have more respect for players who want a full ban instead
Last edited:
I haven't viewed this thread much since the last time tera was discussed at a vote, and admittedly am not reading back beyond skimming and seeing plenty of discussion about tera. At a minimum, I'd imagine council takes a look at their options post-home in a similar timeline to the previous closer look tera received. I wouldn't think a suspect is guaranteed, though.
I only make this post rlly to say that I think restricting tera in any fashion while keeping it around would be pretty heinous. I'd vote for no ban, and then ban, and then pray nothing else is even presented as an official option. The reasons are plentiful, whether it concern the general playability of our metagames (imo), or the caliber of educated voters that we attract in such a propped-up suspect test, and some stuff in between.
I only make this post rlly to say that I think restricting tera in any fashion while keeping it around would be pretty heinous. I'd vote for no ban, and then ban, and then pray nothing else is even presented as an official option. The reasons are plentiful, whether it concern the general playability of our metagames (imo), or the caliber of educated voters that we attract in such a propped-up suspect test, and some stuff in between.
Using match up moth as an example of why tera is broken is a really shit argument imo when what actually makes the moth even more busted than in prior gens is boots. Boots allows you to play moth way more aggressively than before and gives it a lot more opportunities to set up and get going whilst also making teams it's on more flexible as it doesn't need the same level of support it used to have.
Dnite is similarly made more busted due to boots, yes stab espeed is nice but normal is a kinda shit type and the free dd dnite gets due to multiscale is often all you need to win the game. Honestly I'm surprised dnite isn't being used way more than it currently is.
Dnite is similarly made more busted due to boots, yes stab espeed is nice but normal is a kinda shit type and the free dd dnite gets due to multiscale is often all you need to win the game. Honestly I'm surprised dnite isn't being used way more than it currently is.
Personally I think that restricting Tera will not do much and with more time, I view it as more black-and-white in terms of banning outright or leaving it allowed. Obviously a larger discussion with the community and council needs to happen, but that’s not for right now as opposed to after HOME is released and we settle down. Right now, my personal lean is to not act on it.
On a slightly unrelated note, I don’t see us rushing to action prior to HOME unless we have more substantial evidence to back doing so. Obviously anything is possible and we never script the future of tiering, but rather we try to stay open minded. However, it would be hard to see a circumstance arising that forces us to act prior to HOME.
Once HOME comes, then we will get cooking though…and we will need our players to speak up and participate in surveys as well to gauge perception. The council still has to have a larger discussion on Pokemon, Tera, and so on once HOME drops, but I will be as transparent as I can when that occurs. I know you all care and I want to maintain the level of communication that has existed thus far.
Once HOME comes, then we will get cooking though…and we will need our players to speak up and participate in surveys as well to gauge perception. The council still has to have a larger discussion on Pokemon, Tera, and so on once HOME drops, but I will be as transparent as I can when that occurs. I know you all care and I want to maintain the level of communication that has existed thus far.
Just to add to what you're saying about preparing in the teambuilder, most pokemon only really have 6-8 moves they choose from, some even less, a very select few have so many sets that they can run more than that. Generally from being attacked once and attacking them once you know 95% what set they're running and what sort of counterplay to go for. Some pokemon can run a lure set with a random move but if you have knowledge of its moveset you know its a possibility, for example corviknight is never going to thunderbolt your dondozo, it doesn't have that option available.
Tera on the other hand is completely random. Every pokemon has access to all 18 types and they could really be ANY of them, you can make a case that some are more viable than others but if you're staring down a +2 kingambit there's no way to know if you should go for a burn or an earthquake, if you get it wrong and they defensive tera you lose the game. The tera type in that case is completely independent of the set there's ZERO chance to anticipate which means you're flying blind. There's no such thing as "good counterplay" you're just lucky you guessed right.
A gen 8 post-mortem thread or like a YT video would be very interesting. I think we all have some quality of life changes that we would implement into that tier.
"Lackluster" and "dishonest" are some of the first words to come to mind, the former being obvious and the latter you really illustrated with the flame body/static exchanges.
When it comes to balancing the game, we're really good, as a community (and council ofc) agreeing on obvious broken shit.
But the second something isn't literally obvious, and both sides have valid concerns and opinions, then the path with the least resistance is usually taken. Usually that ends up being fine, sometimes it's terrible.
The path of least resistance is gen 7 was broken checks broken. There were times in the meta that Kart might have not passed a suspect, but who could really be bothered trying to balance gen 7? Lowkey, council being half-asleep that gen let it become the wild west of tiers, and it might be why people love it so much. Low, lowkey though, that meta could be described as a broken shit-show lol. My final summary though, is that it ended up being fine. To some it's terrible.
The path of least resistance in gen 8 was ban all the obvious broken, don't touch anything else. Don't look into boots, or regen degen, or static/flame body, or really look into the mons right on the line of being broken like Weav. Lowkey, no one has the answer for why gen 8 feels like dog ass to play, but did we ever really try? I wasn't active on forums but as a casual, I never heard of any steps towards addressing complaints that the meta felt stale and boring to play. Final summary, p terrible meta, overall. To some it's fine.
Gen 9, so far so good when it comes to banning obvious broken, as usual. The tera thing, no one could be expected to handle that perfectly at launch, but in hindsight we know the restriction aspect was flawed, for starters.
M-sab was banned on the literal last day of ORAS, because stall mons are much harder to define as obviously broken, and by the time it was settled the meta, besides tour play, was essentially dead for the large, casual, current gen playerbase.
I don't want tera to be gen 9's M-sab.
We've had really good QoL changes that I really respect GF for. I don't think that recovery nerf was for VGC only, I think they threw that in for us. Toxic, knock spam, which was a huge issue in gen 8, has been regulated and fixed. I think we have a really solid meta on our hands even without tera.
I understand that the last thing some players want to do is take out any fun from this meta, after years of playing a meta that literally had no fun lol. I get why some would be gun-shy in that regard.
Finally, my point to all this: As a community, we need to learn how to tackle nuanced and complicated issues about Pokemon in a more proactive, experimental, and exploratory way.
The gen 6 UU no-scald ladder was very interesting, and exactly what I'm talking about.
Scald was a complicated issue, arguably uncomp but arguably balanced. Instead of just taking the path of least resistance and ignoring the issue and complaints, they looked into it.
"This is not a suspect test. We are not suspecting Scald. This is a curiosity, a trial-run for a UU without Scald. A lot of people have wanted to see the metagame without Scald, so this is their chance."
A curiosity, trial run.
An entire ladder dedicated to experimenting, and searching for an answer to a tough question.
Was it perfect, no, but at least they tried. They messed around a little. The experimented and had faith in their playerbase.
Top of my head:
A) More non-tera OU room tournaments (currently I have never seen one, not one single time)
B) A separate test ladder (splitting the playerbase is a fallacy at worst and rigid, least resistance thinking at best)
C) A non-tera OU room, where players who are curious and want more info for their vote can go and test out gen 9 w/o the gimmick
D) A high level, reward driven non-tera gen 9 OU tournament
We are not going to truly answer the question of tera without players being able to play a meta without it.
The path of least resistance is not working as intended, and when it does it's by chance. It won't work this time.
We need a novel approach to this topic, and we need to approach it with full respect.
If we're going to lose pokemon to keep tera, literally have less mons to play with, then we better be damn sure this isn't a moment where we look back years later and go, "Oh, gen 9, yeah that was a dumpster fire. Why did we ever think tera was ok?"
If tera isn't broken or uncomp as some say on this board, then there should be no issue exposing players to gen 9 without it. Let them decide.
I think we're in really good hands with our current council and tier leader, but the old approach just isn't going to resolve the issue.
It would be in bad-faith to conduct another tera suspect without providing voters with the experience of what they're voting for.
Hell, I myself might even change my mind and find the non-tera gen 9 meta boring.
I propose: Let Home drop, QB obvious shit in the first 2 weeks. Have a separate ladder with no-tera for 3-4 weeks. Tera suspect, ban/no ban.
- Status