Yeah, and none of them are immune to confusion. Also, the ideal prankster team consists of more than just pranksters. If Rotom-W is so good against a prankster team, I myself as a d
-
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!
SwagPlay, evaluating potential bans (basic definition of "uncompetitive" in OP)
- Thread starter haunter
- Start date
- Status
If the opponent uses Swagger on you, they will probably follow it up with Thunder Wave. That is when you switch in Thundurus.
Sure, your opponent could predict the switch, but needing to be smart about switches takes some of the luck out of the equation.
FRIENDS, I have discovered another counter to the plague of SwagPlay: Natu.
0 Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Natu: 66-78 (23.2 - 27.4%) -- 38.6% chance to 4HKO
As you can see Natu easily takes anything any Foul Play user would ever throw at it. Not only does it easily dominate SwagPlay teams, but it also HARD COUNTERS standard Breloom.
Natu hard counters SwagPlay to the point where all of them cry.
Thanks to this impeccable counter, my verdict is that Swagger, and any of its combinations, is 100% balanced and should not be banned.
PS: Stop with all that Numel crap, we all know that shit is trash. Natu is not trash.
PS 2: Natu also completely tears apart Donphan, a Pokemon that, as everyone knows, is one of the best in OU. Indulge yourselves in these marvelous calculations:
0 Atk Donphan Ice Shard vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Natu: 52-62 (18.3 - 21.8%) -- possible 5HKO
252+ Atk Donphan Ice Shard vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Natu: 70-84 (24.6 - 29.5%) -- 100% chance to 4HKO
0 Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Natu: 66-78 (23.2 - 27.4%) -- 38.6% chance to 4HKO
As you can see Natu easily takes anything any Foul Play user would ever throw at it. Not only does it easily dominate SwagPlay teams, but it also HARD COUNTERS standard Breloom.
Natu hard counters SwagPlay to the point where all of them cry.
Thanks to this impeccable counter, my verdict is that Swagger, and any of its combinations, is 100% balanced and should not be banned.
PS: Stop with all that Numel crap, we all know that shit is trash. Natu is not trash.
PS 2: Natu also completely tears apart Donphan, a Pokemon that, as everyone knows, is one of the best in OU. Indulge yourselves in these marvelous calculations:
0 Atk Donphan Ice Shard vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Natu: 52-62 (18.3 - 21.8%) -- possible 5HKO
252+ Atk Donphan Ice Shard vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Eviolite Natu: 70-84 (24.6 - 29.5%) -- 100% chance to 4HKO
Funny, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Chansey, Blissey, Rotom-W, Gliscor, Thundurus, Trevenant and Noivern can stop SwagPlay.
Or go substitute. Which, again, goes back to the 50/50 chance.
AND Natu gets access to Roost to shrug off all the Foul Play damage. Something Numel can't do.
How? Taunt goes through Substitute and the Incarnate forms of the genies outspeed all relevant Prankster users.
that only works if they don't switch out predicting trick. if they do, you only had one shot.
I'm in favor of option #2. Option 3 is pretty unviable as Klefki can serve other legitimate uses such as Dual Screens + Hazards or just emergency TWave to stop sweepers.
Sure, some stuff can check SwagPlay but with the right amount of luck, even said checks can be take down (Rotom-W). Only surefire thing are pink blobs, Fairies, and Mandibuzz. Sound-based moves aren't that widespread and only viable users are Volcorona, Sylveon, (Mega) Gardevoir, and Galvantula off the top of my head.
Something that is entirely luck-based should be removed, and I'm all for banning paraflinch too since people are complaining about that not getting banned.
Sure, some stuff can check SwagPlay but with the right amount of luck, even said checks can be take down (Rotom-W). Only surefire thing are pink blobs, Fairies, and Mandibuzz. Sound-based moves aren't that widespread and only viable users are Volcorona, Sylveon, (Mega) Gardevoir, and Galvantula off the top of my head.
Something that is entirely luck-based should be removed, and I'm all for banning paraflinch too since people are complaining about that not getting banned.
See: smart prankster users actually packing more than just prankster users. As I said, if I know certain Pokes will definitely give me trouble, would I not run specific Pokemon to counter these guys?
Paraflinch cannot be banned without sending Meloetta and Jirachi to Ubers or instituting a ridiculously complex ban.
Because there's a variety of Pokemon that can handle them, and the more counters you have to run, the fewer SwagPlay abusers you can fit in. SwagPlay is mostly threatening through the sheer number of them on a team.
There's also the opportunity cost. Is protecting Klefki worth dedicating 3 Pokemon to stopping its counters?
Last edited:
Alright, to answer a few people (since the thread grew by like 5 pages since I last posted...)
(On a side note, when playing with Machamp, his terrible speed meant that most opponents had the choice of staying in or switching, so the choice to gamble on not hitting themselves in confusion was theirs, not mine. I think that makes a world of difference in the argument.)
When Quagsire/Clefable has better things to do than run Swagger in the first place and there are better ways to annoy/deal with Scizor, I find it hard to justify letting Swagger be usable for that purpose. I'm sure there are ways to use Swagger that don't amount to a coin flip (and kudos to you for finding a less frustrating way to utilize it,) but if I had to choose between a metagame without the move and one where super niche annoyers can use it, I'd choose the former. I don't necessarily have anything against a complex ban to allow uncommon uses for the move exist, but I don't feel the metagame would hurt so much from the loss of cases like that as it would gain from banning the strategy. Plus, I'm not even seeing Swagger limited to Pranksters these days. People suggest it for random crap.
A bunch of people have suggested banning Confusion as a whole, but for reasons that I sort of outlined in my earlier post, I think that's going a bit too far. The reason for this is mainly in the results of getting a bad Swagger confusion roll and a bad confusion roll from any other move. Swagger not only causes the self damage to be much higher, but also makes the incoming Foul Play much worse for many Pokemon. Regular confusion doesn't maim Pokemon quite the same way; having played with Machamp in 4th Gen, I found that the opponent facing confusion would get screwed up by Machamp's powerful hits should they not switch and not by the confusion chance itself. I don't think the other confusion moves would be nearly as easily abused as Swagger, so I don't think banning them is necessary, thoug
(On a side note, when playing with Machamp, his terrible speed meant that most opponents had the choice of staying in or switching, so the choice to gamble on not hitting themselves in confusion was theirs, not mine. I think that makes a world of difference in the argument.)
It's not a mistake of not banning it. Never before has confusion been a broken mechanic.
Not even with Prankster is it a broken mechanic.
Have a problem with Swagger specifically? Switch to a SpA based team member that can handle it, switch out, or carry Own Tempo.
Confusion isn't broken.
This thread is like a culmination of all the talk about SwagPlay I've seen over the past few weeks lol. I don't ladder extensively, and I've only seen the strategy myself a few times, so for that reason I'm not actually gonna side one way or the other. The only thing I feel I can do is focus on the questions such a strategy brings up, though some of them have no doubt been presented already.
The main issue I see with SwagPlay is whether it is unhealthy for the metagame in the same way that certain other luck-based strategies have been deemed unhealthy. Obviously luck is everywhere in Pokemon, but no one bats an eyelash (rightfully so) on self-imposed luck (i.e., using moves with less than 100% accuracy). Luck-based strategies that are not self-imposed (i.e., confusing the opponent) are, by nature, never foolproof. There's always the chance the target doesn't damage himself right away, and he gets to apply whatever tactics he wants as normal. It's whether their applications in actual battles add an unnecessary element of luck that otherwise flies in the face of a more skill-based metagame. Evasion-boosting moves, for instance, can still go either way when it comes to moves hitting. But when they miss, it flat out gives you a free turn to do whatever you want - set up a sweeper, cripple their tank, kill a mon that otherwise checks you, whatever. All because of luck, not skill. More recently, there's Moody. Again, by nature it's not foolproof - the Moody user could get the boosts in stats that don't necessarily help it a whole lot on the first turn, thus letting your mons kill it as usual. But if it gets a boost in Speed on the first turn, all of a sudden it becomes able to Sub+Protect until it gets massive boosts in everything else, and then sweep through your team. Moody essentially boiled down to "if it boosts Speed first, you lost, otherwise you still have a chance".
The question is whether the luck factor that SwagPlay introduces to the metagame interferences with it to a similar level that things like Evasion moves or Moody did. Do the free turns granted through "priority" Parafusion, compounded with the extra damage dealt through Swagger-boosted confusion and Foul Play, mess with too many strategies too easily to be considered healthy? Again, I don't have enough experience to confidently answer that. This is merely my approach to the subject.
Also a minor nitpick to those suggesting a Prankster+confusing move complex ban in place of a Prankster+Swagger ban. Recall that damage dealt through confusion is based on Attack, not Sp. Attack. Swagger punishes the opponent a lot more for bad luck than any other confusing move, so I feel Haunter's initial proposal for the complex ban option works just fine there.
The main issue I see with SwagPlay is whether it is unhealthy for the metagame in the same way that certain other luck-based strategies have been deemed unhealthy. Obviously luck is everywhere in Pokemon, but no one bats an eyelash (rightfully so) on self-imposed luck (i.e., using moves with less than 100% accuracy). Luck-based strategies that are not self-imposed (i.e., confusing the opponent) are, by nature, never foolproof. There's always the chance the target doesn't damage himself right away, and he gets to apply whatever tactics he wants as normal. It's whether their applications in actual battles add an unnecessary element of luck that otherwise flies in the face of a more skill-based metagame. Evasion-boosting moves, for instance, can still go either way when it comes to moves hitting. But when they miss, it flat out gives you a free turn to do whatever you want - set up a sweeper, cripple their tank, kill a mon that otherwise checks you, whatever. All because of luck, not skill. More recently, there's Moody. Again, by nature it's not foolproof - the Moody user could get the boosts in stats that don't necessarily help it a whole lot on the first turn, thus letting your mons kill it as usual. But if it gets a boost in Speed on the first turn, all of a sudden it becomes able to Sub+Protect until it gets massive boosts in everything else, and then sweep through your team. Moody essentially boiled down to "if it boosts Speed first, you lost, otherwise you still have a chance".
The question is whether the luck factor that SwagPlay introduces to the metagame interferences with it to a similar level that things like Evasion moves or Moody did. Do the free turns granted through "priority" Parafusion, compounded with the extra damage dealt through Swagger-boosted confusion and Foul Play, mess with too many strategies too easily to be considered healthy? Again, I don't have enough experience to confidently answer that. This is merely my approach to the subject.
Also a minor nitpick to those suggesting a Prankster+confusing move complex ban in place of a Prankster+Swagger ban. Recall that damage dealt through confusion is based on Attack, not Sp. Attack. Swagger punishes the opponent a lot more for bad luck than any other confusing move, so I feel Haunter's initial proposal for the complex ban option works just fine there.
Swagger is much more than that... it is also its combination with Thunder Wave that makes it so deadly as it increase the possibility for a free turn (and also cripples an opposing Pokemon). Also switching out would just allow your opponent to Sub on the switch and paralyze the switch-in.
Rotom-W is considered a good check to SwagPlay this Gen since due to its immunity to paralysis, your opponent would not get many free turns from paralysis. The SwagPlay user is then forced to attack Rotom-W for miniscule damage, and the SwagPlay user usually does not invest in Speed, so Rotom-W would attack first. (An uninvested Volt Switch cannot reliable break a specially defensive Klefki's sub though.) The Confusion would eventually ware off so the SwagPlay user has to use another turn.
However, I do not know about Rotom-W being a good counter for SwagPlay. I mean it may need Leftovers (as the ChestoRest set is also run as a means to protect it from Toxic) to do so and it cannot reliably break Klefki's subs.
Classy guy (that is sarcasm, btw).
Something doesn't have to be "good" to be uncompetitive. We could have complex banned sandveil + Garchomp, since it was the only relevant offender of it in OU, but because evasion as a whole was considered uncompetitive, the sandveil and snow cloak as a whole were banned. In the same vein, I don't think it's unreasonable to ban confusion, since it does nothing but add an unnecessary luck factor to the game, whether or not it is a reliable way to win. No need to be an ass.
I'm mixed about this. While I hate luck based stuff and completely understand how frustrating it is to lose to hax, I find to be extremely satisfying when I beat people who use this BS. I, myself, would like it to be gone, but I won't really be affected if it stays. I got Garchomp and Rotom (with a 0 attack IV) chilling. We'll see what happens
If any of you are trolling, I'm truly sorry, but I can't tell anymore
the -sey's stop, but can't do much back either and can still be taken down with enough luck
Rotom and Gliscor don't "stop" it at all, just is immune to Twave and takes small damage from foul play, but can still fall to a lucky bastard
Trevenant
8 Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Trevenant: 282-332 (75.4 - 88.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
I hardly count that as a healthy counter, as it can either have a lum berry to be immune to status, or get pwned by foul play.
Noivern can't do anything to stop Twave and swagger, so I have no clue why you mentioned him.
Seriously, if one more person brings up Own Tempo, I might just find my shotgun and shoot my computer, then track them down and *Insert highly illegal action* them
Thundurus counters
the -sey's stop, but can't do much back either and can still be taken down with enough luck
Rotom and Gliscor don't "stop" it at all, just is immune to Twave and takes small damage from foul play, but can still fall to a lucky bastard
Trevenant
8 Atk Liepard Foul Play vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Trevenant: 282-332 (75.4 - 88.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
I hardly count that as a healthy counter, as it can either have a lum berry to be immune to status, or get pwned by foul play.
Noivern can't do anything to stop Twave and swagger, so I have no clue why you mentioned him.
There is no "variety." Klefki has 1 true counter, and 1 reliable check (sort of ish in magic bounce), and a lot of "checks" that require a coin toss to work.
Broken, course not! Just uncompetitive and bad for the meta.
Seriously, if one more person brings up Own Tempo, I might just find my shotgun and shoot my computer, then track them down and *Insert highly illegal action* them
What, more of this own tempo bullshit? May I invite you to read the thread before making dumb statements?
Hyper offensive teams are usually at a disadvantage vs a team of swagger foul play mons, especially if such the swagger team contains a Ditto. Balance, bulky offense and stall teams typically have an easier time switching around the confusion/paralysis circus, but HO really hates prankster Swagger due to the sheer number of Pokemon that will hit themselves really hard if they get unlucky. Since the increase of swagplay teams on the ladder puts HO at an inherent disadvantage, I support the banning of swagplay.
Also, is there a worse feeling than some 14 year old saying "lol" after successfully haxing you to death on the ladder?
Also, is there a worse feeling than some 14 year old saying "lol" after successfully haxing you to death on the ladder?
Hoo boy, I had a feeling this would eventually rear its ugly head, but it is a tough decision for me to think of. However, I think banning the 'mons that make it effecive (even though I still dislike Thundy and Klefki), would not be the correct way to go about it, as Pokemon like these, even with Liepard, can do viable stuff outside of Swagger (i.e. Klefki Dual Screens, Utility Taunt+T-Wave Thundy, NP Liepard etc.), and shouldn't be banned entirely due to them having access to one move. But, I do think option 1 or option 2 would be the best options, primarily option 1, because who is going to use Swagger seriously anyway outside of this strategy when they could be supporting their team better with better moves to choose from? Not many if at all (except NU Liepard but just use NP if you whine too much), so I think I'm on the side of just banning Swagger.
yes, there is. After the same one does it twice.
That said, HO has been taking a lot of hits recently, and I'd say swag play is the least of it's worries.
Except this isn't the world, this is pokemon. We can remove things from pokemon such as evasion, OHKO attacks with 30% accuracy and moody. Confusion on top of paralysis with a priority boost is all luck in how the rest of the game will go, so now we're considering banning a part of it.
I'm all for the complex ban option. If only because I feel like the bans are getting too frequent and a mass ban would only escalate the problem.
You can't ban a playstyle to help another playstyle. SwagPlay teams hate stall teams, so should we ban stall because stall puts SwagPlay at a disadvantage?
- Status