No it's not. It was the introduction of Prankster. You are both completely wrong. Without Swagger, all Prankster users are completely fine. I'm sure we can at least agree on that.
-
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
Klefki is only debatably broken because of 1 move - Swagger. Swagger is successfully abusable on more pokemon than just Klefki.
Also while Klefki and Thundurus-I are the most notable of the Swagger users in OU, this ban is probably going to apply to the lower tiers as well, where Swagger abusers such as Sableye and several others are usable in, so specifically banning the strategy with those two specific pokemon is obnoxiously complex.
Mega Gengar has multiple factors, most notably Shadow Tag combined with its great stats and supportive moveset. However, Shadow Tag isn't considered broken because Mega Gengar was the only user of it that was able to throw the metagame off balance.
"I don't understand this mentality where people want to skirt around banning Swagger as a move and entertain needless complex bans. The reason that the ban is being considered at all is because the move itself has its own negative effect within the tier. I'd hate to bring up comparisons again but this feels a bit like the Drizzle Complex ban.
Anyways, I'd like to assume that we're trying to avoid Complex bans and entertaining Swagger + Prankster is just one that's unnecessary to take."
So yeah I posted that on our forums but yeah, I'll add more on here because people seem to be completely missing the point.
Why entertain a ban on Klefki when without Swagger its nowhere near as broken?
Why entertain a ban on Thundurus-I when without Swagger, it still functions as something else in the tier that isn't broken (my opinion on it on this gen anyways)?
Why entertain a complex ban on Prankster and Swagger together when you could simply ban Swagger?
At this point, everyone is just looking for a reason to not just ban the move. The simplest of actions can prevent less issues in the future.
Also desudesudesu.
Anyways, I'd like to assume that we're trying to avoid Complex bans and entertaining Swagger + Prankster is just one that's unnecessary to take."
So yeah I posted that on our forums but yeah, I'll add more on here because people seem to be completely missing the point.
Why entertain a ban on Klefki when without Swagger its nowhere near as broken?
Why entertain a ban on Thundurus-I when without Swagger, it still functions as something else in the tier that isn't broken (my opinion on it on this gen anyways)?
Why entertain a complex ban on Prankster and Swagger together when you could simply ban Swagger?
At this point, everyone is just looking for a reason to not just ban the move. The simplest of actions can prevent less issues in the future.
Also desudesudesu.
I do agree about the swagger part, I've been for the complex ban since the beginning, but Prankster + Swagger has been available for a while, it's just it wasn't a problem until Klefki and Thundurus-I were brought into the picture
If the problem is Swagger in combination with Prankster (which it is) why not ban that in combination with Prankster? Out of the choices offered in the OP I think that's the most logical. There's nothing really broken about a non-prankster user going for Swagger and Foul Play, It's the specific combination of Prankster AND Swagger that makes the strategy un-competitive. I think banning Thundurus-I or Klefki for this would be a really bad idea. Thundurus-I and Klefki both have OU viable sets that have nothing to do with Prankster in combination with Swagger.
Swagger as stated early has a small niche as a phasing move, so I think eliminating it completely would be a huge oversight. But I also fucking hate Swagger so either way Complex Ban or Simple Ban I'm happy lol. Just don't ban Thundurus-I and Klefki.
Swagger as stated early has a small niche as a phasing move, so I think eliminating it completely would be a huge oversight. But I also fucking hate Swagger so either way Complex Ban or Simple Ban I'm happy lol. Just don't ban Thundurus-I and Klefki.
This is actually a pretty good question. The answer is simple. You're proposing a complex ban, which really isn't ideal for one. Two, really the only benefit from your proposal is that non-Prankster pokemon can still use Swagger. No serious competitive player does that (in before "I do", but seriously, the whole point of this suspect is people abusing Swagger with Prankster which is what you'll see in 99% of battles against Swagger-users as well). Three, just banning Swagger is the easiest solution and has very minimal side-effects, unlike banning the Pokemon that use them (e.g. Klefki isn't uncompetitive without Swagger and has other sets to run, so why ban it?).
EDIT: Also, read what Hannah said. Her post pretty much sums up everything.
We're not going to keep pokemon around just because they have other viable sets. There's the classic example of allowing Blaze Blaziken in OU and UU, but if we were to start doing that, it wouldn't be long before people start proposing to allow Mega Mewtwo Y in NU if it's only allowed to use confusion and hidden power. Unless we identify something specific as actually uncompetitive, banning pokemon is the only choice. Now the problem is keeping the ban as simple as possible but still address the problem without banning too much, yay!
I think that's kinda ridiculous, it's a slippery slope argument. I don't think the community would allow such a silly thing to happen. There's no reason we can't have more complex bans. Blaze Blaziken should be in lower tiers because it really can't do anything. I know that makes things more complicated, but are we really going to let 2 Pokemon go Uber when we could just: Ban Swagger outright(kinda ridiculous because Swagger can phase) or Ban Swagger in combination with Prankster. Is Dual Screens Klefki such a threat that it needs to be banned? We can still use these Pokemon, the complex ban in this case is the best path.
I agree with banning Swagger, I hate Swagger, But I think banning the combination is the most likely to happen
Blaziken's ability, Speed Boost, is what mainly made it broken. However, Speed Boost isn't broken or "uncompetitive", as all of its viable users don't throw off the metagame, as I mentioned with Shadow Tag.
Mega Mewtwo Y is (obviously) ubers because of its sky-high stats combined with its moveset. However, the moves it uses aren't deemed broken or "uncompetitive," as all of the pokemon that can learn its moves (which apart from its exclusive attacks, is a large amount) don't throw off the metagame.
However, both Klefki, Thundurus-I, and a few others have something in common that makes them debatably broken, which is Swagger. Without Swagger, they are still perfectly viable and it doesn't require banning multiple pokemon over 1 move.
Also, the notion that "LET'S BAN ALL CONFUSION RELATED THINGS" seems a bit over the top. People even entertaining a confusion clause is laughable as well.
Once Teeter dance, Supersonic, and Signal beam start breaking the metagame and spark usage of arguably horrible Pokemon just for the advantage of the move it brings, then you can start considering a confusion clause.
Once Teeter dance, Supersonic, and Signal beam start breaking the metagame and spark usage of arguably horrible Pokemon just for the advantage of the move it brings, then you can start considering a confusion clause.
Let me correct myself, I'm not actually campaigning to ban Klefki and Thundurus-I, just pointing out that we don't make things complicated to preserve sets of ban worthy pokemon. We're never (I say hoping I'm not jinxing myself) going to do a complex ban to allow Blaziken in OU/UU because we ban things by their best sets. Blaziken's best set is too broken for OU, and obviously so is Mewtwoite Y, but if we were to ban Swagger solely to allow Klefki and Thundurus-I's other sets to remain, then we could make similar arguments to bring uber pokemon down with limitations to their movesets, abilities and items as well, and I don't think anybody wants that.
The good thing is that's not going to happen, because we're NOT going to ban swagger (swagger + prankster, or whatever we're going to ban) solely to preserve Klefki and Thundurus-I's other sets, we're going to ban it because swagplay is inherently uncompetitive. I was just trying to get you and other people to stop using the other sets as a reason to go with one ban or another
The flaw in your argument is that you're mixing up the terms "broken" and "uncompetitive". What you're saying is that you're afraid that people will try to bring down broken pokemon with certain limitations, when we're actually talking about an uncompetitive move here. It's something completely different and there's no comparing them. Basically your analogy doesn't hold any sense.
No. Klefki brought attention to the problem; it is not the creator of the problem. Pokemon such as Sableye and Liepard are just as much at fault in this strategy. Banning individual abusers when Swagger is clearly the problem is skirting around the issue as a whole, or you ban every abuser. Ban Swagger, or ban Klefki/Thundurus/Liepard/Sableye/Purrloin/Murkrow/Mega Banette/Tornadus? Obviously the former.
His analogy is flawed ~semantically~ so what. This is cherrypicking an analogy instead of attacking the argument. You have not pointed out any faults in his argument.
I don't think I ever once called Swagplay "broken." I was very careful about that, but if I did, I'm sorry. Regardless of whether something's "broken" or "uncompetitive," if we start making allowances to let certain sets remain OU, we'll have to do it for all of them. I don't see what you're complaining about Liarliarpantsonfire , since that example is a reason to not ban the pokemon, something I thought you would appreciate
Jukain 's right in that Klefki and Thundurus-I didn't create the problem, just brought attention to it, so what I said earlier about just banning those 2 probably not being enough is still true.
I'll repeat myself from my last post:
The obvious solution is to ban either swagger or swagger + prankster, but before we do either, we have to fully understand what they both entail
Banning swagger will include banning all the swagger related instances where it is not ban worthy, but will be a much simpler ban.
Banning swagger + prankster is a complex ban, which is never something we should do lightly, but will preserve a part of the meta game (albeit a very small, pretty insignificant one).
I'm in favor of the latter, because I dislike banning anything that isn't ban worthy, but since they'll both get the job done, I doubt it'll matter much. If we could focus our discussion on which one we support (I don't think anybody who's followed this thread still supports no ban), then maybe the moderators will implement something sooner rather than later and we can move on.
Edit: one thing I'm a little shaky on though, would any ban implemented be metagame wide? I don't particularly like the idea of dealing with this issue in UU if Klefki isn't banned and drops in usage
Last edited:
I read probably the first 10ish pages and then have skipped the rest but I feel I should put in my two cents.
I seriously think that the number of times I've encountered this combo may be once this generation and then slightly more last gen. Sure it's not "in the spirit of the game" but you move more often than when you're attacked by para-flinch Jirachi. The key differences between the two are that you don't hurt yourself against Jirachi but if you switch out the problem isn't fixed (confusion goes away Jirachi flinching you will not).
As of yet I don't think I've ever disagreed with a Smogon ban but this is ridiculous. If it were run on a larger percentage of teams maybe I could understand this, but no one runs it and I assume that people further up the ladder use it even less (haven't tried to ladder).
Now I really disagree with Verlisify on basically every point he has but for once he may be on to something. THIS IS A TERRIBLE BAN IDEA.
IMO things like Moody are broken as hell. This however isn't broken and I think this is a case of many Smogon members needing to have a tea spoon of concrete and toughen the hell up.
TL:DR Don't ban anything
I seriously think that the number of times I've encountered this combo may be once this generation and then slightly more last gen. Sure it's not "in the spirit of the game" but you move more often than when you're attacked by para-flinch Jirachi. The key differences between the two are that you don't hurt yourself against Jirachi but if you switch out the problem isn't fixed (confusion goes away Jirachi flinching you will not).
As of yet I don't think I've ever disagreed with a Smogon ban but this is ridiculous. If it were run on a larger percentage of teams maybe I could understand this, but no one runs it and I assume that people further up the ladder use it even less (haven't tried to ladder).
Now I really disagree with Verlisify on basically every point he has but for once he may be on to something. THIS IS A TERRIBLE BAN IDEA.
IMO things like Moody are broken as hell. This however isn't broken and I think this is a case of many Smogon members needing to have a tea spoon of concrete and toughen the hell up.
TL:DR Don't ban anything
Actually the whole argument is flawed. Let's assume his example with Blaziken. He's afraid that people will use the argument that it would be justified to make Blaziken OU with a couple of limitations (e.g. Speed Boost isn't allowed). This is the (attempt at) an analogy with banning Klefki/Thundurus-I to Ubers because they have one trait (Swagger) that supposedly makes them "broken". The reason that this is completely flawed is because Swagger isn't broken, but uncompetitive, as pretty much every knowledgeable person has repeated over and over in this thread. Also, these two aren't the only pokemon that abuse Swagger, meaning if you'd want to be consequent (which you have to, otherwise you're only "fixing" half the problem) you'd have to ban every single Prankster pokemon. I don't need to elaborate that that would be total nonsense.
As for him suggesting a complex ban: that would be complete nonsense. Nobody uses Swagger in a competitive scene when they don't have Prankster. No, not even for phazing. It's just flatout the most ridiculous argument for a complex ban I've ever seen. I don't see how else I can put it, it's just too obvious. He says "I doubt it'll matter much", clearly showing he has no idea that a complex ban shouldn't even be considered unless there's absolutely no other way out and even then (e.g. the Blaziken ban despite only SB Blaziken being broken). Especially in a scenario like this one right here the only reasonable option is to ban Swagger. A complex ban or banning individual pokemon should in my opinion be out of the question (you showed to agree on the latter).
I'm not sure if you've really read the first 10 pages and maybe if you had you shouldn't have stopped.
The problem is not whether or not it is broken.
The problem is that it turns the game into nothing but a complete game of chance. Paraflinching is much easier to deal with than this nonsense.
I haven't been following this thread all the way through, but whenever I check in on it, I'm almost always guaranteed to find at least one post about how Smogon apparently needs to avoid complex bans (such as Blaziken + Speed Boost or Prankster + Swagger). I've never really seen any concrete reasons given as to why this is the case, though. Could somebody please inform me as to why?
I was messing around on Pokemon Online while playing the 5th Generation Metagame. I was using a SwagPlay Sableye, and I must admit that it's forced me to revise my position somewhat. Now I believe that the correct option would be to instate a complex ban of Swagger + Foul Play.
I was messing around on Pokemon Online while playing the 5th Generation Metagame. I was using a SwagPlay Sableye, and I must admit that it's forced me to revise my position somewhat. Now I believe that the correct option would be to instate a complex ban of Swagger + Foul Play.
I'd highly debate that fact. You are more likely to move in this case than with paraflinch. Surely via that logic alone it's less broken/noncompetitive.
For the people who still keep comparing Swaggplay to evasion, moody and OHKO clauses, it would be interesting to consider this:
Evasion Clause
A player may not use a move which has the sole effect of raising Evasion, namely Double Team and Minimize. Originally created because it has been deemed broken since generation 1, the Evasion Clause is one of the most consistent clauses in competitive Pokémon, having been retested on occasion (with the most recent being at the start of Gen 5), and still being found broken, not to mention uncompetitive.
OHKO Clause
The moves Guillotine, Horn Drill, Fissure, and Sheer Cold can not be used. OHKO Clause was standard in Generation 1-4, as it was seen as turning the game into a luck-based one. In Gen 5, a number of players tested OHKO moves, and came to the conclusion that they were broken in spite of their poor accuracy. It is currently enforced in all official Smogon tiers and a majority of Pokémon Online tiers.
And regarding moody, this is what smogon's analysis on bibarel has to say:
Bibarel is generally an unfortunate case. All three of its abilities are among the best in the game (Moody being banned for being too overpowered), but Bibarel simply lacks the stats and movepool to make good use of them
This is the main difference. Things like Moody, OHKO and Evasion were powerful aside from just being annoying and luck based. Prankster is simply not that powerfull. It will win many games because of pure luck and will also lose many games because of it. Swaggplay is not reliable enough to get you in the top of OU the way sand veil garchomp did with sandstorm teams some time ago. It is simply not broken.
Evasion Clause
A player may not use a move which has the sole effect of raising Evasion, namely Double Team and Minimize. Originally created because it has been deemed broken since generation 1, the Evasion Clause is one of the most consistent clauses in competitive Pokémon, having been retested on occasion (with the most recent being at the start of Gen 5), and still being found broken, not to mention uncompetitive.
OHKO Clause
The moves Guillotine, Horn Drill, Fissure, and Sheer Cold can not be used. OHKO Clause was standard in Generation 1-4, as it was seen as turning the game into a luck-based one. In Gen 5, a number of players tested OHKO moves, and came to the conclusion that they were broken in spite of their poor accuracy. It is currently enforced in all official Smogon tiers and a majority of Pokémon Online tiers.
And regarding moody, this is what smogon's analysis on bibarel has to say:
Bibarel is generally an unfortunate case. All three of its abilities are among the best in the game (Moody being banned for being too overpowered), but Bibarel simply lacks the stats and movepool to make good use of them
This is the main difference. Things like Moody, OHKO and Evasion were powerful aside from just being annoying and luck based. Prankster is simply not that powerfull. It will win many games because of pure luck and will also lose many games because of it. Swaggplay is not reliable enough to get you in the top of OU the way sand veil garchomp did with sandstorm teams some time ago. It is simply not broken.
Last edited:
The difference is that you can't make a team of 6 paraflinchers. You can't even use 4 paraflinchers. And paraflinch doesn't have priority. This has been gone over before, you should have kept reading.
All right, let's assume you really are the genius that knows everything and I'm every bit as stupid as you make me out to be. Explain to me why it matters that my example was one where something was banned for being broken while klefki's uncompetitive. The reasons for banning are different, but they're both being reviewed for ou. If we were to ban one and not the other for reasons other than not meeting their respective criteria, we'd be hypocrites.
Speed boost blaziken and swag play klefki are both ban worthy. IF we only banned a klefki with swagger, then we'd get a million requests to bring back blaze blaziken.
Not that any of that really matters, because I'm not even seriously supporting banning the Pokemon, I want either the swagger ban or the complex ban. Neither will have huge repercussions because it's not like neither have precedent (you can't tell me swagger + prankster is more complex than drizzle + swift swim). If you disagree, then say your piece, but don't get all confrontational or whatever it was you just did, it makes people less likely to take you seriously
I wasn't talking to you. Btw the Drizzle-Swift Swim ban was rather controversial if you recall.
You have stated that you haven't laddered. How are we supposed to trust you when you don't have the slightest clue as to what you are talking about? The whole reason as to why this thread was started was because a LARGE number of users have seen it, played against it, and lost to it.
- Status