Metagame Terastallization in Ubers UU

[Imperial]

Terastallization in Ubers UU.
(Huge thanks to Leo Justice and Finchely for helping write)​

Recently, the results of the January tiering survey were published, with Tera being the most divisive topic. Receiving 7.14 and 6.3 from the general and qualified playerbases respectively, there is clearly unrest regarding Tera’s place in Ubers UU. Yet, the tiering council concluded that there isn’t quite enough support from qualified voters to warrant tiering action. As such, we’ve opened this thread in order to create a more concentrated space to discuss the topic at hand.

Benefits

Ubers UU uniquely houses Pokemon whose use of Tera provide them with additional utility and/or strengths outside of those inherent in Terastalization. Namely, Ogerpon-H and Terapagos. These two aren’t overbearing, and are rather healthy for the meta. The ability to Terastalize is baked into these two Pokemon’s designs, and they would lose a key portion of their intentional capabilities should Tera get banned. Other examples of healthy Tera usage are apparent in Regieleki. Despite its pitiful offensive stats, Regieleki is able to utilize Tera Blast Ice to keep Landorus on its (nonexistent) toes, while refraining from becoming an offensive monster due to the aforementioned stats. In addition to Regieleki, Tera generally bolsters the ability of low-tier Pokemon to perform unique roles. Volcorona, Okidogi, and Annihilape all come to mind. Alongside these examples, defensive Tera enables certain pokemon, such as Giratina and Garganacl, to shed their vulnerable typing and gain a stronger typing like Fairy, increasing their defensive capabilities. These pokemon are certainly not dependent on Tera by any means, but it is nevertheless an important tool which increases their viability. Furthermore, Tera gives certain teamstyles outs to match-ups that are too high variance to be comfortably played, such as offense versus Landorus or Ekiller Arceus, or stall versus Stored Power users like Espathra.

Detriments

It’s about time we address the elephant in the room, due to its particular relevancy when it comes to talks about Tera. Zacian received roughly 5.4 from both categories on the recent survey - the highest score received for a Pokemon on that survey, and also a 2-3 whole points higher than it's ever gotten since our first official tiering survey back in December 2023. With the absence of Landorus-T, Tera Blast Ground finally became an option that Zacian could more easily run to gain the coveted Fairy/Ground coverage combo. The few Pokemon capable of switching in in Moltres, Corviknight, and Skarmory all get obliterated by Wild Charge. Physically defensive Unaware users in Quagsire, Dondozo, and Clefable are unique in their ability to avoid the shortcomings of the aforementioned birds, but are still often undesirable for a number of reasons. Dondozo and Clefable are very exploitable and are typically relegated to Stall. Quagsire is notable for its ability to fit into more standard balances and the like, yet even Quagsire is fallible to the occasional Trailblaze Zacian, and also can be unappealing due to its status as a Water-Type that can’t beat the tier’s Fire-Types in almost every case. Alongside Zacian, a Terastalyzed Arceus can also be incredibly difficult to deal with. Every Arceus is capable of using Tera to incredible effect, due to the insane bundle of stats it possesses. Calm Mind Arceus will often use Tera to either make itself immune to phazing, to gain a typing that allows it to beat would-be offensive checks, or in the case of Arceus-Dark, both at the same time. Physical setup Arceus’ use of Tera is arguably even more egregious, due to its more immediately threatening nature. Tera Ground is incredibly popular on Dragon Dance Arceus, due to its ability to both block Thunder Wave and also provide a STAB to Earthquake. Regardless of which Tera type physical setup Arceus runs however, as the Tera type doesn’t overlap weaknesses with the original type, all physical setup Arceus use Tera for the same purpose: to gain a free turn to boost. Due to Arceus’ absurd bulk, it is capable of taking just about any one neutral attack, giving it the chance to Dragon Dance or Swords Dance its way into winning the game. Particularly when it comes to offense teams that rely on keeping offensive pressure as the primary method of handling most opposing offensive threats, physical setup Arceus can pose a major problem. Finally, Tera often tends to benefit offense more than defense, which contributes to the issue we’ve had for a long time where the tier tends to become polarized between stall and offense to varying degrees.

 

[LovelyLuna]

Zacian is an obvious broken, but the results are lower than Tera because many players want action on Tera instead of Zacian. I strongly agree with this opinion because banning Zacian is the single worst action that could be taken. Zacian holds the tier so strongly and teambuilding without it would be awful. There's no common Darkceus check anymore, You'd have to use weak Fighting-types and still very few of them take Arceus on after Tera. A lot of Dragons will become overwhelming because Magearna becomes the tier's only good Fairy. Gouging Fire's Outrage is pretty much riskless and will constantly trade 2/3 for 1 if not sweep. Roaring Moon becomes very borderline, and counterplay becomes extremely limited. Kyurem-White and Palkia-Origin also no defensive counterplay and removing their best offensive counterplay makes them a lot more difficult to deal with. We would either live in a toxic meta where every team feels the need to use shitmons, or it would be Dragon spam on Dragon spam. I can't see balance having any success dealing with all of these threats, an issue that has plagued the tier. To fix the tier after a Zacian ban, it's probably ideal to ban all of these, that's like 6 Pokemon you have to ban? Assuming nothing becomes overbearing when Giratina becomes pretty much the only Dragon-type. This 6 is on top of the already banned NDW and Arceus forms that would be fine in Ubers UU if not for a certain generational mechanic: Tera.

Tera is responsible for NDW, who with its support set is a very strong defensive Pokemon capable of taking on currently unwallable threats, the aforementioend Palkia-Origin and Kyurem-White are great examples of this. It also offers a relevant Stealth Rocker not named Landorus, and opens up teambuilding by allowing you to use Ghost-types not named Giratina. But you can't use all these traits right now, why? NDW is framed for Tera's crimes. Tera is at fault for the ban of Dragonceus as well, which was a nice bulky Dragon-type, nice to slot in a Fire and Water resist without being locked into Giratina again. It's also arguably responsible for Arceus-Steel and Arceus-Fire remaining banned. There are a lot of offensive Pokemon that threaten Steelceus but there are also a lot of Pokemon it can check, having a Steel-type that isn't Magearna or Solgaleo has become a far away dream, and Tera is to blame. Zacian's brokenness, and subsequently responsible for the Dragons and Darkceus becoming overwhelming are all because of Tera. Espathra's controversy is also largely because of Tera, Espathra would never become a debate if the only set is Dazzling Gleam, a world where it could never break through Solgaleo despite 3 turn hypnosis, a world where it has significantly less set up opportunities.

"Then, the Ubers philosophy would be: Do your best to make a fun, competitive format with all the Pokemon, at the expense of simplicity/purity." is a quote from Chaos. "Ubers is the most inclusive of Smogon's tiers, aiming to allow the use of as many Pokemon as competitively possible." is literally taken from the Smogon dex, and Ubers UU is an Ubers tier. Choosing to ban so many Pokemon instead of ban Tera goes against the tiering policy and spirit of Ubers. Even if you want to take the skeptic route and say we don't know what will be banned after Zacian (It's pretty obious.), thats 3-5 Pokemon banned, a controvertial Pokemon, and another issue I want to mention in the following paragraph. This should be more than enough Pokemon to protect and take action on Tera instead.

Tera Arceus has also sparked heated discussions. Tera Arceus is EXTREMELY restricitive on teambuilding, you'd think having 120/120/120 bulk Pokemon with the ability to Tera and check other offensive threats would open up teambuilding, but not in the slightest. Tera Fairy Arceus is very hard to punish, as Steel- and Poison-types are rare, revenge killers are limited to Gunk Shot Arceus-Poison, Excadrill in Sand, and Choice Scarf Solgaleo. Tera Normal is also difficult to threaten, with only one weakness, especially if Arceus-Poison flips its match ups. Tera Ground Arceus can dodge Thunder Wave and threaten sweeps with STAB EQ, this is along with the added benefits from shedding your typing. There are other Tera types but these are definitely the biggest offenders. I also believe Tera Arceus defeats a big point of Ubers UU, It's advertised as a meta where the weaker legendaries like Solgaleo and Deoxys can shine, but also the meta where stronger OU Pokemon like Urshifu and Gouging Fire have a place in the meta. Arceus is still one Pokemon, so Tera can pretty much change the Pokemon entirely. If Arceus-Poison clicks Tera Normal to set up and Extreme Speeds 3 Pokemon to clean up a game, was that the work of Arceus-Poison or Arceus-Normal? If Arceus-Electric pops Tera Fairy on the Giratina Dragon Tail and gets 2 more free boosts, is that Arceus-Electric threatening a sweep or Arceus-Fairy? Tera Ground Arceus-Poison becomes immune to Thunder Wave and takes down 3 Pokemon, or even Arceus-Rock which larps as DD Arceus-Ground especially well, using its exact coverage and becoming the same type. With how often Arceus Teras, these are Ubers OU Pokemon freed into Ubers UU, this is not what the tier was created for, this is toxic and eats away at the tier's identity.

I can't post this without acknowledging the pro-ban arguments. What makes people want to keep Tera despite all of its issues? The Pokemon enabled by Tera, namely the Pokemon in the OP. My biggest issue with this is that the losses are hardly relevant. Ogerpon-H had 8 uses across 5 weeks of UUbersPL, thats 8 teams out of 154 replays, and it's not like the Pokemon's viability is completely gone with a Tera ban, it still has hard, has access to Knock Off and Spikes, and threatens enough of the metagame to have a niche. Regieleki's pivot set would lose viability with a Tera ban, however, more than half of the 17 Regieleki (Same 5 weeks of UUbersPL) ran a screens set which doesn't require Tera, so Regieleki would still have a place in the tier. Terapagos is the best case of these with a total of 24 uses in 5 weeks of UUbersPL, but its noteworthy that its usage took a nosedive from week 2 -> week 3. Players have been less keen on using it the more time passes, and shifts propably aren't kind to it. Terapagos doesn't completely lose viability either, I stand by the support set being notworthy in a Teraless meta, and its sweeping sets will still pull its sweeps off on Shed Tail and Screens teams.

So, the question becomes: Ban 8-10 Pokemon, defy tiering policy, and keep a toxic part of Ubers UU because you want to keep 3 Pokemon viable, OR ban 1 (one) mechanic and in exchange of a decrease in viability of 3

massive s/o to Imperial, a lot in here is taken from his ideas, especially the policy point.

 

[KineSquared]

I think the metagame health argument really favors pro-ban. For reasons other players are more qualified than me to point out, but I'll do it briefly. There are a small handful of pokemon that sit on a knifes edge of a ban due to tera, and have fallen on different sides as the community sees fit:
Zacian
Arceus forms (dragon and poison for sure, maybe even stuff like dark on further extremes)
Necrozma-Dawn-Wings
Chien-Pao (in the past)
For all of these, you could make the argument that Tera blast is the problem and not tera, but that ship has sailed. These pokemon have major weaknesses built into their typings, but Tera lets them ignore it completely and hit whatever check you can think of, or absorb whatever status you're afraid of.

I want to take a different approach that is important to consider: our place in the smogon ecosystem. I think this is really split into two parts.

Ubers UU as an Ubers tier
The main philosophy behind ubers as I see it in practice (don't worry, I know what chaos has and hasn't laid out) is that "The threshold for bans is much taller than in OU". Many people from the ubers community have looked at some of even our current bans and said "that was a poor decision and shouldn't have happened". I am specifically referring to the more recent bans like NDW, Arceus Fire and Dragon, and re-banning stuff like shaymin-sky and arceus-ghost. They are okay with a much higher degree of centralization than other players, most famously shown by gen 8 ubers usage stats.

So are we being more restrictive by banning a mechanic (Tera) or all of these mons? I would argue that by this logic, banning tera is more restrictive and therefore, we shouldn't do it. The act of giving niche mons a chance to shine because they counter ubers threats is a tale at least as old a shedninja in gen 3, if not slowbro in gen 1. I think besides maybe stuff like quagsire for zacian right now, we have very little of that in our tier. I get the argument that nothing has fundamentally failed by the time we're bringing out the heatran to answer a tera fire arc-dragon. Maybe we need to bring some of that more into the common language of our teambuilding. Generational mechanics are some of the last things to go when bans pile on, and I think just going off that logic, its not bad enough yet. However, this is just one perspective.

Ubers UU as an alternative to OU
I see the OU philosophy in contrast as more of a "Making the metagame better is a priority over preserving problematic elements of the game". I would argue besides Ubers, which has its own philosophy, no other "mainline" SV metagame is as centralized as Ubers UU. With that centralization comes an emphasis on checking and countering specific pokemon - which is exactly what tera hurts our ability to do. Therefore, tera should go.

I think we are in a unique position to push the conversation about tera bans across gen 9 forward, and it having it focus in ubers uu could be great for us. Players would no longer have to go to natdex to try out this sort of thing. Players like Ausma and Pinkacross who have advocated for Tera bans and restrictions could try it out and maybe get the larger metagames one step closer to asking the big question of banworthiness. As someone very focused on community building, I think it could be a great chance to onboard more players into our meta, and maybe improve it along the way.

I have usually been anti-ban for most things Ubers UU, but this time feels different. I think our community and metagame will be better off with tera banned.

 

[BigFatMantis]

I'll give my thoughts on tera specifically sometime later. For now though I just wanted to point out a few things:

The "pros" honestly don't matter when talking about whether or not something should be banned. Tiering philosophy doesn't allow us to preserve anything that is banworthy simply because there are more "pros" that go with it. Additionally, this is not supposed to be an exercise of "weighing pros and cons" because that is also irrelevant - if you think there are more "cons" than "pros" that's ok but it has nothing to do with whether or not Tera should be banned.

The only relevant question should be this:

Is Tera, as a mechanic, so broken to the point that it reaches the much higher threshold necessary for tiering action of a generational mechanic for this metagame specifically?

If the answer is yes, then tiering action should be supported. If the answer is no, then there should be no tiering action. Whether or not Zacian w/ tera makes the metagame worse on a higher scale than Terapagos w/ tera makes it better is irrelevant.

I'd also be interested in seeing why Ubers UU specifically needs tiering action when no other mainline SV tier has done so. What makes the tier different from Ubers, OU, etc. to the point that this tier needs tiering action on tera? If people do not believe thresholds have been met in those tiers to warrant action, then there must be something else specific to Ubers UU that warrants it. I've heard some arguments on it (specifically the Arceus issue), but I'd welcome more on that question specifically.

The other question attached to this is how high is the threshold exactly for this? I don't think there's anything specific, but it's probably more than a 6.3 qualified result on a survey. I personally think both general and qualified should be above 7 for action, but I am interested to hear other thoughts, as well as how precedent in other tiers has dictated how this threshold should operate.

 

[Poosh_i]

I'll give my thoughts on tera specifically sometime later. For now though I just wanted to point out a few things:

The "pros" honestly don't matter when talking about whether or not something should be banned. Tiering philosophy doesn't allow us to preserve anything that is banworthy simply because there are more "pros" that go with it. Additionally, this is not supposed to be an exercise of "weighing pros and cons" because that is also irrelevant - if you think there are more "cons" than "pros" that's ok but it has nothing to do with whether or not Tera should be banned.

The only relevant question should be this:

Is Tera, as a mechanic, so broken to the point that it reaches the much higher threshold necessary for tiering action of a generational mechanic for this metagame specifically?

If the answer is yes, then tiering action should be supported. If the answer is no, then there should be no tiering action. Whether or not Zacian w/ tera makes the metagame worse on a higher scale than Terapagos w/ tera makes it better is irrelevant.

I'd also be interested in seeing why Ubers UU specifically needs tiering action when no other mainline SV tier has done so. What makes the tier different from Ubers, OU, etc. to the point that this tier needs tiering action on tera? If people do not believe thresholds have been met in those tiers to warrant action, then there must be something else specific to Ubers UU that warrants it. I've heard some arguments on it (specifically the Arceus issue), but I'd welcome more on that question specifically.

The other question attached to this is how high is the threshold exactly for this? I don't think there's anything specific, but it's probably more than a 6.3 qualified result on a survey. I personally think both general and qualified should be above 7 for action, but I am interested to hear other thoughts, as well as how precedent in other tiers has dictated how this threshold should operate.

I would say that the largest distinction that this tier makes compared to the other SV tiers is that a majority of the pokemon that make up this tier are Ubers dejects mostly as a result of poor typings, poor coverage, or being directly outclassed by another form of itself in ubers. These are all pokemon that benefit the most from Tera as a mechanic, especially when factoring in the BST differences of our offense pieces compared to our defensive pieces.

Another type of pokemon that benefits heavily from Tera are those with powerful setup options -which as everyone here is well aware of, we have in very high supply. There is a reason that just about EVERY team here has some form of phasing. Tera not only benefits these options (especially those with good natural bulk/coverage issues/ recovery), but also work to stifle out the phasing options (tera fairy everywhere) but also directly counter the limited number of actually viable defensive pokemon in the tier. Our threat saturation of game ending sweepers is VERY high, arguably higher than any other tier bar Ubers itself. Ubers however has Ubers-level defensive pokemon, while we mostly have... Giratina, and Lugia? SVOU has OU-level defensive options. We have Ubers level offensive options with Sub-Ubers defensive options, utilizing specific hard counters to these generally.

The best way i can summarize this is that think about how scary Dragonite is in terms of set variety and tera options in SVOU - just about ALL of our big setup threats here have Dragonite levels of variety. Its just not feasible to build balance teams that can realistically answer every single viable setup threat and it is far easier here to run away with a game with one bad turn due to tera.

While you can always argue "git gud" on this matter, the fact that players have to constantly think about this at any point of a game and potentially risk going for otherwise bad predicts to keep themselves out of game-ending scenarios is just generally stress inducing and is an issue that will persist until we ban every single option capable of this. This will kill the tier's identity.

I will expand later if needed and i do have other thoughts on tera i will post eventually.

 

[Finchely]

Before I begin my post in earnest, there's one thing I want to clarify here. When I refer to "offensive Tera", I mean any use of Tera with offensive intent. This includes using using a Tera defensively in order to gain a turn to set up or whatnot. Likewise, when I say "defensive Tera", I specifically mean Tera used with the intent of improving a Pokemon's defensive profile for defense's sake. By defining it this way, I recognize that the line between offensive and defensive Tera can blur in certain cases, but it shouldn't prove problematic for the point that I want to illustrate in this post.

There's something I want to bring up here that I neglected elaborate on in the OP. One of the reasons I greatly dislike Tera is because of how much power is skewed in favor of offensive Tera vs defensive Tera. Particularly, I greatly dislike how proactive use of offensive Tera is far easier and than proactive use of defensive Tera.

When it comes to playing mons, playing proactively is key. Even in the case of stall, the most reactive playstyle, all the best stall teams play proactively in their own way to choke out the opponent before the opponent can break them. That's not to say that playing reactively is all bad, but it can't function as the primary method of play. I can put it like this: playing reactively keeps you from losing, while playing proactively wins you the game.

When it comes to using Tera to push your own gameplan, offensive Tera is greatly favored over defensive Tera. In fact, the only way to be proactive with defensive Tera, is typically on stall teams where an early or mid game Tera is used in order to fix a major matchup issue.

This is all just to point out how much Tera inherently strains the relationship between offense and defense.

To build on Poosh_i's post, and to also elaborate on something in the OP, I want to also discuss the way that Ubers UU has always been polarized between offense and stall to a certain extent. We have Ubers-level threats, but lack the same kinds of Ubers-level defense. In this sense, our tier may always have this polarization, but Tera pushes it beyond what is bearable in my opinion. Teams that can abuse Tera to a major extent will nearly always be stronger than teams that cannot. And when it comes to abusing Tera, both extremes of the archetype spectrum win, but balance loses out. Because of how much offense is favored in the context of our tier, defense must go all-in in order to adaquately stave off the myriad of offensive options in the tier. This is how we get the problem we've had for quite some time now, where the meta diverges away to Stall and Offense, leaving balance behind.

And no I'm not done yet.

Why Tera Faerie is Fucked

A particular issue I want to point out right now, is the incredible power of Tera Faerie. For just about every setup sweeper in the tier, Tera Faerie is one of if not just the best option for it to run. Especially as it pertains to CM Arceus, Tera Faerie allows Arceus to abuse its obscene bulk, to outlast or even in certain cases outright beat would-be checks. The existence of Tera Faerie necessitates many teams needing some sort of offensive Poison or Steel-type, which are in rather short supply, and all of which are abusable. Sneasler is rather weak when it comes to speed control, and has a very difficult time touching the tier's Poison, Steel, and Ghost-types. Switcheroo is an option in a pinch, but is a rather costly option, due to then losing your speed control. Arceus-Poison is by far the tier's best Poison-type, but still greatly suffers from being an Arceus forme weak to Landorus' Earth Power. When it comes to Steel-type attackers capable of revenging say Tera Faerie CM Arc-Dark, we have Zamazenta-C, Sand Rush Excadrill, and the dubiously inconsistent Scarf Solgaleo and Tera Dialga. None of which are easily splashable or even particularly desirable at all. If you don't have a Poison or Steel type due to the relatively constraining nature of the available options, then your recourse is typically to just load Zacian. Zacian is practically the only Pokemon faster than Arceus that is capable of not only threatening CM Arceus, but also capable of being a consistent and good Pokemon in its own right. However, even Zacian is not always a perfect answer, due to its liability to get worn down over time while Arceus can keep recovering off damage, and its inability to reliably take hits from Arceus formes that aren't Dark or Fighting, without expending Tera. That said, Zacian is still incredibly popular, because defensive answers are incredibly few and far between, while the aformentioned other offensive answers typically aren't preferable. Despite Zacian's flaws, it is still one of the best means, due to its ability to almost act as a catch-all to any holes left uncovered.

The only relevant question should be this:

Is Tera, as a mechanic, so broken to the point that it reaches the much higher threshold necessary for tiering action of a generational mechanic for this metagame specifically?

To answer BFM's question, I would say "Yes. For all the reasons mentioned above, Tera as a mechanic within specifically Ubers UU is so broken to the point that it reaches the much higher threshold necessary for tiering action of a generational mechanic".

 

[OceanicGamer]

I'd also be interested in seeing why Ubers UU specifically needs tiering action when no other mainline SV tier has done so. What makes the tier different from Ubers, OU, etc. to the point that this tier needs tiering action on tera? If people do not believe thresholds have been met in those tiers to warrant action, then there must be something else specific to Ubers UU that warrants it. I've heard some arguments on it (specifically the Arceus issue), but I'd welcome more on that question specifically.

I believe the issue of this is because Ubers UU is left with loads of strong offensive Pokémon but the same can't be said for the defensive Pokémon. The top Pokemon already have a limited amount of defensive counterplay which is ruined by the addition of Tera. Take Zacian, which I would argue has barely good defensive answers, in those being Magearna and Solgaleo, and oh oopsie! It clicks Tera Ground Tera Blast and boom not only is one of your key defensive pieces is gone but now you are staring down a Zacian ready to break another hole, forcing out a Choice Scarfer, which can be turned into a free turn for something else. And as Luna said above

banning Zacian is the single worst action that could be taken. Zacian holds the tier so strongly and teambuilding without it would be awful. There's no common Darkceus check anymore, You'd have to use weak Fighting-types and still very few of them take Arceus on after Tera. A lot of Dragons will become overwhelming because Magearna becomes the tier's only good Fairy. Gouging Fire's Outrage is pretty much riskless and will constantly trade 2/3 for 1 if not sweep. Roaring Moon becomes very borderline, and counterplay becomes extremely limited. Kyurem-White and Palkia-Origin also no defensive counterplay and removing their best offensive counterplay makes them a lot more difficult to deal with. We would either live in a toxic meta where every team feels the need to use shitmons, or it would be Dragon spam on Dragon spam.

Option 1 is do nothing but watch at this meta that is volatile to most team cores, Option 2 is to ban Zacian will leads to 5 other bans, or Option 3, ban Tera and the Arceus and Zacian issues are much more easily solved

I'd also like to add something else, banning Tera = unbanning Pokemon

Obvious one is

Our only good Rocker right now is Landorus-Incarnate, and while yes Lando-I is good, sometimes it feels harsh to be forced to use it or a shitmon to get Rocks. NDW gives us another Rocker, as well as a soft-check to Lando-I, just being a good support Pokemon. It would still be a good wallbreaker, but now its a healthy wallbreaker that can be dealt with because it no longer has the option to shed its god-awful typing nor gain important coverage.

Also,

Without option to Tera Fire, it can no longer elude Wisp nor OHKO Magearna at +1 with Flare Blitz (if it gets to +2, skill issue). Also, Dragon is a great fantastic defensive typing, but our only good defensive Dragon is Tina, which is definitely a good Pokemon, but as stated earlier, more options can lead to more team exploration and creativity

If banning Tera means a more controllable Zacian and Arceus, as well as freedom in the builder, which leads to a healthier and more fun metagame, why wouldn't we ban it?

 

[Aberforth]

Speaking personally and only as someone who's played SV Ubers UU in this recent team tour, I dont think I'd vote to ban tera as a mechanic. This far into gen9, playing without tera in gen9 would feel like I wasnt playing gen9 at all. Tera is the single most defining aspect of generation 9, and while I dont always like the effect it has on a tier, without it I would feel like I was playing the facsimile of a gen9 tier.

Generational mechanics should always have a very high bar before action is taken, especially in an ubers-based metagame, and I dont believe tera ever crossed that mark for me while I was playing both with and against it in UUbers PL. It was simply one extra aspect of each Pokemon I had to try to account for. Purely subjectively, I dont think I saw many games where Tera was the decisive factor in the result either.

 

[LovelyLuna]

It was simply one extra aspect of each Pokemon I had to try to account for. Purely subjectively, I dont think I saw many games where Tera was the decisive factor in the result either.

I think this is false, you yourself say Tera is the most defining aspect of the generation. Zacian constantly steals games with Tera Ground sets, having no defensive counterplay, NDW and Dragonceus were also banned because Tera let them sweep so easily. I'd argue that this is the tier (Non-OM or 1v1) where Tera is the most problematic, because of much offense is favoured. Zacian and Deoxys are slight downgrades from their Ubers formes, but Moltres is a baby chick in comparison to Ho-Oh, and Magearna vs Arceus-Fairy as defensive Fairies is a very unfair comparison. Ubers also has Eternatus and Landorus-T which don't have anything in UUbers that can perform their jobs, the latter is especially evident with how much its recent rise affected. It gets ridiculous when Tera gets added into the picture, especially with Arceus pretty much becoming Ubers Pokemon in Arc-Fairy and Arc-Normal.

UUbersPL replays where Tera was the winning factor

UUbersPL Tera

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810326 - Pressured to Tera Fairy and open up a weakness to Poisonceus, because you can't slot a Tera Zacian check on a team. Then Ekiller (why is this Ubers-tier Pokemon legal in UUbers) cleans up the game.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810340 - Fairy on Fairy action, as Finch said really well, counterplay is scarce. Darkceus pops Tera to threaten a sweep, and then the counterplay is to use your own Arceus-Fairy (Ubers Pokemon) and fish for crits/good speed tie rng.)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810418 - Both Dragons Tera with an idea of sweeping, and the counterplay is multiple sacrifices to revenge it.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810545 - I don't like this because im bad and team was bad but Tera set up swepers are so fun.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810635 - Tera to begin a cheesepathra sweep
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810649 - I love Tera set up
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810685 - the inferior Tera Fire PsyFangs Zacian still breaks its checks, and Fishy only comes back from a 2-5 with Tera Arceus.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811085 - Tera Water Garg delays the Arceus sweep and ensures a win.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811170?p2 - Tera Arceus is my favourite answer to Tera Arceus
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811233 - The Tera Ground Rmoon here is brutal, and its so dumb that clicking Tera DD with your faster Pokemon and trying to reverse sweep is the most reliable counterplay.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811261- Tera Zacian is so fun, stealing two kills and the only way it doesn't take 3 is by commiting your own Tera and giving away momentum.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811262 - Tera Arceus is my favourite answer to Tera Arceus
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811343 - When the Tera set up counterplay is your own Tera and saccing two Pokemon
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811415 - Who needs to build for threats when you can Tera and use Flyceus to clean up games
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811464 - Tera set up goes crazy
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811783 - I love the 700th Arceus-Fairy in replays
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811947 - Groundceus is quite a strong Ubers Pokemon, but its okay, you can use your own Uber Arceus instead
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811950 - Tera Zacian cleaning up, with counterplay being winning the speed tie.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812062 - Tera Zacian forcing 2 saccs and a Tera commitment again
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812085 - Frito was favoured to win here with Arceus-Normal, but Dorron's Tera + hax takes the win instead.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ubersuu-2271737402 - Tera set up my favourite
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812683 - Counter to Zacian from both ends is to commit Tera.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812774 - Another game where you use Tera to beat Tera Zacian
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812898 - Arceus Normal robbing another game
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813288 - This happens a lot but Tera Water Magearna and Solgaleo often because some teams can't fit good Fire and Water resists.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813783 - Tera Zacian blowing up Pokemon and forcing Teras for its team.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813914 - Flyceus and Normalceus out against each other
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813995 - Groundceus my favourite UUbers Pokemon
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813998 - Or it might be Fairyceus

Tera warps all of the games heavily and I don't think Id say in healthy ways. Often to enable a sweep, deny a sweep (usually from a Terad Pokemon), or fix a hole in teambuilding like playing without a Ground resist. Favours offense a lot more, and the times defense needs Tera, is usually because of how restrictive teambuilding is. I don't think Gouging Fire or most Tera sweepers are broken, but you'll often have to sacrifice some match ups because of how restrictive Tera Arceus and Zacian can be. Tera has also banned a handful of Pokemon already mentioned, which would definitely open up teambuilding.

 

[BigFatMantis]

Tera has also banned a handful of Pokemon already mentioned, which would definitely open up teambuilding.

I'm curious what pokemon beyond NDW and Arc-Dragon you believe Tera has caused to be banned. I'm not sure I agree entirely with both of those, but I at least acknowledge the arguments. Anything else beyond these though seems extremely speculative that Tera was the primary culprit of causing a ban, however I am open to listen to which ones specifically you think would be perfectly fine without Tera.

 

[LovelyLuna]

I'm curious what pokemon beyond NDW and Arc-Dragon you believe Tera has caused to be banned. I'm not sure I agree entirely with both of those, but I at least acknowledge the arguments. Anything else beyond these though seems extremely speculative that Tera was the primary culprit of causing a ban, however I am open to listen to which ones specifically you think would be perfectly fine without Tera.

I don't think Tera was the primary reason Arceus-Steel got banned, but I think it can come back in a Teraless meta with how much the tier has changed since its ban. Provides the tier with more options for Steel-types without seeming overbearing, considering Fighting, Fire, and Ground coverage are all easy to come by. I also think Arceus-Fire and Arceus-Ghost can be looked into once the meta stabilizes, as their broken set was Ekiller which becomes notably worse with a Tera ban. Ignoring Pokemon Ubers by usage, Banning Tera would be unbanning more than half of UUbersBL imo.

Im curious about what problems you see with NDW and Arceus-Dragon though? Especially NDW, seems like its a very reasonable Pokemon to check and revenge kill without Tera.

 

[BigFatMantis]

Im curious about what problems you see with NDW and Arceus-Dragon though? Especially NDW, seems like its a very reasonable Pokemon to check and revenge kill without Tera.

I actually was the only one (besides Fc) that thought Arceus-Dragon was fine, I voted DNB. NDW I think is more of a Tera Blast issue than Tera, but the Tera Blast ship has unfortunately sailed, that would have solved everyone's problems.

 

[LovelyLuna]

I actually was the only one (besides Fc) that thought Arceus-Dragon was fine, I voted DNB. NDW I think is more of a Tera Blast issue than Tera, but the Tera Blast ship has unfortunately sailed, that would have solved everyone's problems.

That's fine, I don't like Tera Blast as a move either, but I think the point that they would both get unbanned with a Tera ban still gets across.

 

[Dorron]

I'm sorry but I simply can't accept this discourse. I've never ever felt Tera itself has been a problem in this tier and I don't think my view will change anytime soon, if ever. The tier has so many mons able to stand up to most of the "threats" people call unstoppable that it blows my mind how so many people think completely different from that. I don't think Tera is banworthy, I don't think Arceus-Dark is banworthy, I don't think Arceus-Poison is banworthy. I see a single banworthy element of the tier, and I called it over a year ago.



Zacian @ Heavy-Duty Boots / Lum Berry / Protective Pads / Air Balloon / Choice Band
Ability: Intrepid Sword
Tera Type: Fairy / Electric / Fighting / Fire / Flying / Ghost / Ground
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Swords Dance / Anything
- Play Rough
- Tera Blast / Wild Charge / Psychic Fangs / Close Combat / Fire Fang / Ice Fang / Substitute / Trailblaze
- Tera Blast / Wild Charge / Psychic Fangs / Close Combat / Fire Fang / Ice Fang / Substitute / Trailblaze

Zacian is stupid and broken, it doesn't have any other definition. Moreover, it has always been, but people has realized not too long ago which is shocking. If you have played other tiers and have been on the forums for a while, you've probably seen any Pokemon ban announcement in which it was explained why the ban took place. An aspect that contributes to some of these bans is "picking and deciding your checks and counters, which limits the ability of the opponent to play around the threat and has to scout it countless times in order to actually have a reliable plan to deal with it". Zacian is probably the exact image of this definition in the tier's history, and I could even say in any meta I've ever played. You don't know what's running until your Moltres gets Wild Charged, your Arceus-Poison gets Psychic Fanged, your Thunder Wave / Toxic / Will-O-Wisp gets blocked by Substitute or your Magearna gets blown by Close Combat because you felt safe after you forced Tera on another Pokemon and Tera Blast Zacian wasn't an issue anymore. You just have to guess the moves. And that's only the moves, because there are the items too. Since its main set runs Boots you decide not to Spike with Magearna, just to burn it later on the game and have the Lum Berry heal the burn. Or you go your Rocky Helmet user and it ignores it with Pads. Or it switches into your Earth Power from Landorus which you thought was a safe option because Spikes were in the field which would have chipped anything that came in on top of the Earth Power. Or even worse, you think about all this just to get blown by a Choice Band hit and have your answer erased from existence.

You understand my point, Zacian has countless options and you can't really guess what's running from team preview.

Removing Zacian from the tier would make every single Pokemon in the tier besides Quagsire and Dondozo better. A lot of offensive but slower threats are barely usable simply because Zacian can switch in and stomp them with such ease that you no longer want to run them, only relegated to Scarf sets. Speaking of which, many people have brought up that a Zacian ban would lead to another four-six bans (mainly Dragon-types such as Kyurem-White, Palkia-Origin), which kinda makes no sense. We've had Zacian since the very beginning, and we're currently at its peak performance. Sets have been optimized (now most run SD - Play Rough - Wild Charge - Tera Blast Ground) and it has adapted with the meta (Crunch in NDW meta, less Tera Blast Ground with Lando-T around but more Air Balloon + Subs...), but it's never been as good as it is now.

Even though Zacian has felt worse during some metas, you never heard of any problematic Dragon-type during these periods.

Zacian's journey in the VR
November 23 -> January 24: S- to A+
January 24 -> February 24: A+ to S-
On February, it rose to S- once again, but after a couple vr updates with it not changing, Alomomola started to gain popularity and some people even ranked it A, it's lowest ever.
February 24 -> September 24: S- to A+
September 24 -> January 24: Still A+


How is it possible that Zacian is the only Pokemon keeping Kyurem-White and Palkia-Origin in check when its popularity has been a rollercoaster? Doesn't make sense to me, specially when it's currently not even in the S ranks. Moreover, neither Kyuw nor Palkia have been in the A ranks since May 24. They haven't been considered any close to problematic for almost a year now and now people claim we need to keep Zacian to keep them in check. In fact, freeing Zacian would probably lead to players having less burdens while building. Physically defensive weak Pokemon wouldn't feel that underwhelming with the dog gone and could even help dealing with the Dragons around.


You know the best part of these paragraphs about Zacian checking the Dragons? They literally don't matter. At all. They serve no purpose on why we should keep or not Zacian. We can't decide wether to ban it or not based on potential future bans, because we don't know how the meta will develop, it's literally impossible. As BFM said, you can't also weigh on the pros and cons and decide from there. We actually have to make tiering decissions based on if something is banworthy or not, and Zacian absolutely is.



Now, back to Tera, and ignoring Zacian. I haven't felt it's been as stupid as people say in the thread. It's absolutely right that it's an offensive tool that pushes many teams to the edge and makes some setup sweepers way more powerful, but it's not unbearable. You have a lot of tools to deal with the main Tera abusers, most of which aren't crazy techs used by unranked Pokemon. In fact, you can really guess what Tera has your opponent's Pokemon; the best will always be the best and the most used, the same way the best Pokemon are the most used and their best moves are the most used, which is why you build with them in mind.

A lot of Dragons will become overwhelming because Magearna becomes the tier's only good Fairy. Gouging Fire's Outrage is pretty much riskless and will constantly trade 2/3 for 1 if not sweep. Roaring Moon becomes very borderline, and counterplay becomes extremely limited. Kyurem-White and Palkia-Origin also no defensive counterplay and removing their best offensive counterplay makes them a lot more difficult to deal with. We would either live in a toxic meta where every team feels the need to use shitmons, or it would be Dragon spam on Dragon spam.

This is what I mentioned about making decissions based on future bans. You know why there are no other good Fairies? Because Zacian is broken and you don't actually have a reason to run another offensive Fairy-type; Zacian beats its own checks anyways. Enamorus is a very interesting choice as a Fairy-type. Scarf sets can revenge kill almost any Dragon-type. Iron Valiant is unexplored and the main reason it's not that tested is because of Zacian itself OHKOing it with ease and not having good Teras that prevent this. I've personally used both Booster Energy and Specs variants with decent satisfaction. You could also run Blissey (crushed by Zacian), which is bulky enough for Ubers UU and has enough utility to give it a chance. There's also Ice-types such as the new Iron Bundle (crushed by Zacian), which virtually has no resists, and Weavile (crushed by Zacian) which has access to Knock Off for utility, and Triple Axel and Low Kick to deal with the Dragons.

"Then, the Ubers philosophy would be: Do your best to make a fun, competitive format with all the Pokemon, at the expense of simplicity/purity." is a quote from Chaos. "Ubers is the most inclusive of Smogon's tiers, aiming to allow the use of as many Pokemon as competitively possible." is literally taken from the Smogon dex, and Ubers UU is an Ubers tier. Choosing to ban so many Pokemon instead of ban Tera goes against the tiering policy and spirit of Ubers. Even if you want to take the skeptic route and say we don't know what will be banned after Zacian (It's pretty obious.), thats 3-5 Pokemon banned, a controvertial Pokemon, and another issue I want to mention in the following paragraph. This should be more than enough Pokemon to protect and take action on Tera instead.

Chaos quote is from 2019 afaik, even before Gen 8 release. Pretty outdated given the absurd power creep we've had (one Pokemon / two forms in Gen 8 and two Pokemon in Gen 9 banned to AG). Also outdated since we've had an actual broken generational mechanic banned too. Idk what's chaos take on this, but assuming it's the same after five years of crazy tiering decissions due to power creep is quite bold.

What makes people want to keep Tera despite all of its issues? The Pokemon enabled by Tera, namely the Pokemon in the OP.

False. I couldn't care less about them being viable. In fact, I barely use Firepon, Regieleki or Terapagos. Also it's not like I want to keep Tera despite all of its issues, it's simply that's not banworthy to me.

My biggest issue with this is that the losses are hardly relevant.

Also false. Firepon is a fantastic Stallbreaker, one of the best at it. At such a point that I had to run Foul Play Tera Dragon Darkceus to have a chance to beat it in a stall team. Regieleki also forces a lot of mindgames against Landorus, only to surprise you and set up Screens while you switched for no reason. And Terapagos has reverse swept so many games and it's so frustrating to deal with a strong resistless Terastorm. Pagos is currently A+, Eleki A- and Firepon B+, and even though you could argue they have dropped the ball a bit in the current meta, they're still completely relevant and Pokemon you have to be aware of when building.

So, the question becomes: Ban 8-10 Pokemon, defy tiering policy, and keep a toxic part of Ubers UU because you want to keep 3 Pokemon viable, OR ban 1 (one) mechanic and in exchange of a decrease in viability of 3

Also false, every single word of this is false.

I would say that the largest distinction that this tier makes compared to the other SV tiers is that a majority of the pokemon that make up this tier are Ubers dejects mostly as a result of poor typings, poor coverage, or being directly outclassed by another form of itself in ubers. These are all pokemon that benefit the most from Tera as a mechanic, especially when factoring in the BST differences of our offense pieces compared to our defensive pieces.

Isn't this the whole point of the tier? Why would you then remove the key element that makes the Pokemon that are supposed to shine in our tier, well, shine?

When it comes to playing mons, playing proactively is key. Even in the case of stall, the most reactive playstyle, all the best stall teams play proactively in their own way to choke out the opponent before the opponent can break them. That's not to say that playing reactively is all bad, but it can't function as the primary method of play. I can put it like this: playing reactively keeps you from losing, while playing proactively wins you the game.

What's the issue on this? I'd say that encouraging proactive gameplay is actually a pretty good thing. Double changes are both cool to do and watch, and very rewarding if done well. Watching a game where neither player wants to make the first move is quite boring, and the opposing should be the ideal. It also feels very rewarding to take the initiative and succeed. Tera rewards proactivity in a healthy way, and not with an insane advantage like Dynamax did.

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810326 - Pressured to Tera Fairy and open up a weakness to Poisonceus, because you can't slot a Tera Zacian check on a team. Then Ekiller (why is this Ubers-tier Pokemon legal in UUbers) cleans up the game.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810340 - Fairy on Fairy action, as Finch said really well, counterplay is scarce. Darkceus pops Tera to threaten a sweep, and then the counterplay is to use your own Arceus-Fairy (Ubers Pokemon) and fish for crits/good speed tie rng.)
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810418 - Both Dragons Tera with an idea of sweeping, and the counterplay is multiple sacrifices to revenge it.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810545 - I don't like this because im bad and team was bad but Tera set up swepers are so fun.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810635 - Tera to begin a cheesepathra sweep
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810649 - I love Tera set up
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-810685 - the inferior Tera Fire PsyFangs Zacian still breaks its checks, and Fishy only comes back from a 2-5 with Tera Arceus.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811085 - Tera Water Garg delays the Arceus sweep and ensures a win.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811170?p2 - Tera Arceus is my favourite answer to Tera Arceus
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811233 - The Tera Ground Rmoon here is brutal, and its so dumb that clicking Tera DD with your faster Pokemon and trying to reverse sweep is the most reliable counterplay.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811261- Tera Zacian is so fun, stealing two kills and the only way it doesn't take 3 is by commiting your own Tera and giving away momentum.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811262 - Tera Arceus is my favourite answer to Tera Arceus
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811343 - When the Tera set up counterplay is your own Tera and saccing two Pokemon
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811415 - Who needs to build for threats when you can Tera and use Flyceus to clean up games
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811464 - Tera set up goes crazy
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811783 - I love the 700th Arceus-Fairy in replays
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811947 - Groundceus is quite a strong Ubers Pokemon, but its okay, you can use your own Uber Arceus instead
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-811950 - Tera Zacian cleaning up, with counterplay being winning the speed tie.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812062 - Tera Zacian forcing 2 saccs and a Tera commitment again
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812085 - Frito was favoured to win here with Arceus-Normal, but Dorron's Tera + hax takes the win instead.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ubersuu-2271737402 - Tera set up my favourite
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812683 - Counter to Zacian from both ends is to commit Tera.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812774 - Another game where you use Tera to beat Tera Zacian
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-812898 - Arceus Normal robbing another game
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813288 - This happens a lot but Tera Water Magearna and Solgaleo often because some teams can't fit good Fire and Water resists.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813783 - Tera Zacian blowing up Pokemon and forcing Teras for its team.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813914 - Flyceus and Normalceus out against each other
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813995 - Groundceus my favourite UUbers Pokemon
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen9ubersuu-813998 - Or it might be Fairyceus

Game 1: In a tier where Zacian is barely checkable, Baddy brings a team with no Fairy resists (and no other Zacian answer like Dondozo or Quag). Of course he's forced to Tera his answer to almost every physical Arceus.

Game 2: Finchely let Skyiew throw 8 Judgments, which obviously ended up with a crit.

Game 3: I mean, this is a HO vs HO, it's not like you're ever going to defensively check anything. You want to start a good sweep before the opponent and that's what feen did. Plus I wouldn't say the Roaring Moon attempted a sweep.

Game 4: Who would have guessed that the broken Zacian would get two easy kills? On top of that, Magearna Thunder Waved it just to have a Lum Berry deny its job, which ends up costing you the game since you couldn't para their own Mag.

Game 5: Cheesepathra because you want to call it that way. But ye the Tera Orthworm was key to "win" the game, if it wasn't because of that crit.

Game 6: Are we going to ignore the fact that Fc lost a whole Magearna because of paras? That was way more decissive than any Tera in the game.

Game 7: Yeah, Zacian being a problem, nothing new. And Tera Arceus would literally have won anyways because there was nothing threatening it, it just lucked through by winning every single crucial speed tie and not getting critted. In fact, I'd say it was a bad Tera since it didn't really do anything besides becoming neutral to Tera Blast Fire, which is again a Zacian issue.

Game 8: When Tera Arceus wins the game it's bad. But when Tera stops Tera Arceus to win the game it's also bad? Alright.

Game 9: Rasche's Tera wasn't to answer a Tera Arceus. The issue was Earthquake and not Extreme Speed. In fact, Rasche's Arceus wasn't hit a single time by Frito's Arceus after using Tera. So your claim is objectively false.

Game 10: Roaring Moon didn't do that much for a Tera user. And why would reverse sweep be something dumb. On top of that the "reverse sweeper" ended up losing. And it's only purpose in the game was revenge killing the Roaring Moon. Nothing unhealthy to me.

Game 11: "Stealing two kills" when one was an Attack dropped 9% HP Roaring Moon is unheard of. Aberforth could also have hard gone to Latios after sending Poisonceus to force Tera Blast Ground, thus wasting it. But he lost a whole Arceus in one turn. It's not like it mattered though, since Aberforth used his own not Terad Zacian to win the game. On top of all this, this is another HO vs HO game. If you want reliable answers to threats, this is now where you will find them.

Game 12: I guess I can give you this one. But even Tera Bug, Normal and Ice would have won that last turn.

Game 13: HO vs HO. Whoever gets the better sweep wins, that's it. Position yourself better and you win. Not to mention that Pelipper was virtually dead on turn 7 and actually dead on turn 11 (in a horrible way if you ask me, could have absolutely been played better). Saving it would have eased the matchup so much, specially vs sun.

Game 14: My team loses to Arceus-Electric every single game. I realise that on Turn 14 which is where I send Sneasler and pray for a luck Dire Claw, which didn't end up happening. And Tera Ground Landorus was a last resort to pray and tank the Ice Beam + crit or whatever. But if Tera was banned, this matchup would have been even worse.

Game 15: If you get swept by an Okidogi that had Terad and switched out 11 turns ago just congratulate your opponent for playing or building better than you.

Game 16: Cosmic Power Arc is so niche and cheesy that the only answer polt comes up with is... broken Zacian! Polt didn't use Tera at all, worth mentioning.

Game 17: Yeah, Tera Arc in play. Aberforth could have gone to Giratina instead of letting Moltres die for a random burn.

Game 18: Zacian being a problem, I'm sure someone has brought that up before. There was no Speed tie because of Trailblaze.

Game 19: Zacian.

Game 20: 1) HO vs HO, I wouldn't use this to proof anything. 2) I got a chance to win thanks to the "inferior" Psychic Fangs Zacian breaking screens. 3) If I had used the standard Dazzling Gleam, Tera wouldn't have been needed at all. Hax is also up to discussion when both sleeps were two turns.

Game 21: Technically, if we consider the miss, it didn't matter at all anyways. Vigvig had already lost after Samu died.

Game 22: I feel like I've seen this Pokemon elsewhere being an absolute monster, maybe in like another hundred fifty games, but I'm not sure.

Game 23: 1) Zacian. 2) At that point, Tera wasn't even necessary, the game was already won. It was just to secure the game.

Game 24: Lana decided to give Tera away, which put her on disadvantage. But once again, by the time Memedose sets up, it's already game.

Game 25: So Tera actually has value for slower paced teams to deal with strong threats such as Sun teams. That's cool to hear!

Game 26: Zacian, per chance?

Game 27: SBAP lost the game by turn 10, Tera Arceus was just a faster way to end it.

Game 28: Didn't matter, I had already won.

Game 29: If Zacian had killed Bundle instead of using Swords Dance, chances are I would have lost the game. Instead, Imperial chose to let its only Darkceus answer get chipped down (and Poisonceus too).




So yeah, it's not Tera to me, it's basically Zacian and maybe one other mon.

 

[Poosh_i]

I'm sorry but I simply can't accept this discourse. I've never ever felt Tera itself has been a problem in this tier and I don't think my view will change anytime soon, if ever. The tier has so many mons able to stand up to most of the "threats" people call unstoppable that it blows my mind how so many people think completely different from that. I don't think Tera is banworthy, I don't think Arceus-Dark is banworthy, I don't think Arceus-Poison is banworthy. I see a single banworthy element of the tier, and I called it over a year ago.



Zacian @ Heavy-Duty Boots / Lum Berry / Protective Pads / Air Balloon / Choice Band
Ability: Intrepid Sword
Tera Type: Fairy / Electric / Fighting / Fire / Flying / Ghost / Ground
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Swords Dance / Anything
- Play Rough
- Tera Blast / Wild Charge / Psychic Fangs / Close Combat / Fire Fang / Ice Fang / Substitute / Trailblaze
- Tera Blast / Wild Charge / Psychic Fangs / Close Combat / Fire Fang / Ice Fang / Substitute / Trailblaze

Zacian is stupid and broken, it doesn't have any other definition. Moreover, it has always been, but people has realized not too long ago which is shocking. If you have played other tiers and have been on the forums for a while, you've probably seen any Pokemon ban announcement in which it was explained why the ban took place. An aspect that contributes to some of these bans is "picking and deciding your checks and counters, which limits the ability of the opponent to play around the threat and has to scout it countless times in order to actually have a reliable plan to deal with it". Zacian is probably the exact image of this definition in the tier's history, and I could even say in any meta I've ever played. You don't know what's running until your Moltres gets Wild Charged, your Arceus-Poison gets Psychic Fanged, your Thunder Wave / Toxic / Will-O-Wisp gets blocked by Substitute or your Magearna gets blown by Close Combat because you felt safe after you forced Tera on another Pokemon and Tera Blast Zacian wasn't an issue anymore. You just have to guess the moves. And that's only the moves, because there are the items too. Since its main set runs Boots you decide not to Spike with Magearna, just to burn it later on the game and have the Lum Berry heal the burn. Or you go your Rocky Helmet user and it ignores it with Pads. Or it switches into your Earth Power from Landorus which you thought was a safe option because Spikes were in the field which would have chipped anything that came in on top of the Earth Power. Or even worse, you think about all this just to get blown by a Choice Band hit and have your answer erased from existence.

You understand my point, Zacian has countless options and you can't really guess what's running from team preview.

Removing Zacian from the tier would make every single Pokemon in the tier besides Quagsire and Dondozo better. A lot of offensive but slower threats are barely usable simply because Zacian can switch in and stomp them with such ease that you no longer want to run them, only relegated to Scarf sets. Speaking of which, many people have brought up that a Zacian ban would lead to another four-six bans (mainly Dragon-types such as Kyurem-White, Palkia-Origin), which kinda makes no sense. We've had Zacian since the very beginning, and we're currently at its peak performance. Sets have been optimized (now most run SD - Play Rough - Wild Charge - Tera Blast Ground) and it has adapted with the meta (Crunch in NDW meta, less Tera Blast Ground with Lando-T around but more Air Balloon + Subs...), but it's never been as good as it is now.

Even though Zacian has felt worse during some metas, you never heard of any problematic Dragon-type during these periods.

Zacian's journey in the VR
November 23 -> January 24: S- to A+
January 24 -> February 24: A+ to S-
On February, it rose to S- once again, but after a couple vr updates with it not changing, Alomomola started to gain popularity and some people even ranked it A, it's lowest ever.
February 24 -> September 24: S- to A+
September 24 -> January 24: Still A+


How is it possible that Zacian is the only Pokemon keeping Kyurem-White and Palkia-Origin in check when its popularity has been a rollercoaster? Doesn't make sense to me, specially when it's currently not even in the S ranks. Moreover, neither Kyuw nor Palkia have been in the A ranks since May 24. They haven't been considered any close to problematic for almost a year now and now people claim we need to keep Zacian to keep them in check. In fact, freeing Zacian would probably lead to players having less burdens while building. Physically defensive weak Pokemon wouldn't feel that underwhelming with the dog gone and could even help dealing with the Dragons around.


You know the best part of these paragraphs about Zacian checking the Dragons? They literally don't matter. At all. They serve no purpose on why we should keep or not Zacian. We can't decide wether to ban it or not based on potential future bans, because we don't know how the meta will develop, it's literally impossible. As BFM said, you can't also weigh on the pros and cons and decide from there. We actually have to make tiering decissions based on if something is banworthy or not, and Zacian absolutely is.



Now, back to Tera, and ignoring Zacian. I haven't felt it's been as stupid as people say in the thread. It's absolutely right that it's an offensive tool that pushes many teams to the edge and makes some setup sweepers way more powerful, but it's not unbearable. You have a lot of tools to deal with the main Tera abusers, most of which aren't crazy techs used by unranked Pokemon. In fact, you can really guess what Tera has your opponent's Pokemon; the best will always be the best and the most used, the same way the best Pokemon are the most used and their best moves are the most used, which is why you build with them in mind.


This is what I mentioned about making decissions based on future bans. You know why there are no other good Fairies? Because Zacian is broken and you don't actually have a reason to run another offensive Fairy-type; Zacian beats its own checks anyways. Enamorus is a very interesting choice as a Fairy-type. Scarf sets can revenge kill almost any Dragon-type. Iron Valiant is unexplored and the main reason it's not that tested is because of Zacian itself OHKOing it with ease and not having good Teras that prevent this. I've personally used both Booster Energy and Specs variants with decent satisfaction. You could also run Blissey (crushed by Zacian), which is bulky enough for Ubers UU and has enough utility to give it a chance. There's also Ice-types such as the new Iron Bundle (crushed by Zacian), which virtually has no resists, and Weavile (crushed by Zacian) which has access to Knock Off for utility, and Triple Axel and Low Kick to deal with the Dragons.

Chaos quote is from 2019 afaik, even before Gen 8 release. Pretty outdated given the absurd power creep we've had (one Pokemon / two forms in Gen 8 and two Pokemon in Gen 9 banned to AG). Also outdated since we've had an actual broken generational mechanic banned too. Idk what's chaos take on this, but assuming it's the same after five years of crazy tiering decissions due to power creep is quite bold.


False. I couldn't care less about them being viable. In fact, I barely use Firepon, Regieleki or Terapagos. Also it's not like I want to keep Tera despite all of its issues, it's simply that's not banworthy to me.

Also false. Firepon is a fantastic Stallbreaker, one of the best at it. At such a point that I had to run Foul Play Tera Dragon Darkceus to have a chance to beat it in a stall team. Regieleki also forces a lot of mindgames against Landorus, only to surprise you and set up Screens while you switched for no reason. And Terapagos has reverse swept so many games and it's so frustrating to deal with a strong resistless Terastorm. Pagos is currently A+, Eleki A- and Firepon B+, and even though you could argue they have dropped the ball a bit in the current meta, they're still completely relevant and Pokemon you have to be aware of when building.

Also false, every single word of this is false.

Isn't this the whole point of the tier? Why would you then remove the key element that makes the Pokemon that are supposed to shine in our tier, well, shine?

What's the issue on this? I'd say that encouraging proactive gameplay is actually a pretty good thing. Double changes are both cool to do and watch, and very rewarding if done well. Watching a game where neither player wants to make the first move is quite boring, and the opposing should be the ideal. It also feels very rewarding to take the initiative and succeed. Tera rewards proactivity in a healthy way, and not with an insane advantage like Dynamax did.




Game 1: In a tier where Zacian is barely checkable, Baddy brings a team with no Fairy resists (and no other Zacian answer like Dondozo or Quag). Of course he's forced to Tera his answer to almost every physical Arceus.

Game 2: Finchely let Skyiew throw 8 Judgments, which obviously ended up with a crit.

Game 3: I mean, this is a HO vs HO, it's not like you're ever going to defensively check anything. You want to start a good sweep before the opponent and that's what feen did. Plus I wouldn't say the Roaring Moon attempted a sweep.

Game 4: Who would have guessed that the broken Zacian would get two easy kills? On top of that, Magearna Thunder Waved it just to have a Lum Berry deny its job, which ends up costing you the game since you couldn't para their own Mag.

Game 5: Cheesepathra because you want to call it that way. But ye the Tera Orthworm was key to "win" the game, if it wasn't because of that crit.

Game 6: Are we going to ignore the fact that Fc lost a whole Magearna because of paras? That was way more decissive than any Tera in the game.

Game 7: Yeah, Zacian being a problem, nothing new. And Tera Arceus would literally have won anyways because there was nothing threatening it, it just lucked through by winning every single crucial speed tie and not getting critted. In fact, I'd say it was a bad Tera since it didn't really do anything besides becoming neutral to Tera Blast Fire, which is again a Zacian issue.

Game 8: When Tera Arceus wins the game it's bad. But when Tera stops Tera Arceus to win the game it's also bad? Alright.

Game 9: Rasche's Tera wasn't to answer a Tera Arceus. The issue was Earthquake and not Extreme Speed. In fact, Rasche's Arceus wasn't hit a single time by Frito's Arceus after using Tera. So your claim is objectively false.

Game 10: Roaring Moon didn't do that much for a Tera user. And why would reverse sweep be something dumb. On top of that the "reverse sweeper" ended up losing. And it's only purpose in the game was revenge killing the Roaring Moon. Nothing unhealthy to me.

Game 11: "Stealing two kills" when one was an Attack dropped 9% HP Roaring Moon is unheard of. Aberforth could also have hard gone to Latios after sending Poisonceus to force Tera Blast Ground, thus wasting it. But he lost a whole Arceus in one turn. It's not like it mattered though, since Aberforth used his own not Terad Zacian to win the game. On top of all this, this is another HO vs HO game. If you want reliable answers to threats, this is now where you will find them.

Game 12: I guess I can give you this one. But even Tera Bug, Normal and Ice would have won that last turn.

Game 13: HO vs HO. Whoever gets the better sweep wins, that's it. Position yourself better and you win. Not to mention that Pelipper was virtually dead on turn 7 and actually dead on turn 11 (in a horrible way if you ask me, could have absolutely been played better). Saving it would have eased the matchup so much, specially vs sun.

Game 14: My team loses to Arceus-Electric every single game. I realise that on Turn 14 which is where I send Sneasler and pray for a luck Dire Claw, which didn't end up happening. And Tera Ground Landorus was a last resort to pray and tank the Ice Beam + crit or whatever. But if Tera was banned, this matchup would have been even worse.

Game 15: If you get swept by an Okidogi that had Terad and switched out 11 turns ago just congratulate your opponent for playing or building better than you.

Game 16: Cosmic Power Arc is so niche and cheesy that the only answer polt comes up with is... broken Zacian! Polt didn't use Tera at all, worth mentioning.

Game 17: Yeah, Tera Arc in play. Aberforth could have gone to Giratina instead of letting Moltres die for a random burn.

Game 18: Zacian being a problem, I'm sure someone has brought that up before. There was no Speed tie because of Trailblaze.

Game 19: Zacian.

Game 20: 1) HO vs HO, I wouldn't use this to proof anything. 2) I got a chance to win thanks to the "inferior" Psychic Fangs Zacian breaking screens. 3) If I had used the standard Dazzling Gleam, Tera wouldn't have been needed at all. Hax is also up to discussion when both sleeps were two turns.

Game 21: Technically, if we consider the miss, it didn't matter at all anyways. Vigvig had already lost after Samu died.

Game 22: I feel like I've seen this Pokemon elsewhere being an absolute monster, maybe in like another hundred fifty games, but I'm not sure.

Game 23: 1) Zacian. 2) At that point, Tera wasn't even necessary, the game was already won. It was just to secure the game.

Game 24: Lana decided to give Tera away, which put her on disadvantage. But once again, by the time Memedose sets up, it's already game.

Game 25: So Tera actually has value for slower paced teams to deal with strong threats such as Sun teams. That's cool to hear!

Game 26: Zacian, per chance?

Game 27: SBAP lost the game by turn 10, Tera Arceus was just a faster way to end it.

Game 28: Didn't matter, I had already won.

Game 29: If Zacian had killed Bundle instead of using Swords Dance, chances are I would have lost the game. Instead, Imperial chose to let its only Darkceus answer get chipped down (and Poisonceus too).




So yeah, it's not Tera to me, it's basically Zacian and maybe one other mon.

I'm only going to address my part of the post - The pokemon of this tier are absolutely capable of being good off of their OWN merits, complete nonargument. Tera is a crutch and a method to make many of them LARPs of ubers proper pokemon. If that is the best you can come up with to my post then I think my statement is solid.

 

[LovelyLuna]

I'm sorry but I simply can't accept this discourse. I've never ever felt Tera itself has been a problem in this tier and I don't think my view will change anytime soon, if ever. The tier has so many mons able to stand up to most of the "threats" people call unstoppable that it blows my mind how so many people think completely different from that. I don't think Tera is banworthy, I don't think Arceus-Dark is banworthy, I don't think Arceus-Poison is banworthy. I see a single banworthy element of the tier, and I called it over a year ago.



Zacian @ Heavy-Duty Boots / Lum Berry / Protective Pads / Air Balloon / Choice Band
Ability: Intrepid Sword
Tera Type: Fairy / Electric / Fighting / Fire / Flying / Ghost / Ground
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Swords Dance / Anything
- Play Rough
- Tera Blast / Wild Charge / Psychic Fangs / Close Combat / Fire Fang / Ice Fang / Substitute / Trailblaze
- Tera Blast / Wild Charge / Psychic Fangs / Close Combat / Fire Fang / Ice Fang / Substitute / Trailblaze

Zacian is stupid and broken, it doesn't have any other definition. Moreover, it has always been, but people has realized not too long ago which is shocking. If you have played other tiers and have been on the forums for a while, you've probably seen any Pokemon ban announcement in which it was explained why the ban took place. An aspect that contributes to some of these bans is "picking and deciding your checks and counters, which limits the ability of the opponent to play around the threat and has to scout it countless times in order to actually have a reliable plan to deal with it". Zacian is probably the exact image of this definition in the tier's history, and I could even say in any meta I've ever played. You don't know what's running until your Moltres gets Wild Charged, your Arceus-Poison gets Psychic Fanged, your Thunder Wave / Toxic / Will-O-Wisp gets blocked by Substitute or your Magearna gets blown by Close Combat because you felt safe after you forced Tera on another Pokemon and Tera Blast Zacian wasn't an issue anymore. You just have to guess the moves. And that's only the moves, because there are the items too. Since its main set runs Boots you decide not to Spike with Magearna, just to burn it later on the game and have the Lum Berry heal the burn. Or you go your Rocky Helmet user and it ignores it with Pads. Or it switches into your Earth Power from Landorus which you thought was a safe option because Spikes were in the field which would have chipped anything that came in on top of the Earth Power. Or even worse, you think about all this just to get blown by a Choice Band hit and have your answer erased from existence.

Yep, and without Tera Zacian becomes perfectly fine.

Removing Zacian from the tier would make every single Pokemon in the tier besides Quagsire and Dondozo better. A lot of offensive but slower threats are barely usable simply because Zacian can switch in and stomp them with such ease that you no longer want to run them, only relegated to Scarf sets.

A Zacian ban makes many Pokemon works, Arceus-Dark blows through the roof because the rest of its checks are either bad at checking it or underwhelming Pokemon in general, which makes other Arceus formes worse, with how much better the Dragons and how much worse balance get, something like Ogerpon-Hearthflame would lose value. Despite it's negative match up into Zacian, Giratina could fall off because it becomes a momentum sink in such an offensive metagame, and more. Zacian currently is one of the few core pieces that enables balance to exist imo, Its a straightforward check ("stomp them") to a lot of these offensive threats that can ruin balance;s defensive cores.

Speaking of which, many people have brought up that a Zacian ban would lead to another four-six bans (mainly Dragon-types such as Kyurem-White, Palkia-Origin), which kinda makes no sense. We've had Zacian since the very beginning, and we're currently at its peak performance. Sets have been optimized (now most run SD - Play Rough - Wild Charge - Tera Blast Ground) and it has adapted with the meta (Crunch in NDW meta, less Tera Blast Ground with Lando-T around but more Air Balloon + Subs...), but it's never been as good as it is now.

Even though Zacian has felt worse during some metas, you never heard of any problematic Dragon-type during these periods.

Zacian's journey in the VR
November 23 -> January 24: S- to A+
January 24 -> February 24: A+ to S-
On February, it rose to S- once again, but after a couple vr updates with it not changing, Alomomola started to gain popularity and some people even ranked it A, it's lowest ever.
February 24 -> September 24: S- to A+
September 24 -> January 24: Still A+

Despite being A+, Zacian usage stood high with 36% in the first 7 rounds of Ubers UU seasonal, and Round 8 (idk why I stopped counting in the thread, but thankfully this is the week right before fc's vr post, where Zacian had 55%usage). Zacian remained an incredibly easy to fit Pokemon that the tier's Dragons and Darkceus.

How is it possible that Zacian is the only Pokemon keeping Kyurem-White and Palkia-Origin in check when its popularity has been a rollercoaster? Doesn't make sense to me, specially when it's currently not even in the S ranks. Moreover, neither Kyuw nor Palkia have been in the A ranks since May 24. They haven't been considered any close to problematic for almost a year now and now people claim we need to keep Zacian to keep them in check. In fact, freeing Zacian would probably lead to players having less burdens while building. Physically defensive weak Pokemon wouldn't feel that underwhelming with the dog gone and could even help dealing with the Dragons around.

Same as how Zacian's survey score went from constant 2s -> we need to take action now. Landorus-T, Zacian's most splashable check, left the tier. If we remove Zacian from the tier we're likely to get similar issues with Darkceus and at least one of the Dragon-types..

You know the best part of these paragraphs about Zacian checking the Dragons? They literally don't matter. At all. They serve no purpose on why we should keep or not Zacian. We can't decide wether to ban it or not based on potential future bans, because we don't know how the meta will develop, it's literally impossible. As BFM said, you can't also weigh on the pros and cons and decide from there. We actually have to make tiering decissions based on if something is banworthy or not, and Zacian absolutely is.

We can actually, both Tera and Zacian are factors of the main issue, Tera Zacian. We need to decide which should get banned, especially since other Pokemon would get banned/have been banned if we keep Tera. Then in this case, I think its justifiable to compare the two situations and identify what we should do. Ban Zacian and kill the tier, or Ban Tera to save the tier. Bans are meant to make a metagme more balanced anyway, and banning Tera does this more effectively.

Now, back to Tera, and ignoring Zacian. I haven't felt it's been as stupid as people say in the thread. It's absolutely right that it's an offensive tool that pushes many teams to the edge and makes some setup sweepers way more powerful, but it's not unbearable. You have a lot of tools to deal with the main Tera abusers, most of which aren't crazy techs used by unranked Pokemon. In fact, you can really guess what Tera has your opponent's Pokemon; the best will always be the best and the most used, the same way the best Pokemon are the most used and their best moves are the most used, which is why you build with them in mind.


This is what I mentioned about making decissions based on future bans. You know why there are no other good Fairies? Because Zacian is broken and you don't actually have a reason to run another offensive Fairy-type; Zacian beats its own checks anyways. Enamorus is a very interesting choice as a Fairy-type. Scarf sets can revenge kill almost any Dragon-type. Iron Valiant is unexplored and the main reason it's not that tested is because of Zacian itself OHKOing it with ease and not having good Teras that prevent this. I've personally used both Booster Energy and Specs variants with decent satisfaction. You could also run Blissey (crushed by Zacian), which is bulky enough for Ubers UU and has enough utility to give it a chance. There's also Ice-types such as the new Iron Bundle (crushed by Zacian), which virtually has no resists, and Weavile (crushed by Zacian) which has access to Knock Off for utility, and Triple Axel and Low Kick to deal with the Dragons.

The actual reason the Fairies are bad is because theyre terrible, Enamorus and Iron Valiant are slow, frail, and weak, even in a Zacianless metagame I don't think they make it out of C. They don't deal with Darkceus without physical attacks, and become helpless if Darkceus clicks teh Tera button (wow maybe something is broken idk). They're slower than +1 Roaring Moon even with their respective speed boosting items, they can't even OHKO Kyurem-White or Palkia-Origin. I think if we're pressured to use these terrible Pokemon, maybe the Dragons and Darkceus are a little busted.

Chaos quote is from 2019 afaik, even before Gen 8 release. Pretty outdated given the absurd power creep we've had (one Pokemon / two forms in Gen 8 and two Pokemon in Gen 9 banned to AG). Also outdated since we've had an actual broken generational mechanic banned too. Idk what's chaos take on this, but assuming it's the same after five years of crazy tiering decissions due to power creep is quite bold.

It doesn't matter, what matters is the philosophy, what Ubers was created as and what Ubers is supposed to be. A tier that allows as many Pokemon playable as possible.

False. I couldn't care less about them being viable. In fact, I barely use Firepon, Regieleki or Terapagos. Also it's not like I want to keep Tera despite all of its issues, it's simply that's not banworthy to me.

Also false. Firepon is a fantastic Stallbreaker, one of the best at it. At such a point that I had to run Foul Play Tera Dragon Darkceus to have a chance to beat it in a stall team. Regieleki also forces a lot of mindgames against Landorus, only to surprise you and set up Screens while you switched for no reason. And Terapagos has reverse swept so many games and it's so frustrating to deal with a strong resistless Terastorm. Pagos is currently A+, Eleki A- and Firepon B+, and even though you could argue they have dropped the ball a bit in the current meta, they're still completely relevant and Pokemon you have to be aware of when building.

Okay we can ignore this then and focus on the other stuff

Isn't this the whole point of the tier? Why would you then remove the key element that makes the Pokemon that are supposed to shine in our tier, well, shine?

It's not like Zacian, NDW, or any weak Arceus doesn't shine without access to Tera, they're still spectacular Pokemon.

What's the issue on this? I'd say that encouraging proactive gameplay is actually a pretty good thing. Double changes are both cool to do and watch, and very rewarding if done well. Watching a game where neither player wants to make the first move is quite boring, and the opposing should be the ideal. It also feels very rewarding to take the initiative and succeed. Tera rewards proactivity in a healthy way, and not with an insane advantage like Dynamax did.

When the gameplay becomes so proactive you can almost never afford to play passively, it gets pretty bad for defensive styles. Tera definitely doesn't reward it in healthy ways when its often one click of a button and now you get 2 free boosts.

Game 1: In a tier where Zacian is barely checkable, Baddy brings a team with no Fairy resists (and no other Zacian answer like Dondozo or Quag). Of course he's forced to Tera his answer to almost every physical Arceus.

Game 2: Finchely let Skyiew throw 8 Judgments, which obviously ended up with a crit.

Game 3: I mean, this is a HO vs HO, it's not like you're ever going to defensively check anything. You want to start a good sweep before the opponent and that's what feen did. Plus I wouldn't say the Roaring Moon attempted a sweep.

So yeah, it's not Tera to me, it's basically Zacian and maybe one other mon.

Every single time you blame Zacian, its Tera Zacian. Maybe Finchely wouldn't have had to take 8 Judgements if the Arceus couldnt become Arceus-Fairy and resist her STAB. Also Id like to point out that all I suggested from these replays is that they are replays where Tera is required to win the game, where Tera is impactful. Maybe the defensive Teras wouldnt have to be used if defensive teams werent so overhwlemed with how many threats they need to check. Tera always forces unhealthy loop holes when offensive Pokemon just break through defensive checks and choose their counters, even the defensive loop holes when it denies sweeps after you didn't consider the Pokemon in the builder can be punishing.

 

[Hydrametr0nice]

Disclaimer: These are just my three cents, from a tiering philosophy perspective, and not specifically about Zacian.
I believe the main issues here are more related to tiering philosophy, particularly as it applies to Ubers UU, than anything else.

---

First of all, reiterating BigFatMantis, it makes no sense to speculate about the consequences of banning Zacian. That is not in line with Smogon's tiering policy, and neither the Ubers nor OU tiers operate in that manner.

---

Second, I think it is time to solidify and clearly define Ubers UU philosophy, or these problems will continue to arise (just like National Dex until it was properly defined).

Ubers UU as an alternative to OU

If Ubers UU was tiered using the same standards as OU, everything would be banned until we ended up with... well... OU. (Of course, some OU Pokémon are also in Ubers.) This is a fact—it's the definition of OU. If some Pokémon in Ubers UU survived that tiering policy they would be in OU.

Ubers UU as an Ubers tier

Wasn't this the reason why Ubers UU was created in the first place? Just as UU applies the tiering philosophy of OU to OU's leftovers, Ubers UU should apply the tiering philosophy of Ubers to Ubers' leftovers. This doesn't mean that Pokémon like Shaymin-Sky and multiple Arceus forms shouldn't be banned. However, you aren't even using the Ubers ban threshold of 66.6% in your suspect tests, you are already being more loose on bans.

So, please, define Ubers UU tiering philosophy.

---

Finally, as Aberforth said, banning Tera in Ubers UU—an Ubers tier—while allowing it in PU, feels simply wrong. I believe Ubers UU should not ban Tera independently of Ubers, just as no tier from UU to PU has banned Tera separately. Imagine if there was an Ubers RU tier, and Ubers UU decided to ban Tera simply because they don't want to ban a specific Pokémon—this would have catastrophic consequences for the tiers below. It's crazy to think of UU banning Tera to avoid banning Blaziken, Iron Hands, Latias and Galarian Moltres. Ubers UU is not a special tier like Monotype, Little Cup or Doubles that warrants a separate set of rules. Ubers UU is simply Ubers' UU. I have never seen a Terastallization thread in any tier below OU.

Suspect Zacian if you want and address the consequences. Every tier has had problems with Pokémon abusing Tera, and they survived.

 

[KineSquared]

So, please, define Ubers UU tiering philosophy.

My two cents on how tiering philosophy has evolved is simply that it's somewhere in between OU and Ubers. Neither of these tiers have hard lines of "we can quantify this type of pokemon is banworthy and this type isn't". The suspect threshold being 60% instead of 66% is honestly something I just haven't given thought to, but I've been away from the tiering logistics (i.e. I'm not council) for over a year at this point. That's the closest you can get to "Defining" a tiering threshold, but that is really just an amalgamation of however many players qualify and their personal opinions. It feels like you want a concrete answer where there is none. We should have a higher bar to centralizing, "broken" threats compared to OU, but also we shouldn't be as afraid as Ubers is to ban something that warps the metagame in an unfair/unfun/unbalanced way.

 

[Poosh_i]

Disclaimer: These are just my three cents, from a tiering philosophy perspective, and not specifically about Zacian.
I believe the main issues here are more related to tiering philosophy, particularly as it applies to Ubers UU, than anything else.

---

First of all, reiterating BigFatMantis, it makes no sense to speculate about the consequences of banning Zacian. That is not in line with Smogon's tiering policy, and neither the Ubers nor OU tiers operate in that manner.

---

Second, I think it is time to solidify and clearly define Ubers UU philosophy, or these problems will continue to arise (just like National Dex until it was properly defined).

If Ubers UU was tiered using the same standards as OU, everything would be banned until we ended up with... well... OU. (Of course, some OU Pokémon are also in Ubers.) This is a fact—it's the definition of OU. If some Pokémon in Ubers UU survived that tiering policy they would be in OU.

Wasn't this the reason why Ubers UU was created in the first place? Just as UU applies the tiering philosophy of OU to OU's leftovers, Ubers UU should apply the tiering philosophy of Ubers to Ubers' leftovers. This doesn't mean that Pokémon like Shaymin-Sky and multiple Arceus forms shouldn't be banned. However, you aren't even using the Ubers ban threshold of 66.6% in your suspect tests, you are already being more loose on bans.

So, please, define Ubers UU tiering philosophy.

---

Finally, as Aberforth said, banning Tera in Ubers UU—an Ubers tier—while allowing it in PU, feels simply wrong. I believe Ubers UU should not ban Tera independently of Ubers, just as no tier from UU to PU has banned Tera separately. Imagine if there was an Ubers RU tier, and Ubers UU decided to ban Tera simply because they don't want to ban a specific Pokémon—this would have catastrophic consequences for the tiers below. It's crazy to think of UU banning Tera to avoid banning Blaziken, Iron Hands, Latias and Galarian Moltres. Ubers UU is not a special tier like Monotype, Little Cup or Doubles that warrants a separate set of rules. Ubers UU is simply Ubers' UU. I have never seen a Terastallization thread in any tier below OU.

Suspect Zacian if you want and address the consequences. Every tier has had problems with Pokémon abusing Tera, and they survived.

I'm chiming in on the point of it "feeling wrong", this is just as poor of an argument as speculating about zacian and has no bearing on the reality of the tier. The entire point of this tier is that it exists adjacent to the OU-PU line, and thus what is done there and what has done here should have absolutely 0 bearing on any part of this discussion and whether or not it you perceive it to be wrong or not.

And since you yourself evoked the National Dex example, National Dex UU and thus the tiers below them banned tera far before NDOU did. Is that not the exact precedent you're making an example out of?

I was involved with Natdex RU before and after the Tera ban at that time - it wasn't "catastrophic" for them, because they had *also* wanted tera banned and having it go removed the tiering headaches that ensue without them being put in the spot that NDUU and equivocally, we are in right now.

This is an entirely pro-keep tera argument that does everything except actually discuss Tera in Ubers UU.

 

[Hydrametr0nice]

I just made my first post because I have seen decisions being made (not in this tier), and after the backlash, councils accusing people of not intervening when they should have, so I just felt like writting what I thought. I don't want to go on for too long, so I'll just respond to your post.

I'm chiming in on the point of it "feeling wrong", this is just as poor of an argument as speculating about zacian and has no bearing on the reality of the tier. The entire point of this tier is that it exists adjacent to the OU-PU line, and thus what is done there and what has done here should have absolutely 0 bearing on any part of this discussion and whether or not it you perceive it to be wrong or not.

And since you yourself evoked the National Dex example, National Dex UU and thus the tiers below them banned tera far before NDOU did. Is that not the exact precedent you're making an example out of?

I was involved with Natdex RU before and after the Tera ban at that time - it wasn't "catastrophic" for them, because they had *also* wanted tera banned and having it go removed the tiering headaches that ensue without them being put in the spot that NDUU and equivocally, we are in right now.

This is an entirely pro-keep tera argument that does everything except actually discuss Tera in Ubers UU.

You are right about the precedent.

Now, even if you want to discuss banning Tera versus banning Zacian, NDW and some Arceus forms, you would still need to provide arguments that demonstrate why Terastallization warrants a ban in Ubers UU more than in any other SV tier—without relying on theorymon. You and others provided a few points, mostly focusing on the imbalance between offense and defense. However, most every other tier (excluding Ubers) has had more bans due to Terastallization than Ubers UU. Considering that Ubers UU is supposed to have a higher ban threshold than these other tiers (otherwise, it would effectively just be OU), I still don’t see how you can make an argument for banning Terastallization instead of Zacian and going from there.

Tera was banned in National Dex OU (a decision I actually supported), but many of the pro-ban arguments for Tera in Nat Dex factored in the overlap of Tera with past generational mechanics. That parallel doesn’t apply here.

As for the offense vs. defense argument, I still believe that the fact remains: Ubers UU is essentially Ubers' lower tier, shaped by Ubers' tiering policy and leftovers. Would Ubers be banning Terastallization if Eternatus and Ho-Oh weren’t in the game? I don’t think so. Perhaps they would ban more offensive Pokémon like Koraidon and Zacian-Crowned, but I can’t imagine the Ubers line banning Terastallization before the OU line does. Personally, I would like that even if OU bans Terastallization, Ubers UU remaind faithfull to Ubers.

Feel free to disagree! That's just how I interpret this tier. I really like the Ubers UU project and will continue to follow its development closely, no matter what happens from here.

 

[LBN]

I'm gonna have to entirely agree with both dorron, and BFM's sentiments here. I haven't played ubers UU much at all besides some sparing times, but I think my take can be given regardless of whether i play it or not. Strictly speaking, tiering action shouldn't be permitted on anything in Ubers UU until you settle on a proper identity. Is it Ubers-like, or just a OU mishmash with some brokens splattered inside? Should you use the 66.6% super-majority system or use OU's 60. Should the standards for what's "broken" follow OU's, or Ubers. If its "a mix of the two" draw the line in the sand somewhere. In Ubers, Koraidon is within reason of being acceptable, in OU a mon with Koraidon's track record would've been nuked long ago. You can't have a metagame like this without having some form of concrete basis instead of going off nothing but vibes.

Going strictly off the arguments in the thread; mainly the first one from the other luna that isn't me. I find the argument of "Without zacian we turn into dragon spam v dragon spam" to not be compelling at all to target a generational mechanic. Some metagames are faster paced than others and there's nothing completely wrong with a fast paced meta where fat is niche. SV Ubers games roughly last around 28 turns or less, with a select few going to around 80 or higher. SS Ubers is a far bulkier meta where slowly breaking your opponent down is a common sight; and games over 100 turns isn't too uncommon. When your a tier based off Ubers of all things; complaints about dragon vs dragon offense wars seems very silly to me when that was the entire identity of Ubers for a clean decade. All I get from this thread is a feeling of tera being scapegoated, not that its the actual issue here. Is zacian broken with tera? Very likely it is, but it isn't the first time tiers have banned things for being tera merchants. RU for instance, Comfey Polteageist and Yanmega are all complete tera merchants who border of niche to worthless without it saw themselves banned for their tera abuse. And even this isn't sufficient to start glaring at the generational mechanic; hell its just barely enough to entertain tera blast. Which is the conclusion that was reached when a PR thread was made discussing the matter.

What this tier desperately needs is an identity, and not just being a hodgepodge of whatever is felt like at the moment. Follow OU's footstoops, or follow Ubers footsteps. And neither of the paths these two take should ever result in a tera suspect test.

 

[LovelyLuna]

I'll say im not sure about a lot of the stuff regarding policy and what the threshold should be. I've always personally seen Ubers UU as somewhere in between Ubers and OU, accepting more centralisation than OU (Magearna and Lando-T at a time being pretty much mandatory for non HO/Stall) but taking their 60% threshold. To me, the point of Ubers UU is giving a chance to the outclassed Ubers, whether that is outclassed formes, or older legendaries that have fallen victim to powercreep. This is why I'm against taking a complete Ubers approach where the metagame is restricted to a handful of Pokemon, a metagame where many styles are just dead.

Is zacian broken with tera? Very likely it is, but it isn't the first time tiers have banned things for being tera merchants. RU for instance, Comfey Polteageist and Yanmega are all complete tera merchants who border of niche to worthless without it saw themselves banned for their tera abuse. And even this isn't sufficient to start glaring at the generational mechanic; hell its just barely enough to entertain tera blast. Which is the conclusion that was reached when a PR thread was made discussing the matter.

What this tier desperately needs is an identity, and not just being a hodgepodge of whatever is felt like at the moment. Follow OU's footstoops, or follow Ubers footsteps. And neither of the paths these two take should ever result in a tera suspect test.

Real reason I made the post though is here. Can Tera eventually be blamed for the ban of too many Pokemon? Since those Pokemon in RU warrant a discussion thread. Alongside Zacian, NDW and 2-4 Arceus fromes could be freed with a Tera ban. I expect a Zacian ban will end up with more bans,. Arceus with Tera is a unique property to Ubers UU and very controvertial. If this isn't enough to justify a Tera suspect, at what point is it enough? Or does it require fundamentally different rules, like 1v1, Monotype, or even NatDex because of other gimmicks alongside Tera.

 

[BigFatMantis]

Alongside Zacian, NDW and 2-4 Arceus fromes could be freed with a Tera ban. I expect a Zacian ban will end up with more bans,. Arceus with Tera is a unique property to Ubers UU and very controvertial. If this isn't enough to justify a Tera suspect, at what point is it enough? Or does it require fundamentally different rules, like 1v1, Monotype, or even NatDex because of other gimmicks alongside Tera.

If you're talking about tiering policy, the real reason why it's not enough to justify is because you are speaking in complete hypotheticals and conjectures. While I agree NDW would probably be unbanned without Tera, saying Zacian will be banned is conjecture since it's not banned (and isn't even on the table for a suspect atm). Saying 2-4 Arceus forms "could" be freed is also too much conjecture. That's not really any reason to ban things and can't be used as a basis whatsoever. The proper procedure is always to deal with the problematic pokemon first. So, if there's 1-2 pokemon currently really problematic with Tera to the point they need to be banned, then we ban them. If there's another 1-2 after that, then we ban them. If it gets to the point where we've done this a bunch of times in a row and 8+ mons are banned in the cycle or something, then we look at Tera if that's the root cause. But you don't look at it beforehand like this because we truly do not know what is and is not problematic in a metagame that is non-existent.

 

[Poosh_i]

I just made my first post because I have seen decisions being made (not in this tier), and after the backlash, councils accusing people of not intervening when they should have, so I just felt like writting what I thought. I don't want to go on for too long, so I'll just respond to your post.


You are right about the precedent.

Now, even if you want to discuss banning Tera versus banning Zacian, NDW and some Arceus forms, you would still need to provide arguments that demonstrate why Terastallization warrants a ban in Ubers UU more than in any other SV tier—without relying on theorymon. You and others provided a few points, mostly focusing on the imbalance between offense and defense. However, most every other tier (excluding Ubers) has had more bans due to Terastallization than Ubers UU. Considering that Ubers UU is supposed to have a higher ban threshold than these other tiers (otherwise, it would effectively just be OU), I still don’t see how you can make an argument for banning Terastallization instead of Zacian and going from there.

Tera was banned in National Dex OU (a decision I actually supported), but many of the pro-ban arguments for Tera in Nat Dex factored in the overlap of Tera with past generational mechanics. That parallel doesn’t apply here.

As for the offense vs. defense argument, I still believe that the fact remains: Ubers UU is essentially Ubers' lower tier, shaped by Ubers' tiering policy and leftovers. Would Ubers be banning Terastallization if Eternatus and Ho-Oh weren’t in the game? I don’t think so. Perhaps they would ban more offensive Pokémon like Koraidon and Zacian-Crowned, but I can’t imagine the Ubers line banning Terastallization before the OU line does. Personally, I would like that even if OU bans Terastallization, Ubers UU remaind faithfull to Ubers.

Feel free to disagree! I really like the Ubers UU project and will continue to follow its development closely, no matter what happens from here.

Reasonable response. Thank you for contributing

 

[KineSquared]

Should the standards for what's "broken" follow OU's, or Ubers. If its "a mix of the two" draw the line in the sand somewhere.

What is OUs line in the sand? Different people feel different ways about it. To many people Kyurem is busted and palafin wasn't. To some people they are both busted, and to some people neither of them are. There is no "line" of "this is a way to quantify broken-ness from 0-100, and we ban everything above a 70". What is Ubers line? That's a little better defined, but plenty of people thought miraidon was below that line, or now think koraidon is above that line. I'm genuinely curious what you're looking for beyond "It's in between OU and Ubers". By what other metric could that be stated?