Keyword ”if”, man. Tera’s still right here. Calm down.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Check out the winners of the 2022 Smog Awards!
Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]
- Thread starter Finchinator
- Start date
- Status
So, if I read an opponent and they read that read, then it means I got outplayed. If I read their Tera type wrong, then I just got caught by something I didn't expect.
If they have a Tapu Fini in, and I bring in a Pex to counter it, but the end up being the Taunt CM set, is that uncompetitive, or is it just what happens in a game as varied as Pokémon? This gen places a lot of weight on your ability to build teams. Even more than previous gens, which isn't Tera being broken, it's just the consequence of how complex a mechanic it is.
Couple of things, a metagame can be unhealthy regardless of how old it is. Proof is Dynamax wasn't less broken just because it was released the same time SS came out, it was banned outright a month later. My perception is you cannot have a healthy metagame where Terastalization is involved currently without any restrictions at the very minimum. Dynamax was a game defining mechanic and it was banned, I don't think anyone here would say the Dynamax ban was toxic, it solely might be the most agreed upon ban in Smogon history. Creativity and evolution of the metagame will come regardless of Tera being here or not I don't think they're correlated.
Well, I never thought I'd come across a post talking about an OM, Camomons, in a discussion about terastallization in SV OU lmao. Surprised but glad to see people are still looking at this metagame!With Terastalization currently legal in OU, if I want to cover all my bases, I've got to build to deal with, among other mons:
...etc., etc., etc.
- Dragon/Ghost Dragapult
- Ghost Dragapult
- Steel Dragapult
- Fairy Dragapult
- Fire/Ghost Skeledirge
- Fairy Skeledirge
- Dragon/Dark Roaring Moon
- Flying Roaring Moon
- Steel Roaring Moon
- Dark Roaring Moon
- Fighting/Ghost Annihilape
- Fairy Annihilape
- Water Annihilape
- Rock Garganacl
- Flying Garganacl
- Poison Garganacl
- Fighting Garganacl
- Ghost Garganacl
- Ground/Steel Iron Treads
- Electric Iron Treads
- Water Iron Treads
I've previously noted in https://www.smogon.com/forums/threa...rage-fist-update.3710915/page-64#post-9410390 and https://www.smogon.com/forums/threa...ering-discussion.3711465/page-12#post-9413905 that mons suddenly start having fewer - likely often drastically fewer - checks when they can tech into any single type they want, thus increasing the need to put in multiple checks for the same mon in the same team of mine. Here's hoping these multiple checks for various mons overlap with each other and check larger swathes of the meta between them (e.g. Breloom for regular Chien-Pao and regular Iron Treads and Steel Dragapult, Lokix for regular Chien-Pao and some regular Gholdengo and regular Dragapult, Scizor for regular Chien-Pao and regular Iron Valiant and Fairy Dragapult)! Alternately, you can consider the OU meta to contain many, many different mons with the same species, movepool, and base stats but completely different typings.
Which Other Metagame involves each mon of the same species to essentially be considered as multiple mons with the same movepool and base stats but completely different typings? Camomons! It's a venerable metagame with much tactical thinking and much hand-wringing in the teambuilder that's survived multiple generations and is beloved in enough circles. There are still ways to build decent to good teams in Camomons, the same people pour themselves into the meta and construct those decent to good teams (compare the councils of Gen 7 Camomons, Gen 8 Camomons, and Gen 9 Camomons - note that the Gen 8 and Gen 9 councils have all the same members, with some of those members posting at the start of the Gen 8 thread and/or constructing sample teams for it significantly earlier than the end of Gen 8, but do note that the Gens 7 and 8 councils do not share any members), and it's quite likely that the same people perform well in tournaments (see the winners of these three tournaments - note that the SS Camomons Send-Off Tournament was won by Gen 8 council member Siamato and the Camomons Isle of Armor Launch Tournament was won by Andyboy, Gen 7 but non-Gen 8 council member). There's still set scouting, type scouting, tactical sacrifices, and choosing the right (often Choiced) move for all possibilities of the opposing team when it's your turn. But since there are effectively a metric funk-ton of mons to check in the teambuilder in Camomons and seemingly not enough team slots to check them all, what's their philosophy of how willing they are to throw in the towel for portions of the meta when it comes to teambuilding? See this great post (portion) from Gen 9 and Gen 8 Camomons council member ponchlake (emphasis mine):
Perhaps the real question we need to ask ourselves when it comes to Terastalization is how matchup-fishy do we want Gen 9 OU to be? Camomons themselves implies to outright admits that it's more matchup-fishy than OU due to throwing in the towel more often when it comes to fully checking mons. And it's quite possible that we ban fewer mons and/or we do not ban or restrict Terastalization if we accept Gen 9 OU to be significantly more matchup-fishy than Gen 8 OU simply because, with that acceptance of matchup-fishiness, we no longer feel the need to bring in multiple checks for the same mon quite as strongly, and therefore we start to ignore that measuring stick for how broken a mon is.
So as a veteran and council member of this metagame and former OU player, I'd like to make clarifications or corrections about your post aiming to compare a typing change mechanics, terastallization and Camomons's typing change concept.
I) Typing change mechanics vs typing change concept
Terastallization is a mechanics that allows to replace (defensively speaking) your typing by a single chosen one* at any time* on any mons*. Those are the main features of terastallization outside from the super-STAB concept and Terablast.
That's an interesting mechanics because it enables some mons to potentially become viable in terastallizing into a much better typing (Garganacl or Avalugg into Fairy for example) therefore offering more diversity in the builder. There's also a competitive aspect in using this mechanics finding the best terastallization among your 6 mons and the right time to activate it.
However, we can't disregard the uncompetitive aspect of terastallization either. Being sudently able to change type to prevent revenge killing is uncompetitive due to how difficult it is to predict and impactful it can be. Even more when it comes to prevent a sweep from a setup mon.
* It's reasonable to say there's not really 17 possibilities for a mon terastallization but more something like 3-8.
* At some point of the game, it's realistic to estimate your opponent and you have no reason to terastallize.
* Like dynamax, you'd like to terastallize a mon rather than another one depending on how the game is going.
Camomons is an OM based on the possibility to change your typing based on your 2 first moves. This change happens in the builder and the typing is revealed when bringing the mon on the field. An example is shown below.
Garchomp @ Black Sludge
Ability: Rough Skin
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Jolly Nature
- Liquidation
- Poison Jab
- Stealth Rock
- Swords Dance
- You can run a
if you want be let's be honest, in almost every cases it will be bad. Thus, it's reasonable to not take (or not try to take) this typing possibility into account while building and especially because you will naturally find an answer to it in common good builds. -
seemed to be an interesting bulky setup breaker with that typing but it was not in the SS Camomons metagame. Mainly because
was S-tier and mon such a
or
were around. It's the case of something good on paper but not great in practise due to the metagame.
So, although interesting, the link made between terastallization and Camomons shouldn't be pushed too far just because both involve typing change. Terastallization is uncompetitive due its unpredictability in-game and the possible immense impact it can have. Camomons is less competitive because MU gets more weight in the outcome of the game.
II) Camomons and OU are (ofc) built differently
It's a point that hasn't been sufficiently adressed but absolutely crucial when trying to compare terastallization in OU and Camomons!
If Camomons stays a competitive metagame in which it's possible to perform and be consistent, that's also because you're not playing Camo like you play OU. Indeed, because it's too hard or impossible to take into account all the possibilities while building (our defensive cores will likely be dismantled by something for sure), Camomons building thus relies more in offensive counterplay such as revenge killers rather than defensive counterplay. This is possible because Camomons concept allows revenge killers to be better with strong (chosen) STABs able to cover a large range of threats. Defensive unexpected mons are usually less of an issue (when it doesn't come to setup ones).
In-game, Camomons is also played differently compared to OU. First because you don't know your opponent's mons typing so early game is often more based on pivoting/scouting opposing set with a rather slow start (case balance vs balance). However, when you know all (or almost all) your opponent typing, you have in fact more information than in a traditionnal OU game. If you see a
well, there's no question, it has Surf, Scald or Hydro Pump and will be able to hit your
. It's impossible to lure it with such a set because the Camomons concept partially reveal your moveset. You can therefore adapt your playstyle thanks to this information.Camomons has its own tools and playstyle allowing to deal better with the increased uncompetitiveness that OU hasn't.
Conclusion
If the comparison between terastallization in SV OU and Camomons is a bit clumsy and inappropriate to me, an excellent question is however raised at the end:
What OU players want? In which metagame do they want to play? What are they willing to concede for it?
Terastallization is at the same time an interesting elements in terms of possibilities in the builder, competitive in determining how to use it the best in-game and uncompetitive due to its intrinsic and potentially too impactful unpredictability.
In the optic of building the most competitive metagame, just getting rid of it might be the best solution. However, keeping the mechanics as it is or trying to find a way to slightly modify it to reduce its uncompetitive aspects will necessarily not be free and will be at the expense of some competitiveness and "simplicity" (I mean intuitivity for beginners used to the regular game and coming to PS).
This question can only be answered by the OU players themselves through this thread and necessarily ending with a suspect test. The SV OU council also does a great job to me in letting a lot of time for people to judge the mechanics and form an opinion on it while putting on the table a wide range of possibilities. Interested to see how things will end!
Well yeah terastallization is also in SV Camomons and works as expected. However, things are much more polarised in favor of an outright ban of terastallization in Camomons. Indeed, Camomons mons already have a great typing partially removing the diversity terastallization can bring. So it mostly remains the uncompetitive part which is even worst in Camomons preventing revenge-killing, essential pillar of Camomons's playstyle making things even harder against bulky setup for instance (an issue known in past Camomons generation). It exacerbates the dependance of the MU to an unreasonable point to me. However, we (as council) want more time to let people share their mind about it and try it ourselves before deciding if we should or shouldn't get rid of it.
Replays to illustrate my point (because facts are important):
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1727302928-jqfo378j083qksdgtq2pcixzr5kg5h6pw
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1727311246-wqr2qezwso3nt14lx9x77uwdbyuhtuopw
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1724639004-x9qbofq8ddsde49qakv6f3nfkcbrhj8pw
Replays to illustrate my point (because facts are important):
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1727302928-jqfo378j083qksdgtq2pcixzr5kg5h6pw
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1727311246-wqr2qezwso3nt14lx9x77uwdbyuhtuopw
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1724639004-x9qbofq8ddsde49qakv6f3nfkcbrhj8pw
Just to let you know that my old pseudo was Matiss98 and you probably saw during your research Lectrys ;p
Being the Taunt CM set had opportunity cost. It meant you could beat pex, but you were worse into more offensive teams than if you ran scarf. You had to choose, in the builder, between your Fini being self-sufficient enough to muscle past some of its checks at the cost of not bringing as much to the team as a whole. You couldnt cripple Glowking, and the need for other forms of speed control would mean you were giving up role compression as a weavile check+scarfer to specifically be able to turn the tables on Pex.
Tera is more like if you could choose in-battle between those sets. Theres no tradeoff in the builder, and minimal tradeoff in game. There is no opportunity cost to putting Tera-Water on Annihilape or Tera Fairy/Flying/Whatever the flavor of the minute is on Garg. You slap that shit on there, and if you need it ingame, great! If you dont, theres 5 other mons you can tera instead.
Yes DMax was hellishly broken, that is true. This is not DMax. There is nothing complex about "This Mon can't use Tera because it would be horribly broken with it". If someone reads that Dragapult or whoever can't Tera then they can read the suspect test for it. You may not have specifically said what I'm about to say, but anyone who says that complex bans hurts new players is dishonest. It is not hard to read a thread about a suspect. The first post by whoever makes the suspect explains why people think it's broken. No one can pull that bullshit anymore
If you are bringing Pex to counter Fini, then you need to rebuild your team. Most Fini sets beat Pex, this is common knowledge in Gen 7/8. Its not the same as Annihilape not only choosing to Tera or not, but what Tera it can choose. If you are using that as an example to back up why Tera should not be touched upon, then try again.
Ahh here we go, more get gud comments. Wanting to limit the amount of unknown variables does not make someone less skilled.
this might be a dumb as rocks idea, since im in literally -1000 ladder right now, but i think there should be a non official popularity vote on the site, because i cant honestly keep reading this thread because it feels like a game of yu gi oh with fucking semantics and we are getting to the point where semantics is more important than the actual disscussion, so the more this trend continues, the less usefull this thread will be, so with the popular election at the very least we have some """""""general"""""""" idea of the overall mindset, sure this doesnt matter at the end of the day (see trump 2016) but at least its more data do use in argument
and to repeat my opinion if anyone is asking, ban the entirety of tera, only after Gamefreak starts vomiting DLC, because i feel like you can have a general prediction of the possible tera users and can force a tera under right circumstances given the tide of the battle, making the games overall more interesting and i do belive that it encourages long term planning but without the lose of momentum due to the nature of the change, but i do recognize that this can and will be thrown out of the window when more mons are added to the mix
and to repeat my opinion if anyone is asking, ban the entirety of tera, only after Gamefreak starts vomiting DLC, because i feel like you can have a general prediction of the possible tera users and can force a tera under right circumstances given the tide of the battle, making the games overall more interesting and i do belive that it encourages long term planning but without the lose of momentum due to the nature of the change, but i do recognize that this can and will be thrown out of the window when more mons are added to the mix
alephgalactus
Banned deucer.
I’d say before Home. Otherwise we’ll have to deal with Lando-T, Ursaluna, Cresselia, Enamorus, possibly Magearna, etc, all with the ability to Tera, on top of whatever broken nonsense is left over from this portion of the meta because at the rate we’re going and how much bannable shit there is we’ll never even get to Gholdengo or Grimmsnarl.
Tera is not a completely unknown variable -- there are only so many possible options. Again, look at your opponent's team and try to sus out their gameplan. And playing this game is already about trying to work around unknown variables. What set is my opponent running? Are they are lure? Can I outspeed them?
The things that are unbalanced tend to be what you have absolutely no control over even if you know what's coming.
If you have to guess it, it’s an unknown. Just because 99% of Gholdengos run Make It Rain, that doesn’t mean you know for sure that the specific Gholdengo you’re facing is running it. Sure, you can make an educated guess, but once again, that’s still an unknown.
Here's the thing though, you could say the same of other broken mechanics like Gems in generation 5 before they were banned. Automatically nuke one thing in an already offensive and unstable meta based on complex changes for other broken mechanics like infinite weather. Obviously I'm not directly comparing the two in a way that they are the exact same under the those circumstances, but I mean to point out that something can seem balanced at first but then become unstable with perspective and hindsight, or just be difficult to balance around as a necessary part of the game. Admittedly Terastalization is new and I think it could certainly use some testing yes, but the end goal doesn't change and Terastalization is not so integrated into the game that it should require we fundamentally change the way we look at tiering. Frankly, as much as Finchinator and Ruft would like to ponder the spectrum of options regarding Terastalization, it should never be looked at in a way that violates smogon tiering policy. THAT is what I am mainly getting at, that we have barriers erected regarding tiering in the Smogon structure as a way to safeguard the idea of competitive play. We should not be preserving a mechanic like Terastalization on grounds that are fundementally un-Smogon. Regardless of the many opinions and ideas we have concerning Terastalization, in the end the two options are the same: Should Terastalization be BANNED? OR Should Terastalization STAY?
To dive further into this, I'd like to elaborate on why the reasons many concerns, questions, and ideas for Terastalization and its close relative Dynamax fundamentally don't work and did not work.
Within the realm of Smogon's official tiers, it operates on a fine line: to follow cartridge based limitations, or to forego them; the answer is surprisingly mixed and complicated. Things like Freeze and Sleep clauses never existed within recent generations, only appearing within generation 3 during battle stadium, but are implemented nonetheless. That's because those two elements required checks and balances in the subsequent generations within the Smogon tiering system, which is outside of Nintendo / Gamefreak's jurisdiction, but it still didn't step outside of the realm of possibility because it was a previously implemented feature by the designers of the game. That is one checkbox that many changes to both Terastalization and the former Dynamax simply fail to hit. Ideas of a gentlemen's agreement or visual queues which tip off which Pokemon have certain Terastalization types or which Pokemon is Dynamaxed were never a part of the game. Why does this matter? Why is it still not within Smogon's jurisdiction to do anything like this despite being a separate entity from Nintendo and Gamefreak? Because it is not something the designers of the game intended. If something occurs in the host generation, it remains a part of Smogon's mainstream tiers; those include OU, UU, Ubers, RU, NU, PU, ZU, NFE, and LC. Those tiers do not include significant modifications that are outside of the realm of possibility for the host generation, which is significant. That's also why things that item trade-offs for the ability to go ham for 3 turns or change your stab / multiply your STAB are unavailable. Now, there are deviations from standard play such as National Dex; which is a Smogon inspired tier that includes previously removed mechanics that are outside the jurisdiction of Nintendo / Gamfreak, and is a perfect example of not following standard tiering protocol and drawing the line in the sand for what is legal and illegal in terms of tiering for the tiers based off of the mainstream games.
I've accrewed a lot of general experience for tiering through experiences like National Dex NU
1. You cannot subtract from an intended game mechanic.
This one is fairly self explanatory. You cannot take a part from the whole and keep the rest if it is not according to the host generation.
2. You cannot add to an intended game mechanic.
This one is also fairly self explanatory. You cannot add to the whole product that the host generation offers.
3. You cannot ban something without probable cause and evidences.
This one goes for all tiering, and is on a wide spectrum.
4. When considering a tiering decision, reconsider the costs and evaluate the impact on the metagame.
This is ironically part of the reason we are considering Terastalization more liberally, because there are still lingering doubts about what we did with Dynamax (spoiler alert: it was the right move).
I think responding to this ties in nicely. Quote, "Regardless of the many opinions and ideas we have concerning Terastalization, in the end the two options draw the same conclusion: Should Terastalization be BANNED? OR Should Terastalization STAY?" The slippery slope exists and is more of a borderline "vibe check" than uncompetitiveness is in terms of being tangible or not. I still agree that framing Terastalization as being uncompetitive seems like a stretch in hindsight, but being broken is fitting. The ability to change matchups off of type alone and nuke supposed check with an increased type STAB creates more guessing games and 50/50s that decide entire games than are naturally available, and is in itself centralizing for that reason.
Yes, that is a concern for more specific banworthy Pokemon than it is for Terastalization as a whole (and trust me, there are a ton of them). You are correct in assuming that, and it was an oversight on my end to place the cart before the horse. However, the reasoning I provide still stands in defiance of that fact. I do agree that Terastalization will require more testing before it can be banned, we need to remove all the broken Pokemon in the tier before we touch the generational gimmick so that the environment for testing is as sterile as possible. However, this still ties back to the idea of our options for Terastalization falling under the illusion of choice and opinion beyond polarized viewpoints, because we have to eventually settle on banning it or not. It's clearly provable that near none of the suggested changes for Terastalization will be founded in Smogon principle, and are therefore unacceptable for tiering protocol and cannot be inplemented in right conscious.
1. The issue ties into broken Pokemon and Terastalization, however, when not putting the cart ahead of the horse this is undeterminable and therefore irrelevant at the moment.
2. This is highly dubious and / or debatable, since we lack a sterile environment to test Terastalization in. However, we've already seen pokemon that were already good before improve their matchups further and heighten artificially generated rock-paper-scissors matchups and increase the rate at which significant 50/50s occur that decide games.
1. The responsibility does fall onto everyone who wants tiering action against Terastalization, that is true. But it falls equally on everyone who doesn't want action as well, since their reasoning is just as important when finally deciding whether Terastalization should be banned or not.
2. All reasoning, discarding extreme hypotheticals and misnomers, for the banning of Terastalization that I am aware of has been fair reasoning. Setting that aside for a moment, I'd like to ask what those evidences are as proof of concept here since this entire post you made has been very he-said-she-said.
1. I would like to know who posted these replays, arguments, and retorts (which includes significant tournament / top players), where I can find them, and whether it comes down to Terastalization itself needing more testing, because that itself is what I think draws a large portion of attention for anti-ban sentiments.
2. This is entirely irrelevant and childish, and only based on meager social factors that disregard evidence for attention.
1. If I'm responding to this, I'm going to assume this was worded as "In conclusion: from a debate perspective, what if we were to take the thread as a whole?" for sanity's sake. If so, I've already drawn a conclusion for you-- you can't take this thread as a whole because not all arguments / ideas / concerns are valid under the tiering policies and structure of Smogon.
2. This is extremely inconclusive. Quote, "Regardless of the many opinions and ideas we have concerning Terastalization, in the end the two options draw the same conclusion: Should Terastalization be BANNED? OR Should Terastalization STAY?" Little-to-none of the proposed solutions to simply restricting Terastalization have been consistent enough with Smogon tiering policies and cartridge restrictions to be viable options. Therefore, if none of the those changes logically make sense for that reason, restriction is an exclusive and niche argument and will not be the result of this discussion.
3. In the sense of the idea that Smogon is founded on, no, competitiveness is not subjective. You cannot exchange fundamental ideas that built Smogon from the ground up for cheap installments like the considered "fun," which is a naturally subjective thing that relies on feeling over decades long policy.
4. You would be correct, uncompetitiveness is slightly more subjective than a handful of interactions possible in-game. However, that would still be more indicative of something being broken. Uncompetitiveness as a whole violates the competitive spirit through factors like surface level rng, whereas brokenness is more to the core than a woven layer of integrated luck-related elements.
5. You would also be correct to assume that uncompetitiveness itself is incapable of deeper meaning without real definition. However, brokenness is, because it is a more multi-faceted definition and tangible concept. Because it is more tangible, it also includes more of the general data and deep analysis uncompetitiveness lacks.
That's all my thoughts regarding Terastalization plastered onto a large post at the moment. If anyone has any questions, comments, or concerns regarding that reasoning, please let me know.
[EDIT]
Just wanted to add onto the fact that Terastalization not only causes mass RPS and unhealthy 50/50s, but also naturally forces teams to prepare multiple pokemon just to check one threat and overlap coverage that can make teams even more matchup dependent (sound familiar? i.e. Kyurem in SSOU). That alone places it under the definition for being broken, albeit uniquely.
Terastalization is unhealthy for this metagame and needs to go when the time is right. If I have the option to, I want to remove it as early as possible and sift through the broken Pokemon, but I'm willing to wait if the general consensus is that we need time.
Last edited:
i disagree with a lot of your retorts but i respect the effort put into this post, have a good one
I think the issue with terra is gonna be that it will make at least some abusers very difficult to handle. For example , specs lele was kept in check by, among other things. focus blast inaccuracy, but with Tera fighting it will effectively get an 100% accurate focus blast that it dreamed of in the past few gens. And since it can be stacked with specs it will be a lot more devastating and consistent.
I think the issue with Tera is that it can take certain balanced mons like regidrago/regielki and make them busted by giving them the stab coverage that the lack of had kept them in check.
Lure sets have always been ( and should always be ) a thing in competitive pokemon, but the issue with most lure sets is that they reduce the mon's overall effectiveness for improving a few specific matchups.
As others have pointed out , Tera in many cases isn't a liability. There's very little opportunity cost to using Tera on a given offensive breaker or sweeper. The change of typing can be a double edged sword, but it doesn't really matter if the opposing setup sweeper is at +1 and can control whether or not your revenge killer or check can actually beat it or not. So you may lose for example your tttar to Chi yu 's Tera fighting , but the issue is once tttar goes down , what else on your team is switching in to chi yu ?
But that's where it starts to become an issue of whether it was just the abuser being too good or if it's Tera pushing it over the edge.
The same can be said for other dangerous breakers and sweepers like Tera Dnite , where conventionally the counterplay to dnite breaking through say your corviknight in a previous meta was to revenge it with weavile after. But Tera fire dnite is no longer weak to ice. And Tera normal for instance has the power and priority to one shot weavile from full at +1, just as an example.
So Tera creates these scenarios where you can lose 1 or even 2 mons to dangerous setup sweepers due to the sudden typing change.
But the issue is even beyond that , even if you did know dnite was Tera fire or Tera normal in advance, you still need to guess what turn it will use. And Even if you can guess, some abusers seem to be so fast and strong that knowing it's coming won't be enough.
And so when you combine this with the fact that there is very little opportunity cost associated with making a mon a Tera type and activating it in battle compared with traditional lure sets this is what can make it an issue. In some cases as I said the typing change can in fact be an opportunity cost but not always. Something like the hypothetical leki for instance won't appreciate the defensive drawback of ice type ,( making it weak to mach punch and bullet ) but it's so frail to begin with that it's hardly noticeable.
Traditional lure sets can leave you unable beating stuff you normally should beat. But with Tera not only does the mon generally keep consistency in its desired roles , it's able to do even more. And this is something that can start to strain teambuilding and make Tera seem unbalanced in game.
But at the same time , Tera does add a lot defensively wise given you can patch a hole In your team by switching to a typing. In this sense , it is pretty competitive and healthy and alleviates the matchup issues we have had in previous gens in this case.
So it's clear Tera has competitive merit to it but I think the uncompetitive aspect is unbalancing certain offensive juggernauts.
I think the issue with Tera is that it can take certain balanced mons like regidrago/regielki and make them busted by giving them the stab coverage that the lack of had kept them in check.
Lure sets have always been ( and should always be ) a thing in competitive pokemon, but the issue with most lure sets is that they reduce the mon's overall effectiveness for improving a few specific matchups.
As others have pointed out , Tera in many cases isn't a liability. There's very little opportunity cost to using Tera on a given offensive breaker or sweeper. The change of typing can be a double edged sword, but it doesn't really matter if the opposing setup sweeper is at +1 and can control whether or not your revenge killer or check can actually beat it or not. So you may lose for example your tttar to Chi yu 's Tera fighting , but the issue is once tttar goes down , what else on your team is switching in to chi yu ?
But that's where it starts to become an issue of whether it was just the abuser being too good or if it's Tera pushing it over the edge.
The same can be said for other dangerous breakers and sweepers like Tera Dnite , where conventionally the counterplay to dnite breaking through say your corviknight in a previous meta was to revenge it with weavile after. But Tera fire dnite is no longer weak to ice. And Tera normal for instance has the power and priority to one shot weavile from full at +1, just as an example.
So Tera creates these scenarios where you can lose 1 or even 2 mons to dangerous setup sweepers due to the sudden typing change.
But the issue is even beyond that , even if you did know dnite was Tera fire or Tera normal in advance, you still need to guess what turn it will use. And Even if you can guess, some abusers seem to be so fast and strong that knowing it's coming won't be enough.
And so when you combine this with the fact that there is very little opportunity cost associated with making a mon a Tera type and activating it in battle compared with traditional lure sets this is what can make it an issue. In some cases as I said the typing change can in fact be an opportunity cost but not always. Something like the hypothetical leki for instance won't appreciate the defensive drawback of ice type ,( making it weak to mach punch and bullet ) but it's so frail to begin with that it's hardly noticeable.
Traditional lure sets can leave you unable beating stuff you normally should beat. But with Tera not only does the mon generally keep consistency in its desired roles , it's able to do even more. And this is something that can start to strain teambuilding and make Tera seem unbalanced in game.
But at the same time , Tera does add a lot defensively wise given you can patch a hole In your team by switching to a typing. In this sense , it is pretty competitive and healthy and alleviates the matchup issues we have had in previous gens in this case.
So it's clear Tera has competitive merit to it but I think the uncompetitive aspect is unbalancing certain offensive juggernauts.
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/terastallization-tiering-discussion.3711465/post-9416448
I'd like to see what you think of this post, it has a lot of relevant research.
Honestly, I want to see the game develop for another month or two, wait until the novelty wears off and things settle into routine before we take a look at tiering action, nothing is immediately apparent as broken about Tera. As you said, the broken Mons need to go first before we can get to the generational mechanic.
I agree that Vrin's post is amazing, but I believe something like Chi-Yu is broken even outside of Tera, so I don't think using it as an example as to why you would prefer an outright ban is a good idea. Iron Valiant is a better example of something that is potentially problematic with Tera, but Chi-Yu literally eviscerates most switch-ins even without Tera because its STAB combo, Base Special Attack, available attacks, and Beads of Ruin.
chi yu is genuinely one of the weaker terastilizations you can do in the tier, the calcs are not much better unless you're playing sun. in sun it works a lot better, but if it's not a sun team you likely have many better options
edit: what i mean is you usually still have the same attacks required to kill, obviously it will do considerably more damage flat
edit: what i mean is you usually still have the same attacks required to kill, obviously it will do considerably more damage flat
Last edited:
Cause they must have got these iron hands when they tera their garchomp into a water type. They salty
As an admittedly bad player, my opinion on tera has only gone down since this generation began. I personally have a lot of fun with it, but its ability to turn threats from just good to potentially (or explicitly) problematic makes it feel kind of unhealthy to me, and I don't think any single restriction fully fixes this.
Terastallization has four main ways it benefits you. It introduces more options for you that your opponent won't be able to always account for, it can give you what is essentially an adaptability boost, it can give you a third type for coverage, and it can help you defensively deal with an opposing pokemon. There are solutions that have been proposed that deal with any of these in isolation, but I think that all of them turn various pokemon from just good to borderline.
As an example: Roaring Moon will likely always be good, but its unpredictability is what puts it over the edge for a lot of people. Flying and steel have very different answers, and it can even use ground to throw off teams that counter the former two types. Dragapult is finally given what it wants with a physical ghost STAB if it chooses to tera ghost, which also gives it what is effectively an adaptability boost on it, while using tera ghost on a specs set allows it to blow everything up, which makes it kind of borderline. Volcarona has always had some glaring issues due to its movepool, but now it can tera grass or what have you to patch that up, turning it from an inconsistent beast to one much more consistent. Espartha and Annihilape have some solid counters, but both can tera (Espartha into fairy or fighting, Annihilape into water) to defensively deal with those counters, allowing them to snowball out of control. (There's other examples, but you get my point.)
All these pokemon are pushed up to the edge (and some blatantly over it) by tera, but no single solution proposed solves why they're potentially problematic. Team prievew doesn't change why Espartha is broken, only allowing STAB tera doesn't change why Dragapult's so good, etc. As a result, I'm concerned that any attempts to restrict tera without a full ban would ultimately results in a large swath of pokemon still needing to be removed. Perhaps that's for the best--I know some argue that banning 5 or however many pokemon is worth it to preserve the mechanic. I just worry that any restriction will ultimately not have the results some people think it will in entirely fixing it.
I do still think that testing with limited tera is a good idea for the suspect ladder, with team prievew displaying tera type probably being the best course of action for that. I just don't agree that unrestricted tera is the right course of action, and I worry that preserving tera through some limitation will still result in a heap of mons still needing to be banned.
Terastallization has four main ways it benefits you. It introduces more options for you that your opponent won't be able to always account for, it can give you what is essentially an adaptability boost, it can give you a third type for coverage, and it can help you defensively deal with an opposing pokemon. There are solutions that have been proposed that deal with any of these in isolation, but I think that all of them turn various pokemon from just good to borderline.
As an example: Roaring Moon will likely always be good, but its unpredictability is what puts it over the edge for a lot of people. Flying and steel have very different answers, and it can even use ground to throw off teams that counter the former two types. Dragapult is finally given what it wants with a physical ghost STAB if it chooses to tera ghost, which also gives it what is effectively an adaptability boost on it, while using tera ghost on a specs set allows it to blow everything up, which makes it kind of borderline. Volcarona has always had some glaring issues due to its movepool, but now it can tera grass or what have you to patch that up, turning it from an inconsistent beast to one much more consistent. Espartha and Annihilape have some solid counters, but both can tera (Espartha into fairy or fighting, Annihilape into water) to defensively deal with those counters, allowing them to snowball out of control. (There's other examples, but you get my point.)
All these pokemon are pushed up to the edge (and some blatantly over it) by tera, but no single solution proposed solves why they're potentially problematic. Team prievew doesn't change why Espartha is broken, only allowing STAB tera doesn't change why Dragapult's so good, etc. As a result, I'm concerned that any attempts to restrict tera without a full ban would ultimately results in a large swath of pokemon still needing to be removed. Perhaps that's for the best--I know some argue that banning 5 or however many pokemon is worth it to preserve the mechanic. I just worry that any restriction will ultimately not have the results some people think it will in entirely fixing it.
I do still think that testing with limited tera is a good idea for the suspect ladder, with team prievew displaying tera type probably being the best course of action for that. I just don't agree that unrestricted tera is the right course of action, and I worry that preserving tera through some limitation will still result in a heap of mons still needing to be banned.
For everyone who is saying just work out what tera your opponent is using. Great. Cool. I do that. I predict their tera types perfectly for their entire team. They're still not obligated to use it on any given turn or a given pokemon. Tera forces true 50/50s which decide games. This is not the same as prediction for switches. There is always a weigted ev calculation you can do for those, because kill pokemon staying in vs let in something are different outcomes, so you can just play for the better position consistently. This does not work with tera. 90+% of the time in my experience, if you do not predict their tera turn correctly you just lose the game on the spot, and often if you predict them using it, and they just don't, you will just lose because you just clicked a move that is neutral or nve against their current typing. And sure we could expect people to predict what turn tera is used, but that puts all the onus on anyone looking to play something other than hyper offense to be prediction gods, while hyper offense just gets to go about it's day as normal. All the arguments for keeping tera just makes me feel like I'm looking at the forums during gen 5. And we all know how that turned out.
Something to bear in mind - when a lower ladder player says that terastalization seems entirely random, that's not exclusively due to their inability to predict the right play. It's also because of facing less skilled opponents: they'll pick less-effective types and tertastalize their mons at less ideal times. An experienced and skilled player can punish this, but a more casual player lacks that ability and so losing afterwards sometimes feels unfair.
If anyone is still questioning whether showing tera on team preview is breaking cartridge mechanics or “bending over backwards” to accommodate for the mechanic, I’d recommend checking out the vgc tournament going on right now. They are using open team sheets prior to battle, meaning full knowledge of tera types. You can see how smooth and effortless this practice is.
But it's not how it works in random battles on cartridge. If we were to follow VGC rules, then you would have a pokepaste of your opponent's team at the start of every ladder game then, no?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've played around 700 games of Gen 9 pre-Home Terra meta.
-and I've just played my last game of this meta
Essentially, what pushes Terra over the edge is the 50/50's it forces.
Basically- the higher I get on the ladder, the more it comes down to a guessing game- a literal coin flip.
If our goal is to try and make this game as competitive as possible, then we want to limit these scenarios
In this replay posted above, you'll see I lost due to not being clairvoyant.
I even predicted the Ghost terra, but how could I have known Dark?
However- even if I KNEW they were Terra Dark- it's still a guessing game.
Terra FORCES a 50/50.
Again, even if I knew they were Terra Dark- I still have to choose between Sacred Sword and Crunch.
(It often feels like Terra rewards the less skilled player more often (Dark terra bro l2p lol?) but I don't have data for this so let's move on.)
Another game I did not save the replay of was the following scenario:
Iron Valiant vs Roaring Moon.
Last mons.
Valiant is speed boosted and +1 Spa.
Roaring is not scarf nor boosted.
Roaring is around 60% HP.
Roaring player has yet to Terra in this game.
Valiant has an option: Moonblast or Aura Sphere
Valiant player can assume with recent trends (eyeroll) that Roaring is most likely either Terra Flying or Steel.
Moon will knock out both non-Terra and Flying.
Aura will knock out Terra Steel.
Inversely, Terra Steel lives Moonblast.
Terra Flying lives Aura.
What would you do?
What option would mitigate the risk and give you the highest probability of winning?
Moonblast.
Which is what I choose,
Roaring Terra Steel- good game.
And, honestly, I had a feeling it was Terra Steel, but again, IT'S JUST A PURE GUESS.
For the 3rd or so time, even if I KNEW it was Terra Steel, which I kinda did, I can't risk it.
THIS EXCHANGE IS THE DEFINTION OF UNCOMPETITIVE.
BAN TERRA.
COMPLETLEY BAN IT- NO HALF MEASURES.
And people, we all know Terra will be banned post-Home.
It's that or ban about 30 mons to Uber, starting with Regieleki Terra Ice lol.
Also, in that replay I Terra fighting to blow past Chi-Yu.
That's dumb.
Mons should have checks- what were they supposed to do, Terra Ghost lol?
This isn't Pokemon, this is a trash mechanic and it needs to go.
I'm telling you as time goes on, at it's highest level, Terra forces 50/50's.
There is no adapting to this, there is no way around this.
If you have X move and Y move and X move OHKO non-Terra and Y move OHKO Terra (even if you know their Terra 100%), and your opponent also knows this, it comes down to a Sucker Punch scenario. Do they Terra or not? You don't know, and they don't know, so it's literally a 50/50, a late game Sucker Punch scenario that we can't avoid.
Mons has 50/50's
But our goal is to minimize them as much as possible.
This mechanic needs to go.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've played around 700 games of Gen 9 pre-Home Terra meta.
-and I've just played my last game of this meta
Essentially, what pushes Terra over the edge is the 50/50's it forces.
Basically- the higher I get on the ladder, the more it comes down to a guessing game- a literal coin flip.
If our goal is to try and make this game as competitive as possible, then we want to limit these scenarios
In this replay posted above, you'll see I lost due to not being clairvoyant.
I even predicted the Ghost terra, but how could I have known Dark?
However- even if I KNEW they were Terra Dark- it's still a guessing game.
Terra FORCES a 50/50.
Again, even if I knew they were Terra Dark- I still have to choose between Sacred Sword and Crunch.
(It often feels like Terra rewards the less skilled player more often (Dark terra bro l2p lol?) but I don't have data for this so let's move on.)
Another game I did not save the replay of was the following scenario:
Iron Valiant vs Roaring Moon.
Last mons.
Valiant is speed boosted and +1 Spa.
Roaring is not scarf nor boosted.
Roaring is around 60% HP.
Roaring player has yet to Terra in this game.
Valiant has an option: Moonblast or Aura Sphere
Valiant player can assume with recent trends (eyeroll) that Roaring is most likely either Terra Flying or Steel.
Moon will knock out both non-Terra and Flying.
Aura will knock out Terra Steel.
Inversely, Terra Steel lives Moonblast.
Terra Flying lives Aura.
What would you do?
What option would mitigate the risk and give you the highest probability of winning?
Moonblast.
Which is what I choose,
Roaring Terra Steel- good game.
And, honestly, I had a feeling it was Terra Steel, but again, IT'S JUST A PURE GUESS.
For the 3rd or so time, even if I KNEW it was Terra Steel, which I kinda did, I can't risk it.
THIS EXCHANGE IS THE DEFINTION OF UNCOMPETITIVE.
BAN TERRA.
COMPLETLEY BAN IT- NO HALF MEASURES.
And people, we all know Terra will be banned post-Home.
It's that or ban about 30 mons to Uber, starting with Regieleki Terra Ice lol.
Also, in that replay I Terra fighting to blow past Chi-Yu.
That's dumb.
Mons should have checks- what were they supposed to do, Terra Ghost lol?
This isn't Pokemon, this is a trash mechanic and it needs to go.
I'm telling you as time goes on, at it's highest level, Terra forces 50/50's.
There is no adapting to this, there is no way around this.
If you have X move and Y move and X move OHKO non-Terra and Y move OHKO Terra (even if you know their Terra 100%), and your opponent also knows this, it comes down to a Sucker Punch scenario. Do they Terra or not? You don't know, and they don't know, so it's literally a 50/50, a late game Sucker Punch scenario that we can't avoid.
Mons has 50/50's
But our goal is to minimize them as much as possible.
This mechanic needs to go.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Status