alephgalactus
Banned deucer.
You do realize that “only like 90” is a majority and the general vote was tampered with, right? I really hope you do, because you’ve been told that several times by multiple different people now.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]
- Thread starter Finchinator
- Start date
- Status
Ty for the response!
Fair criticism for sure.
I should have been clear in my goals of the restriction I'm putting forth:
It would nuke Terra into the ground- a gigantic nerf that would make the gimmick a mere novelty yet still appease a small sense of fun for people who want to get creative.
The concept is born from Gen 6, as in lots of lead matchups are Megas who run protect.
So this would be a weird cousin of that lead MU game.
Offensive mons would run protect, scout then go into a counter/check. It would also provide a small nerf to cannons like Terra Dark Chien who would need to give up a moveslot- or if no protect, risk being forced out turn 1.
Ironically, this reminds me of Palafin's design lol
As for arbitrary; I'm not sure where else we could put this forced Terra turn. I just went for the obvious choice lol
There are arguably more arbitrary restriction proposals we currently have to choose from, such as limiting which mons can Terra..
Ideally, Terra is simply banned.
My goal was just to provide a restriction that appeased those who really don't enjoy the mechanic in competitive play, but if they must keep it in, this would be their second choice.
If we absolutely can't add it to the proposed restrictions I understand.
Unfortunately, cartridge accuracy denies any effective restrictions. You could easily fix tera by having like 1 dedicated tera-mon that is tera'd preemptively before the battle starts, or anything in that realm.
The proposed ones, even combining some, just feel like cope (adding tera to good mon -> broken mon can never be fixed, basically comes down to how many mons you are willing to sac to OUBL). Also hoping this gen is not gonna be a series of suspect tests that cycle through different restrictions for years or how long people try to shoehorn tera into the meta.
Anyway, its surely useful to watch the current tera-suspect from natdex. For me atleast, it is a glimpse into the future because post Home/DLC is natdex-light in terms of power-level.
The proposed ones, even combining some, just feel like cope (adding tera to good mon -> broken mon can never be fixed, basically comes down to how many mons you are willing to sac to OUBL). Also hoping this gen is not gonna be a series of suspect tests that cycle through different restrictions for years or how long people try to shoehorn tera into the meta.
Anyway, its surely useful to watch the current tera-suspect from natdex. For me atleast, it is a glimpse into the future because post Home/DLC is natdex-light in terms of power-level.
Tera is actually far weaker in National Dex than it is in SV OU because there's more of an opportunity cost to it. Anything holding a Mega Stone or a Z-Crystal can't tera at all. Given how basically every team is running at least one of those, and so many are running both, there's a ton of restriction and situations where you know 100% there won't be any tera coming from the opponent on that turn.
It certainly has some better abusers like a certain horribly designed yellow ball but I could feasibly see a NatDex Tera while SV OU bans it. That being said, if NatDex bans it outright, might be a sign of things to come.
I think there's a lot of debate about the voting system right now, and I think it's based on disagreement on the 4 main groups:
1) No Action (Status Quo)
2) Action, if not No ban
3) Action, if not Ban
4) Full Ban
The current system hurts group 2, as they are forced to choose between a safe preference (No Ban) or vote fully in line with their ideals and risk having tera be fully banned. However, the alternative, party preference, hurts group 1, as it would become impossible to fairly enforce the super-majority required to pass action. If group 1 is ever the least popular choice, it will be eliminated, regardless of if there is a super majority in favor of it. It becomes very messy very quickly.
However, this is an important topic to discuss due to how close the tiering survey is on whether action on tera is needed in the first place. While there is a solid majority that state that action is required, the super-majority is of only about 4 people, meaning that it could cross the threshold during the suspect test and due to the voting system.
1) No Action (Status Quo)
2) Action, if not No ban
3) Action, if not Ban
4) Full Ban
The current system hurts group 2, as they are forced to choose between a safe preference (No Ban) or vote fully in line with their ideals and risk having tera be fully banned. However, the alternative, party preference, hurts group 1, as it would become impossible to fairly enforce the super-majority required to pass action. If group 1 is ever the least popular choice, it will be eliminated, regardless of if there is a super majority in favor of it. It becomes very messy very quickly.
However, this is an important topic to discuss due to how close the tiering survey is on whether action on tera is needed in the first place. While there is a solid majority that state that action is required, the super-majority is of only about 4 people, meaning that it could cross the threshold during the suspect test and due to the voting system.
(as a nd player) nd has 20 million more abusers that push tera over the edge, and so far from what I've seen, there's much less players in nd wanting a restriction on tera, and a minority who think its fine, at least compared to ou. i think your overestimating the "opportunity cost" for tera, a lot of mons which run it don't run z moves / much prefer tera on those sets, and you can argue that it creates an even larger guessing game having to consider both sets with and without tera.
just wanted to correct this, realistically nd is much more likely to ban tera and ou (from what I've seen) to restrict it in some way/ not ban it
My hot take is that I don't think tera Eleki is going to be all that good. Sure it gets stab boltbeam, but with the number of good grounds in the tier (Tusk, treads, chomp, clodsire, ting lu, and eventually usaluna & lando) it's going to have to tera every game to be consistent. And unlike Dragonite, which loses a quad weakness, has multiscale, espeed and a gains a reasonable defensive typing, Eleki gains a bunch of weaknesses by using tera ice. With how frail it is, it'll also could be caught off guard and eliminated with a tera ground. Aside from this, almost all of the home pokemon people think will be broken with tera will be broken without it IMO. Fighting tera magearna won't be fun because fighting magearna isn't fun.
Last edited:
1 Regieleki with Ice Tera blast is getting ban 100% only way it can be stopped is with hard priority like mach/bullet punch. Its already a viable mon while only using electric moves and some weak normal/rock moves, with a decent ice move coverage its OP no matter what.
2 Dragonite Dragon Flying typing is a lot better than normal type as it has a lot of resistances. Normal tera is very good but its bc of the adaptability boost + gaining tempo when the opponent is gonna use ice/fairy/dragon moves. Also, dragonite issue isnt Tera its the support it gets from Shed Tail and Screens, mainly shed tail but screens also contribute. U will see 0 dragonite stomping you without any support as most teams already easily stop him unless he has at least 2 DD.
Didn't Eleki drop in SS towards the end of the Gen, and it was completely unviable in UU due to the abundance of grounds? It was viable in OU sure but I wouldn't call it good. I'm also not saying that normal is the best defensive typing, but its a lot more solid than Ice, which gets rid of absolutely any defensive applications eleki could potentially have, coming in on some flying or electric moves.
Also, dragonite doesn't need tera to be good, it's a decent enough pokemon without it. I feel like the fact Eleki NEEDS terra would be more trouble than its worth in practice.
People said similar things about avalugg before SV came out (obviously not being broken, but viable), and it turned out to not be worth it due to the requirement of having to tera the mon EVERY game.
That said, there's every possibility that I'm wrong and it will be broken. However, I do think people are jumping the gun a bit by saying that it's instant ubers.
Last edited:
There are better abusers but given how often you can see at team preview that there's one mon who won't be using it at all, and how often you can figure out with decent certainty one of their mons is holding a Z-Crystal because they're clearly not choiced but had no lefties/life orb, it's weaker. If I'm up against a Mega Zard, I know 100% this Accelorock will either OHKO it or he'll switch something else in to take the hit. There's no "Zard goes Tera Steel, resists it and OHKOs you with Solarbeam" possible.
I guess you could say it's a distinction without a difference but while the abusers are stronger, the mechanic is weaker.
Created an account to post this, hope that's ok
I saw someone propose a similar idea a few posts ago, and I want to share mine: what if you could only terastallize a Pokemon on its first turn after switching in?
As in if you switch out a pokemon, it's replacement has to terastallize immediately, or else it loses its opportunity to terastallize until it switches out and back in again.
In my opinion, this preserves the main novelty behind the mechanic while eliminating the problem of having boosted sweepers tera to dodge would-be checks and gives more agency/room for counterplay to the opponent, as they have to contend with far fewer 50/50s. It forces the tera user to play more proactively and take more risks, as having to terastallize at more predictable times means the opponent has a much better chance of handling a tera play more effectively. I think a solution like this would reduce the uncertainty that is the central problem of tera imo
I saw someone propose a similar idea a few posts ago, and I want to share mine: what if you could only terastallize a Pokemon on its first turn after switching in?
As in if you switch out a pokemon, it's replacement has to terastallize immediately, or else it loses its opportunity to terastallize until it switches out and back in again.
In my opinion, this preserves the main novelty behind the mechanic while eliminating the problem of having boosted sweepers tera to dodge would-be checks and gives more agency/room for counterplay to the opponent, as they have to contend with far fewer 50/50s. It forces the tera user to play more proactively and take more risks, as having to terastallize at more predictable times means the opponent has a much better chance of handling a tera play more effectively. I think a solution like this would reduce the uncertainty that is the central problem of tera imo
Dusk Mage Necrozma
formerly XenonHero126
It’s a decent idea but I’m not sure it solves that much. A lot of surprise Teras are turn 1 anyway, like, Tera Grass Chiyu baits in and kills Dondozo either way. I don’t see much going for it over Tera preview or only letting one Pokemon Tera.
Terra preview and letting one mon terra doesn't solve most of the concerns on why Terra is a problem.
None of the restrictions really address the core issues of Terra.
The only approach to keeping Terra but restricting it would have to be a novel idea for a complicated situation.
Goodbye & Thanks
Thrown in a fire?
I assume you’re being facetious, and I do agree with the general sentiment that we should avoid overly specific restrictions. I imagine that it would be both easier to implement on Showdown and easier for a restriction to be widely understood/played with if it’s the “least restrictive solution” possible. Part of me feels that trying to create restrictions to make Tera suitable for the tier is creating too much of a custom format anyway and that since no restriction will be perfect and some of the more fundamental aspects of Tera that are “questionable,” like the inherent layer of variance and increased power that it introduces will exist regardless of restrictions, Tera should either just be banned or allowed without modifications. However, if we were going to look at restricting it, I think that “simpler” restrictions like being only able to Tera one preselected Pokémon, not being able to Tera unless a Pokémon is holding a Tera Crystal, and/or only being able to Tera into a type that a Pokémon already has seems more intuitive and would be more easily applied to the tier.
We will most likely have to deal with Terra and try to find a restriction.
The playerbase is so split that getting a super majority on a full Terra ban seems unlikely.
Any restriction we implement would need to address the core concerns of Terra, not be too complex, and be able to be implemented on cart.
Being forced to hold an item is an interesting concept, it's better than any of the proposed restrictions available, at least.
Being able to Terra into a mon's own type would not resolve the power creep issue, sitting on your Terra until the opponent Terras, the setting up with one type then Terra into a better type (Chi-Yu is an example, it can NP on Grimm then go Terra Fire when needed) and is generally not a well received restriction proposal.
We will need to find some sort of restriction that resolves or downplays these issues; I think this is the time to be open to any idea and then brainstorm as a community what would work best.
Goodbye & Thanks
Thrown in a fire?
Yeah, I’m not entirely sure how the voting will turn out, and I wouldn’t read too much into the survey results to predict, even focusing only on the “qualified” responses, since there are plenty of good players who will get reqs but haven’t bothered to ladder into the top 250/didn’t enter the No Johns tour. Either way, people being split on Tera doesn’t necessarily mean that a restriction is a compromise between the two, the same way that someone who is a moderate isn’t really like someone who is halfway between someone who is a conservative and someone who is a liberal; I know that analogy is a little forced but my point is that restricting Tera to me feels more like a separate, third option instead of a point between banning Tera and leaving it as is. Again, I get that split voting could lead to Tera being restricted becoming more likely, but I was speaking more from an ideological perspective.
I agree as well that none of the proposed Tera restrictions are perfect and that it’s fine to brainstorm about restricting Tera. My initial point was just that although I’m personally unsure about restricting Tera, since it feels like a departure from how Smogon normally approaches tiering, I think that if we are going to weigh Tera restrictions, striving for less complex/limiting restrictions seems like a good value to pursue.
Also, it’s no big deal, but I think it’s best to not reply and quote a person mid sentence, since you remove a lot of context to what they say and it can at times be disingenuous.
OKAY GUYS IVE GOT IT. GOD SHOWED ME THE WAY.
After a long time reading and meditating on the thread I heard the water from the sink and heard a car honk, then... CRASSSH, huge sound even bigger ideas came to me!!!! 2 options:
1) Random Tera!!! All mons tera are absolutely random to maintain all fairness AND will activate at a random turn to avoid any kind of advantage!!! Aint I smart? I know dont need to thank me
2) Even weeks we play with Tera, uneven weeks with play without it!!
Yeah i know im too smart you can thank me later bye
After a long time reading and meditating on the thread I heard the water from the sink and heard a car honk, then... CRASSSH, huge sound even bigger ideas came to me!!!! 2 options:
1) Random Tera!!! All mons tera are absolutely random to maintain all fairness AND will activate at a random turn to avoid any kind of advantage!!! Aint I smart? I know dont need to thank me
2) Even weeks we play with Tera, uneven weeks with play without it!!
Yeah i know im too smart you can thank me later bye
Yeah, so we need to prepare for that reality....
I feel like no one is really thinking about it very much.
It's called responding directly to a point, it's perfectly fine dude..
I'm not reposting your tangents when I want to address a specific point lol
locking for suspect
- Status