Minor complaint but the link to the sets VR is outdated. It should be changed to link to the new thread.
No it’s not enough, ladder usage doesn’t directly correlate to viability ie. a top 5 used mon isn’t necessarily going to be S/A+ rank. Please only post in the thread if you have actual arguments in favor of a rise and leave these questions to PMs/SQSAIs there a reason why Kartana is still in A tier? Just going based off of Usage Stats from the OU ladder, Its got the 7th highest usage in the 1500s, 4th highest in the 1695s and 5th in the 1825s. I'm pretty sure many have covered how great it is in the current metagame so I won't go much into that but I feel these facts are enough to really start considering it's climb to at least A+ tier
True but there have already been enough arguments in favor of the rise like the rise in the popularity of the Scarf set and it's ability to destroy its counters with SD breakneck blitz. I was just pointing out it's high usage in the ladder rankings overall and not just in one specific rank. I really don't understand why we are arguing as I am stating mostly facts and not opinionsNo it’s not enough, ladder usage doesn’t directly correlate to viability ie. a top 5 used mon isn’t necessarily going to be S/A+ rank. Please only post in the thread if you have actual arguments in favor of a rise and leave these questions to PMs/SQSA
SaveMeJebus, I understand that you may think Kartana is A+ material, I even agree. However, your logic is quite flawed. It's safe to assume that a pokemon popular in a competitive format tends to be good because its good (I'm talking to you Landorus), but its never 100% of what you go off when considering how good a pokemon ACTUALLY is. For example, mimikyu is OU by usage, but is only in the C rank, while reuniclus is a solid A- ranked pokemon, but isnt used as much being RUBL. A pokemon may be used a lot for many different reasons, such as being fun to use, so don't make assumptions about a pokemon solely based on the ladder.True but there have already been enough arguments in favor of the rise like the rise in the popularity of the Scarf set and it's ability to destroy its counters with SD breakneck blitz. I was just pointing out it's high usage in the ladder rankings overall and not just in one specific rank. I really don't understand why we are arguing as I am stating mostly facts and not opinions
I decided to run a quick stats analysis to investigate this claim. While it's true that ladder usage doesn't directly (in the statistical sense, i.e. 1 to 1) correlate to viability, the correlation is obviously there, and it is pretty high. My stats come from here - https://www.smogon.com/stats/2019-02/gen7ou-1825.txt - as well as the top post of this thread. I took our VR list for OU and converted all the S ranks in to viability= 1 ranks, with each subsequent number representing a lower rank (A+ = 2, A = 3, etc.)No it’s not enough, ladder usage doesn’t directly correlate to viability
the analysis you did was pretty cool but wouldn't it make more sense the other way around? by that i mean that 67% of the variance in ladder usage would be explained by viability. how viable a mon is definitely isn't explained by how often it's used, and tournament usage would probably be a better indicator of vr placement.As you can see highly Usage-ranked mons are also highly Viability-ranked. How closely? Using Spearman's rho, I found a correlation coefficient of 0.82 - which gives us a solid r-squared value of 0.67. This means that ~67% of the variance in viability rank is explained by usage (from a statistical standpoint). Clearly, it's not solely usage, but it does tell us that usage is the predominant indicator of viability.
I didn't really go much into detail on why it should rise since it was already brought up a few pages ago and it would be the same argument. I just wanted to bring up some information that I didn't see in the discussion for it to rise. Also, even going based off tournament usage has its flaws since players often run certain pokes or EV spreads to counter certain teamsthe analysis you did was pretty cool but wouldn't it make more sense the other way around? by that i mean that 67% of the variance in ladder usage would be explained by viability. how viable a mon is definitely isn't explained by how often it's used, and tournament usage would probably be a better indicator of vr placement.
ladder usage and viability do have a pretty strong correlation, but usage definitely shouldn't be the sole argument used when determining whether or not a mon should move up. there are a lot of metagames where almost unviable pokemon receive regular use on the ladder, which doesn't really apply to tournaments where players are more likely to care about the meta and get informed about it. in the guy's posts, he literally only brought up usage as an argument, unless you count "sd breakneck blitz destroys its counters" which can be said for any offensive lure set in the game.
when it comes to kart i'm not too versed in the meta so i'll leave the discussion to others, but i would like to continue discussing stats in a different thread maybe.
FYI your correlation coefficient would be -0.82 since you put the S ranks as the lowest viability, 1.0, but that's just nitpicking; really cool analysis!Using Spearman's rho, I found a correlation coefficient of 0.82
I thought this was a phenomenal idea and re-ran robofiends analysis with SPL Usage Stats. I got an R^2 of .48 and a correlation of -0.69 (I represented S rank with the lowest number; in reality viability is positively correlated with usage.and tournament usage would probably be a better indicator of vr placement.
Observation | Predicted 1 | Residuals |
Landorus-T | -2.04182 | 3.041819 |
Greninja | 0.686346 | 0.313654 |
Magearna | 1.465822 | -0.46582 |
Toxapex | 1.595735 | 0.404265 |
Tornadus-T | 1.725647 | 0.274353 |
Heatran | 1.85556 | -0.85556 |
chomp | 2.699992 | 0.300008 |
fini | 2.829904 | 2.170096 |
ttar | 2.829904 | 0.170096 |
kart | 3.08973 | -0.08973 |
rotom-w | 3.154686 | -0.15469 |
ferro | 3.154686 | -1.15469 |
bulu | 3.414511 | -0.41451 |
latias | 3.479468 | -0.47947 |
lele | 3.544424 | -0.54442 |
tang | 3.60938 | 0.39062 |
rachi | 3.739293 | 2.260707 |
zam | 3.739293 | -1.73929 |
drill | 3.804249 | 1.195751 |
zap | 3.804249 | 1.195751 |
celesteela | 3.999118 | -0.99912 |
maw | 4.064074 | -2.06407 |
clef | 4.064074 | -0.06407 |
koko | 4.064074 | -1.06407 |
sciz | 4.064074 | -0.06407 |
volcarona | 4.258943 | -1.25894 |
medi | 4.3239 | -1.3239 |
zard | 4.388856 | 0.611144 |
glisc | 4.388856 | -0.38886 |
weav | 4.453812 | 1.546188 |
peli | 4.453812 | 0.546188 |
pert | 4.453812 | 0.546188 |
serp | 4.453812 | 0.546188 |
latios | 4.518769 | 0.481231 |
zone | 4.518769 | -1.51877 |
chansey | 4.583725 | -0.58372 |
reuni | 4.583725 | -0.58372 |
kyub | 4.648681 | -0.64868 |
tini | 4.713638 | 1.286362 |
kyu | 4.778594 | 2.221406 |
Only players with a score of 1825 or higher will have their usage counted in the statistics that were posted.I've been interested in seeing some stats like this for a while, there's a bit of a point missed, in that Pokemon will be used more often *because* it is high in the rankings,, with newer and intermediate players using this as a frame of reference for what to use.
I think it's almost mandatory to state, that as a person who lives in that part of the ladder, people's teams are usually damn near identical and it's gotten so braindead and meta slavery that Stef and I did a live and we ran into the exact same 3 teams 12 times. Usually it's 4 mons plus filler. thos does not mean that these mons are good btw. In aggregate, people are pretty stupid, even in high ladder. Stupid and lazy. Even according to game theory, the state we are in right now does not mean that these mons are the best or even most optimal. Saying otherwise is a dead point and mathematically just wrong and I will not entertain such foolishness. That being said " used more often *because* it is high in the rankings" also effects higher players as well. I've constantly stated that the mere existence of this provides a feedback loop but at this point it doesn't matter. Ladder and tournament are very different. Skipping the straight up cock sucking that is the tournament community, in tour play you face certain opponents and their teams are going to be different. In ladder your job is to prepare a team that wins a lot more than it loses -this also is why tour teams usually are absolute garbage on ladder. They'd like to think otherwise and think they are better, they are not and let's stop pretending that way.Only players with a score of 1825 or higher will have their usage counted in the statistics that were posted.
I'm up for a Jirachi Rise myself. The thing can actually be impossible to switch into if you're slower(from said body slam)and then get flinched down by iron head. The amount of team support it brings to a table is phenomenal. Bulky Steel, Rocker, and a written but not limited to, Kyurem-B, M-Diancie, Bulu, Lele, Zam, and M-Lati check. This thing deserves better.I'd like to keep the Jirachi hype train going: this thing belongs in B+.
More and more, I find this little punk to be an amazing teammate. Rocks, U-Turn, Wish, Body Slam, bulk, hax: Rachi has it all. Its Body Slam comes with a 60% para chance, making it the perfect lure to bring Landorus-T, Heatran, Greninja, Kartana, or Torn-T down to an awful speed level. Because so few of its checks resist BS Para + Iron Head, it almost always has a play that can advance a win condition: either you rock into a check, Wish into a check and then run and heal a teammate, Body Slam/Toxic to spread status, U-Turn if you got it, or just go for some IH flinches.
Jirachi's niche as a SpDef support mon has been widening for a while now. While it used to only see usage to counter Lele, people have found that it can do a lot of other things due to its good bulk. M-Latios has a 0.4% chance to 2HKO it from full with EQ. Prot Gren's HP Fire is a 3HKO. M-Zam's Shadow Ball is a 3HKO. Bulu cannot beat any of its sets, Celesteela 4HKO's with Flame, Pex can't Poison stall it (and hates Para), Ice-Z Kyu-B 4HKO's it.. The list of things it checks goes on and on, from M-Diancie to Torn-T to Chansey or Clefable. And keep in mind, each of these mons that it checks have to be wary on the swap to keep their teammate from taking paralysis. While Jirachi isn't a one-man show, still losing hard to Heatran, Ash-Gren, and Lando (among others), as a defensive stopgap it's very useful.
Despite the rise of Rotom-W, Tapu Koko, Zapdos, and Magnezone, Rachi is one of those mons that, like I said, has the move slots to play around. Toxic + Wish/Protect can annoy all of them - especially Magnezone who will get PP stalled. U-Turn lets it keep up momentum against unfavorable switch ins as well. And that's all just talking one set - scarf has its merits as well, including Trick, Healing Wish, and hax-based cleanup. Time to boost this man.
I'm all up for this. I love jirachi as a mon that can switch into a lot of common threats (mawile, both latis, ect.) and has lots of reliable coverage with punch moves and TWO stab, hard hitting moves with boosted flinch chances. It can also be used in more creative ways, like chesto rest, band, scarf, or pretty much whatever you want, and it isn't as strong as Mmetagross, it feels like it can be a solid replacement for it, being more well rounded. Lets get Jirachi into B+.I'm up for a Jirachi Rise myself. The thing can actually be impossible to switch into if you're slower(from said body slam)and then get flinched down by iron head. The amount of team support it brings to a table is phenomenal. Bulky Steel, Rocker, and a written but not limited to, Kyurem-B, M-Diancie, Bulu, Lele, Zam, and M-Lati check. This thing deserves better.
There probably needs to be a separate subset for mega pokemon as since there's a limit of one mega per team, usage will naturally be lower (on average, unless there's an extreme outlier)assertion that usage is not totally correlated with viability; while there is a connection, there are other factors at play. For example, the data suggest mawile should be placed in A- rank, but Mawile is probably well placed in A/A+, not A-.
Man, you really spend a third of the paragraph on how Jirachi is a great check Tapu Koko (it is not) and Mega Glalie (???), a third of the paragraph on a Z-Happy Hour set that is universally regarded as a meme and has absolutely no breaking power even with the boost (hell, this set isn’t even a main set on the analysis — it just gets poorly oversold in the OO), and a third of the paragraph on checks notes Ancient Power Jirachi??? which doesn’t fit on any set at all and doesn’t even come close to doing enough damage to be worthwhile against 4x, especially considering proper teambuilding would render this unnecessary, thus making it a complete booost fish that just wastes turns otherwise. And THEN calls out every other poster and asks for the thread to be locked? That’s just not right man. I’m not locking the thread.I agree that jirachi should rise! Aside from having one of the best movies iirc, it is great for checking strong things like tapu lele, tapu bulu, tapu fini, some tapu koko, serperior, and mega glalie. Wish support is great as always, and z-happy hour is nearly uncounterable when paired with something like alolan golem or mostly just flinch hax. Psychic spam is better, and jirachi (as a psychic type him/herself) is a psychic type and a 4x psychic resist. If you are extra skilled, then you can even run ancient power, which has a 20% chance of ruining your opponents parade while also luring volcarona, mega charizard, and landorus-t in certain circumstances.
Also this thread has been garbage for at least 2 pages and should be locked for the weekend tbh.
(Srry for any languages mistakes).How to make sure the thread does not get locked? Tell Finch to lock it.
S -> A+ ?
There is simply one argument for me to suggest this:
According to the last slate, Magearna became S because of [...] the recent results of the Shift Gear variant, proving to turn around or clean up a number of relevant tournament games in recent weeks [...] (source).
In the same update Jirachi became B.
Now I have seen lots of support for Jirachi becoming even B+ with which I agree with. If Jirachi becomes B+ which is partly exaplained by its increasing usage, offensive Magearna sets will have difficulties doing what it is known for and thus is an argument for Magearna dropping to A+.
Three arguments I would accept to let Magearna stay S
a) Jirachi becoming more viable allows you to neglect AV on Magearna more often than not, to go for the offensive route with Shift Gear or Trick Room.
b) Having an actual counter to Magearna (Jirachi) makes it less likely for the opponent to risk blocking Volt Switches with their Ground types earlygame, which might shift the viablity of AV to S but Shift Gear to A+
c) Magearna should have been S in the second to the last slate. This means, that recent tournament success of offensive Magearna just confirmed that Magearna deserves S but its viability is indepedent enough of those successes to stay S in the future.
Kommo-o is already ranked, albeit as C and not C+. Do you have any points that would justify a raise from C to C+?Kommo-o should really be added to the list as it already made its debut in ou and I figure it should be at least at c+ rank as -
- The increasing prevalence of steel types like heatran, magnezone, kartana and ferrothorn would make it’s stab close combat very useful.
- When paired with its z stone kommonium z kommo-o becomes a force to be reckoned with. It’s z move clangorous soulblaze gives it a +1 boost in all stats allowing it to outspeed mega alakazam, ash-greninja, tapu koko etc.
- Apart from steel types it is also an effective counter to garchomp, ash-greninja, mega tyranitar, mega gyarados etc.
- But it will face a tough time if Pokemon like tapu koko, tapu Lele and mega medicham face it before it uses its z move. And Pokemon like clefable and magearna will also prevent it from using its z move without which kommo-o is a pretty weak Pokemon. Well this is my first post so I hope u ppl shall treat me well. And pls point out any mistakes I have made.