Another poster condemning my opinion as worthless because I dared to suggest something like Trevenant as a viable answer was a bit souring. Regardless, I propose it isn't that inefficient and that there are viable options to deal with BP that don't remove team power too much.
I looked this up, actually. Superpower is strictly used for one pokemon. Ferrothorn. I think it is completely acceptable to lose at attack designed specifically to hit a single pokemon out of 719 in order to better fight a team archetype.
Honestly, I had to reread my quote three or four times to try and understand what you were crying about. I said that people, myself included, were condemning Trevenant, not saying that your opinion is worthless because of that suggestion alone. By trying to play the victim, you are essentially attempting to avoid actually answering the point brought up. Once again, your personal experience alone isn't sufficient to say that Trevenant isn't inefficient, especially since we can call bias as we could in any other similar situation involving anybody else doing something similar.
I was waiting for you to go read the analysis to see why they recommended using Superpower so that I could respond. Your assumption is that people only use Superpower for that one thing mentioned in the analysis which is, as common sense would dictate, a silly assumption to make. Regardless, you are dropping Superpower, which supposedly is only used for Ferrothorn, to hit BP, which is far less common than Ferrothorn. Also, you refuse to address the other options for that moveslot and instead just focus on what you can respond to, Superpower.
I've used CB Azumarill before and I rarely used Superpower/Nock Off because I would end up being locked into weaker moves, and the opponent would switch into things that resisted them. I also don't see Azumarill using them most of the time, they usually spam Water/Fairy moves. Actually, most Azumarills I see have Belly Drum instead, because they can afford not to have a coverage move. Water/Fairy is just that good of a combination.
So if I have to sacrifice a bit of coverage they offer to get coverage against BP, why not? If BP is a prominent playstyle, I need to have something to fight against it just like against every other strategy.
And yes, it is a playstyle. It's a legitimate way to build a team just like any other style. Why shouldn't it be? Because you hate fighting against it? This is the same thing I've been saying it for a long time, people are trying to create an ideal metagame where BP doesn't exist, and saying BP is broken because it doesn't belong to said magical metagame. Instead, they should accept that BP exists and adapt the meta to it. BP is part of the meta, will be part of the meta until it's nerfed (and may still be after it's nerfed), and will be until the end of the gen if it's not nerfed. The people who actually recognized that and prepared their teams against the real meta didn't have problems against BP in the suspect ladder. The people who want to play an artificial dumbed down meta instead of the real one are the ones who have trouble against BP teams. That's like refusing to prepare a team against stall because you hate stall, then ask for it to be nerfed because your team is not prepared against stall.
As I've said to other people before, why do you think your individual experiences alone should matter whatsoever? I rarely use Giga Drain when I use Mega Venu, does that mean it should be replaced? As for BD Azu, I think that further goes to support how Perish Song CB Azumarill isn't the type of fix we need. The majority of Azumarills are BD (41% vs 30%), so trying to propose switching to CB Azumarill solely for Perish Song because, unless people are idiots and just use something because it is fun or something, there is a reason BD is more common than CB.
Two things: 1. Who said BP was prominent? 2. Has anyone, in these 26 pages, every tried to refute the argument that BP is not a playstyle?
Now, before you say something like, "If it isn't prominent, then who cares" let me cover that (once again x5). Things are tested because they are broken, uncompetitive etc., nowhere is there a minimum usage requirement for those definitions. SwagPlay usage was under a percent and it still got suspected. Trying to argue that nobody uses it so there is no reason to pay attention to it is entirely foolish in its attempt to avoid the actual arguments because it proposes that we should wait until something becomes a serious problem to take care of it, at which time many people, yourself possibly included, will complain about how something like this was left unchecked for long enough to become a problem.
This last paragraph literally asked a question and
did exactly what people have been doing for the last Arceus knows how many pages as they attempt to refuse to address the actual points brought up. You asked a question. Then you answered the question. And, in doing that, you have demonstrated clearly why it is best not to waste time trying to argue with you. I think I said it just last page and here you are, proving me insanely right. You apparently think that people think that BP isn't a playstyle because they don't like playing against it.
In other words, you demonstrated how little you pay attention to or retain other people's arguments as you repeatedly argue in circles, refusing to address the actual arguments at every step. BP is not a playstyle in the same sense as HO and stall, which is the context people have been using that term in, because it is literally one team with maybe one point of variation. The "core" is Scolipede/Vaporeon/Sylveon/Espeon/Smeargle, so all of the team but one Pokemon. The "options" are Mr. Mime or Zapdos. So it is literally 5+1. If, even after this, you come back in the next couple of pages saying people just don't want to deal with it, then you have made it clear that you have no intention to address arguments apart from the ones you make up and, in that case, I would propose that people just stop trying with you as it would be proven to be futile.
I like how you sit in the corner until you hear this one phrase you can key in on, not saying a thing when other more valid options were mentioned, only to hop in again when you can get another cheap shot in on something we've moved past. It shows character. Very respectable. +1 like.
But it isn't perfect. Denisss made the change to Zapdos because people weren't pressuring his team with a move that shuts it down pretty hard, consistently. If more people ran Perish Song in prep to counter BP do you think he would come onto the forums asking for Perish Song to be banned because he has to use the "inferior" version of his team with Mr. Mime on it to compensate? We know no one wants to "weaken" their team in order to account for an opponent's advantages, after all.
For a "balanced and ideal metagame" do you think Baton Pass is as dominating and polarizing as Drizzle + Swift Swim was in Gen 5?
Likewise, should Deniss not be in the top 10? If he is maintaining his position he more than likely deserves it, imho, simply for being a good player who built a good team and plays it well. If the suspect test showed anything it was that BP was a joke if you do not play it with some kind of skill.
Just to make sure I understood that first part correctly, you were crying about people undermining your opinion because of Trevenant earlier and now you degrade another person's opinion simply because, in your limited experience, they only reply to specific topics? You are, once again, attempting to downplay arguments by either playing the victim or bringing up irrelevant points yourself. How about you try to respond to actual arguments rather than trying to circle around them to make it look like you got where you were supposed to get.
Honestly, it would be in your best interest to not try and bring up Denisss's actions because then you'd have to take into account everything he has said, unless, of course, you would like to continue selectively choosing what you see and acknowledge. Denisss made it clear that BP needs to be nerfed, so by listing off all these possible fixes and then quoting Denisss for points, you are making two contradictory arguments. If these checks were so evident and not problematic, then Denisss probably wouldn't be advocating a nerf.
Great comparison except that this goes back to the point that BP hasn't reached a high enough usage for everyone to prepare for it or play it. Even though that is the case, the increase in less specialized counters, such as Taunt, which can only stop the chain late game, have seen an increase in use. Seeing how this is by no means effective, the metagame will have to adapt further with specialized counters, leading to polarization. This exact topic of adaptation was covered about 17 pages ago, I am now legitimately curious as to if you have read this thread in its entirety.
The Gengar Trapper set has existed since Gen 2. Saying it doesn't accomplish anything against other playstyles is a bit laughable when it has been a proven veteran of a build for generations. If you can absolutely think of no possible applications for him, stallbraking better than the stallbreaker set and removing support pokemon from balanced teams are his two highest appeals.
Though, if you feel like you don't have to say what's been said, you may feel free to not say anything at all. I'll take your known opinion into consideration, don't worry about it.
That point is pretty meaningless, it only sounds as if it has a point. The Gengar Trapper set
was created in Gen II so, yes, it has been around since Gen II but it most certainly hasn't seen routine use since Gen II. It was listed under Other Options two generations in a row, so it was used Gen II and III and not recommended after that. So, your claim is completely invalid because it is only a veteran in that it has seen four generations, not because it has been played that time.
As for your last point, you once again attempt to undermine a person's opinion because of something irrelevant, such as when they post, so soon after you cry about people supposedly saying your opinion was meaningless because of Trevenant. I strongly recommend that you avoid further attempts to point fingers and avoid arguments by playing the victim because a) it is unproductive seeing how you leave chunks of arguments unaddressed and b) you are making yourself look like a fool when nobody is saying what you are crying about except for you to an extent.
