Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[XerxesPraelor]

Banning OHKO is like banning a Treasure Map that gave 5 platinums.

Banning sleep is like banning a Militia that says "Each opponent discards 2 cards" from having an attack effect more than once.

Banning Ubers is like banning rebuild, minion, and torturer.

The bans may be bad, but they're not silly.

6v6 singles is what the most dramatic battles in the game (Champion), Anime (rival/dragonite guy) and manga (championships) are. They're more epic than any other format.

[dondon151]

I am willing to bet that you haven't played much competitive 3v3 Singles if you're claiming that it's even more chaotic than 6v6. It's definitely different, but it's not really more luck-based. You still have 6 Pokemon to choose from; you just have to choose three of them based on your opponent's team and what you think they're likely to use against your team. Thing is, even if it is a bit more luck-based, there's still plenty of skill involved and luck evens out when playing on a ladder.

What I take from this is an admission that 3v3 singles is more luck-based than 6v6 singles.

All the games that have been used as the tournament platforms for Pokemon (Stadium, Colosseum, Battle Revolution) have used 3v3 for their Singles games. Once tournament play moved to the portable games in 5th gen, that format became available there to.

I'm fairly certain that official tournaments have always been held on handhelds and never on consoles.

As mentioned, stuff like Stealth Rock should be a pretty big hint that 6v6 isn't what GameFreak cares about. "Gee, let's introduce a move that just cripples a bunch of Pokemon and is so powerful that it gets used in every match." GameFreak changes a bunch of existing mechanics between generations. 6th gen alone tweaked the power of 50 moves! It dramatically changed the critical hit mechanics! It nerfed weather-causing Abilities down to 5 turns! Etc., etc. If you accept that GameFreak made all these minor balancing tweaks but left Stealth Rock (a move that cuts Charizard's HP in half when it switches in) unchanged just for lulz, you're kidding yourself.

This is a ridiculous extrapolation. First of all, Game Freak introducing small changes for the sake of "balance" does not indicate that Game Freak actually knows how to balance its own game. Game Freak also gave +10 stat boosts to some Pokemon. Does giving Exploud +10 SpDef seriously make it an iota more viable? If you want to use these tweaks as evidence that Game Freak is balancing Pokemon for some hypothesized purpose, you may not ignore the evidence to the contrary.

Secondly, we do not know if Game Freak nerfed auto-weather because it was too powerful or because they wanted a niche for Primordial Sea and Desolate Land, which are just better versions of auto-weather from previous generations.

Thirdly, Stealth Rock did receive a big nerf in the form of a Defog buff. Stealth Rock is not the only egregiously centralizing component in the game. The creators of Stealth Rock also dreamed up things like Prankster and Shadow Tag.

The only "beef" I have is that the entire English-speaking Pokemon internet community has accepted Smogon's rules as the de facto way to play the game. Really that is GameFreak's fault, though, for not providing a strong push for a single format from the very beginning. Other than that, I have no issue with Smogonites playing by whatever silly rules they want. I just reserve the right to call them silly.

Smogon's rules are actually quite scientific. You've provided no reasoning as to why they're silly; you've simply stated repeatedly that you find them silly.

OHKOs and Evasion haven't changed, but all the other game mechanics have. It's about context. There are a ton of moves that bypass accuracy checks and most of them aren't damaging moves. Evasion-raising thereby promotes the use of more interesting strategies like Perish Song, etc. OHKOs may have been crazy back in the day, but do you know how much power creep there's been in Pokemon since then? Probably you do. OHKOs were banned back when Hyper Beam was a reasonable option on Gyarados and Life Orb and Choice items didn't exist!

The problem with countering evasion now is the same as it has always been: strategies that counter evasion are not good strategies in and of themselves. That's the whole reason why evasion is banned - if teams are forced to run a Pokemon or moveslot to counter evasion and that Pokemon serves no other purpose, then evasion is centralizing.

OHKOs are banned because they're completely luck-based. Power creep or not, Pokemon can still be countered with other Pokemon until you allow OHKO moves.

Sleep mechanics changed a lot between 4th and 5th gens and there are more ways to fight sleep with every new generation. Even if you don't have a counter, Sleep doesn't seem so bad now. IF the sleep-inducing move hits, there's a 1 in 3 chance that you wake up after one turn of sleep, so the sleep user netted nothing.

I need evidence to support this assertion that "sleep doesn't seem so bad now." One of the more common teams on the Anything Goes ladder features 6 Darkrai.

I think it's a fine analogy. Yes, the mechanics are completely different. That's why it's an analogy.

It's actually a very bad analogy. Dominion kingdoms are randomly generated, so the existence of power cards isn't bad because they're not in every kingdom.

If you had access to all published cards in every game, then centralization becomes a problem. That's the Dominion equivalent to Pokemon - if you had the freedom to build any kind of deck from any of the cards available. The strongest decks involve some combination of Chapel, Quarry, Bridge, and King's Court. The strongest teams in a no-clause Pokemon metagame involve some combination of Mega Rayquaza, Arceus, Darkrai, and Klefki.

[eHalcyon]

The strongest teams in a no-clause Pokemon metagame involve some combination of Mega Rayquaza, Arceus, Darkrai, and Klefki.

Not sure if serious, but I hope so.  I've loved Klefki since the first time I saw it (when XY was leaking).

[dondon151]

6 Klefki teams are a common sight on the Anything Goes ladder. Pretty much all of them run Thunder Wave / Swagger / Substitute / Foul Play.

[eHalcyon]

6 Klefki teams are a common sight on the Anything Goes ladder. Pretty much all of them run Thunder Wave / Swagger / Substitute / Foul Play.

Oh.  Hahaha.  OK, I guess that makes sense.

I used a Klefki when I was running through super triples in XY Battle Maison for the first 50 or so battles.  It was a support set though, with T-Wave, dual screens and Foul Play.  Pretty fun stuff.  I'd use the parafusion set but a little bad luck can ruin it and it's not as resilient outside singles anyway.

Also used a Klefki through the story, with a suboptimal offensive set.  Because that's how it works during the plot.

[Lekkit]

My main beef with Smogon is that they want to create this "fair fight experience". Not only by banning stuff that's too good, but also stuff that's too swingy or makes the game center around it. But at the same time they leave other super powerful, swingy or game-centric stuff in.

Also, the more you restrict, the less "outside the box" battling is left. If you want monsters hitting each other in turn as the only element of the game, that's fine, but I like stuff like Swagger/Foul Play, FEAR and stuff like that. It's creative. But apparently not competitive.

I do agree that it's good that it exists, since the game is skewed from the start. I just wish that they were more consistent with their monster/move/item-hate.

In general I don't really like third parties making variants, because they "make the game better". In the case of Pokémon, house rules are needed for variation, though. I just don't agree with Smogon being the "only" and "true" way, aside from VGC.

[LastFootnote]

I'm not sure about that.  From what I've seen, Smogon has as many haters as it has fans, and the hate seems hyperbolic in the same way that fans are overly supportive.  Smogon meta is interesting in its own right, there is decent rationale behind their bans, and afaik it's a product of community discussion, not some sort of dictatorial decree.

It absolutely does not matter how many fans or haters Smogon has; its rules are the de facto standard. Example: All the Pokemon of the Week sets and analyses on serebii.net assume Smogon's rules and talk about their tiers explicitly.

Smogon's rules are (or were the last time I checked) a product of a very weighted "community discussion" where the top players of the existing game—the ones with the most incentive to maintain the status quo—are the ones that call the shots. dondon, how are these rules "sceintific"? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

In Dominion analogy, the argument around Smogon seems more like the argument over enabling the VP tracker.

No. The equivalent to a VP tracker in Pokemon would be maybe tracking the current HP bars and status conditions of Pokemon that aren't currently in play. I can't speak for everyone, but whether or not I have access to a VP tracker doesn't dramatically change my strategy in a game Dominion. In Pokemon, 3v3 Singles and 6v6 Singles are radically different games.


dondon, just to be clear, I never suggested that an "Anything Goes" ruleset was a good idea. I support banning the cover and event legendary Pokemon and enforcing Species and Item clauses (to promote variety).

The problem here is that I think we each want to get something different out of competitive Pokemon. For me, Pokemon promises lots of variety and Smogon's ruleset is designed to eliminate most of that variety such that each team can cover all its bases and beat each other team and good play wins out over luck as much as possible. Smogon's entire 6v6 metagame is centered around switch-to-a-counter dancing, carefully eliminating anything that can prevent you from sweeping, and then sweeping. Most of the teams look pretty much the same. Special wall, physical wall, rock setter, rapid spinner, sweeper. Leftovers on all the walls, Life Orb or Choice items on all the attackers. BORING! It's so fucking boring! And having 6 Pokemon in your active roster is the primary reason it pans out this way. The more options you have to switch to, the more often switching is a better move than attacking. And on top of that Smogon bans some of the biggest "threats" to this system, like OHKO moves.

What I take from this is an admission that 3v3 singles is more luck-based than 6v6 singles.

Yes, possibly a bit. In my opinion, the massive amount of new options that would be made viable far outweighs the relatively minor increase in "luck". But luck doesn't increase nearly as much as you might think. You basically have a sideboard, so you have the potential to cover your bases. You just have to be smart about which 3 Pokemon you choose to bring into the match.

The problem with countering evasion now is the same as it has always been: strategies that counter evasion are not good strategies in and of themselves. That's the whole reason why evasion is banned - if teams are forced to run a Pokemon or moveslot to counter evasion and that Pokemon serves no other purpose, then evasion is centralizing.

OHKOs are banned because they're completely luck-based. Power creep or not, Pokemon can still be countered with other Pokemon until you allow OHKO moves.

You are looking at this from such a Smogon-centric perspective that you don't even realize your arguments are circular. The assumption that you have to be able to potentially counter all possible threats with one team in order for the game to be "competitive" is fallacious.

[LastFootnote]

Banning OHKO is like banning a Treasure Map that gave 5 platinums.

Banning sleep is like banning a Militia that says "Each opponent discards 2 cards" from having an attack effect more than once.

Banning Ubers is like banning rebuild, minion, and torturer.

The bans may be bad, but they're not silly.

I think you're overstating these. You could say that banning OHKOs is like banning Treasure Map as printed, though that's not a great analogy because Treasure Map has enablers and absolutely nothing makes OHKO moves hit more often.

Sleep Clause is the rule we've been discussing here that makes the most sense. BUT, Sleep mechanics have changed pretty dramatically in 5th gen and I think it's worth trying the game without the clause first.

Banning "Ubers" is a obviously a good idea, though what constitutes an "Uber" is up for debate. In a game where switching to a counter is no longer the correct move 90% of the time, Wobbuffet isn't quite so dominating.

6v6 singles is what the most dramatic battles in the game (Champion), Anime (rival/dragonite guy) and manga (championships) are. They're more epic than any other format.

First of all, that's just your opinion. Second, comparing in-game battles (with items, uneven levels, etc.) and competitive battles is apples and oranges. And what makes a good anime or manga does not necessarily also make a good game.

[dondon151]

Smogon's rules are (or were the last time I checked) a product of a very weighted "community discussion" where the top players of the existing game—the ones with the most incentive to maintain the status quo—are the ones that call the shots. dondon, how are these rules "sceintific"? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

You sound a little confused here. How are the top players of Smogon's metagame interested in "maintaining the status quo" when they vote to ban something rather than to retain it? The top players who qualify to vote in a suspect test stand to benefit from keeping an overcentralizing Pokemon or mechanic because they are the best at using it.

The impact of the rules are measurable in terms of (ranked) usage stats, and the banning process itself is methodical. That's why I say they're scientific.

Also, the more you restrict, the less "outside the box" battling is left. If you want monsters hitting each other in turn as the only element of the game, that's fine, but I like stuff like Swagger/Foul Play, FEAR and stuff like that. It's creative. But apparently not competitive.

dondon, just to be clear, I never suggested that an "Anything Goes" ruleset was a good idea. I support banning the cover and event legendary Pokemon and enforcing Species and Item clauses (to promote variety).

The problem here is that I think we each want to get something different out of competitive Pokemon. For me, Pokemon promises lots of variety and Smogon's ruleset is designed to eliminate most of that variety such that each team can cover all its bases and beat each other team and good play wins out over luck as much as possible. Smogon's entire 6v6 metagame is centered around switch-to-a-counter dancing, carefully eliminating anything that can prevent you from sweeping, and then sweeping. Most of the teams look pretty much the same. Special wall, physical wall, rock setter, rapid spinner, sweeper. Leftovers on all the walls, Life Orb or Choice items on all the attackers. BORING! It's so fucking boring! And having 6 Pokemon in your active roster is the primary reason it pans out this way. The more options you have to switch to, the more often switching is a better move than attacking. And on top of that Smogon bans some of the biggest "threats" to this system, like OHKO moves.

I vehemently disagree with both of you. You're under the illusion that the current roles in the metagame are "boring," yet without Sleep Clause or Swagger Clause, the metagames would be even more "boring." That's precisely why the bans exist! So now, for example, instead of walls *, which can be one of several Pokemon, you would much prefer to run Prankster + Thunder Wave + Swagger users, which are limited to Klefki and Thundurus. So much for increasing variety! If you haven't noticed by now, centralizing strategies are banned because they greatly limit the space of viable teams. If you really cared about a varied metagame, you should be the first to jump on the Smogon bandwagon.

(Also, FEAR is not banned...)

The point is that Lekkit's statement, "the more you restrict, the less 'outside the box' battling is left" is strictly untrue. It is actually the case that the more you restrict (within limits), the more varied battling results! For example, why does LastFootnote advocate retaining Uber bans but not Sleep Clause or Swagger Clause? There's no consistent reasoning behind keeping one and not the other - LastFootnote tacitly acknowledges that restricting certain Pokemon leads to a better (in his opinion) metagame. But we know that not all cover legendaries are banworthy; Black Kyurem is OU and Zygarde is UU, to the best of my knowledge, and both of them are much weaker than Pokemon like Mega Kangaskhan or even Talonflame.

* LastFootnote's generalization about team composition is completely untrue. That sort of team composition may have been viable back in gen III, but nowadays most teams are designed around helping set up a win condition, which is basically to say that they're built around supporting one or two Pokemon.

You are looking at this from such a Smogon-centric perspective that you don't even realize your arguments are circular. The assumption that you have to be able to potentially counter all possible threats with one team in order for the game to be "competitive" is fallacious.

I resent this accusation. I didn't even use the word "competitive" in any of my quoted sentences, and I never said that a team had to be able to counter all possible threats to be viable (in fact, I said the opposite earlier in this post). I am not engaging in a fallacy so much as you are engaging in a straw man.

[eHalcyon]

My main beef with Smogon is that they want to create this "fair fight experience". Not only by banning stuff that's too good, but also stuff that's too swingy or makes the game center around it. But at the same time they leave other super powerful, swingy or game-centric stuff in.

Also, the more you restrict, the less "outside the box" battling is left. If you want monsters hitting each other in turn as the only element of the game, that's fine, but I like stuff like Swagger/Foul Play, FEAR and stuff like that. It's creative. But apparently not competitive.

I do agree that it's good that it exists, since the game is skewed from the start. I just wish that they were more consistent with their monster/move/item-hate.

In general I don't really like third parties making variants, because they "make the game better". In the case of Pokémon, house rules are needed for variation, though. I just don't agree with Smogon being the "only" and "true" way, aside from VGC.

I am pretty sure Swagger/Foul Play is viable, especially with Prankster pokemon. (Edit: but apparently it's banned?  OK then.)  FEAR is more viable in Smogon meta than it would be in doubles, because two opposing pokemon are a way bigger threat to a FEAR pokemon.  Focus Sash and Sturdy aren't enough then, and Fake Out is a lot better in doubles too.

Other than a vocal minority, I don't think people consider Smogon the only true way.  There are plenty of communities centered on VGC; Smogon itself has a forum for it.  People also tend to forget that the tier lists aren't exactly ban lists.  If you want to use a UU pokemon in ubers, you are certainly free to do so.  And then you can also play Anything Goes or, for even crazier stuff, you can try hackmons.  If you want to go a different direction, you can play Little Cup and use pokemon that would never get play in any other format!

The online battling with XY showed that a lack of restrictions really limits creativity for singles battling.  People were constantly complaining about how every team had the same several super powerful pokemon.  And then there are very valid complaints that 3v3 singles often felt like Rock-Paper-Scissors.

I'm not saying other formats are bad.  The simple truth is that 6v6 singles is a popular way to play, but the meta becomes very centralized with no restrictions at all.  The specific restrictions that Smogon has may not be perfect, and maybe they are a bit overbearing in some places, but the nature of restrictions is that no one set will satisfy everybody.  As far as all that goes, Smogon does a pretty good job.

It absolutely does not matter how many fans or haters Smogon has; its rules are the de facto standard. Example: All the Pokemon of the Week sets and analyses on serebii.net assume Smogon's rules and talk about their tiers explicitly.

Smogon's rules are (or were the last time I checked) a product of a very weighted "community discussion" where the top players of the existing game—the ones with the most incentive to maintain the status quo—are the ones that call the shots. dondon, how are these rules "sceintific"? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Things become de facto for a reason.  Even then, there are certainly communities for non-Smogon formats.  This complaint sounds like it's hating on them just because they are popular.  And here is a snippet from a post I found on their Facebook page:

We would like to remind everyone that this potential tiering change would only affect the official, usage-based Smogon Tiers (OU to NU); tiers such as Ubers, Balanced-Hackmons and Monotype will not reflect this change. This change would only be made on our tournaments and our ladders. You are, of course, more than welcome to play by whatever rulesets you desire on your own servers and tournaments.

Additionally, we would like to stress that we never have nor ever will claim these are Nintendo-official rules; they are Smogon-official rules that are ONLY enforced in OUR environments. We feel there are many ways to enjoy Pokemon, whether singles, doubles, online, or wifi, and we don't feel any one method or metagame is "better" than another (though we obviously emphasize certain ones).

Finally, it's extremely important to note that YOU have the DIRECT ability to influence these changes; simply play on the suspect ladders, qualify, and vote. The algorithm that determines qualification credentials emphasizes BOTH experience and quality of play, so you don't need to be a "smogon elite" with a 90% win percentage to qualify (if you have a lower win %, you just need to play more games).

So no, it's not only top players who have a say.

No. The equivalent to a VP tracker in Pokemon would be maybe tracking the current HP bars and status conditions of Pokemon that aren't currently in play. I can't speak for everyone, but whether or not I have access to a VP tracker doesn't dramatically change my strategy in a game Dominion. In Pokemon, 3v3 Singles and 6v6 Singles are radically different games.

OK, here's a better analogy then:

The difference between playing with Smogon's format and restrictions and not doing so is like the difference between playing Dominion with randomization between only two sets at a time or playing Dominion with All Random, or playing ranked Dominion with some sort of veto method.  There are arguments for both.  Some players have very strong feelings about which way is better (there's previously been some fierce discussion about veto method, or whether veto should be allowed at all for ranked games). 

The problem here is that I think we each want to get something different out of competitive Pokemon. For me, Pokemon promises lots of variety and Smogon's ruleset is designed to eliminate most of that variety such that each team can cover all its bases and beat each other team and good play wins out over luck as much as possible. Smogon's entire 6v6 metagame is centered around switch-to-a-counter dancing, carefully eliminating anything that can prevent you from sweeping, and then sweeping. Most of the teams look pretty much the same. Special wall, physical wall, rock setter, rapid spinner, sweeper. Leftovers on all the walls, Life Orb or Choice items on all the attackers. BORING! It's so fucking boring! And having 6 Pokemon in your active roster is the primary reason it pans out this way. The more options you have to switch to, the more often switching is a better move than attacking. And on top of that Smogon bans some of the biggest "threats" to this system, like OHKO moves.

But that's just, like, your opinion.  You could also say that Smogon's ruleset is designed to eliminate centralizing elements, and that the intricate check and counter "dancing" between opponents is interesting and highly entertaining, with great diversity in how different roles are fulfilled and executed, and multiple tiers to let weaker pokemon have a chance at the spotlight.

And to be completely clear here, I count myself as impartial in this debate.  I don't play on Smogon, I have no horse in this race.  It just bothers me how vociferously I've seen people argue against Smogon, as if they are some evil organization intent on stripping away all fun from a game.  I'm sure there are fair criticisms of Smogon, but I haven't really seen any.

Yes, possibly a bit. In my opinion, the massive amount of new options that would be made viable far outweighs the relatively minor increase in "luck". But luck doesn't increase nearly as much as you might think. You basically have a sideboard, so you have the potential to cover your bases. You just have to be smart about which 3 Pokemon you choose to bring into the match.

Are there stats on this?  Last I heard, the meta in the official ranked matches was incredibly samey.

Banning OHKO is like banning a Treasure Map that gave 5 platinums.

Banning sleep is like banning a Militia that says "Each opponent discards 2 cards" from having an attack effect more than once.

Banning Ubers is like banning rebuild, minion, and torturer.

The bans may be bad, but they're not silly.

I think you're overstating these. You could say that banning OHKOs is like banning Treasure Map as printed, though that's not a great analogy because Treasure Map has enablers and absolutely nothing makes OHKO moves hit more often.

Sleep Clause is the rule we've been discussing here that makes the most sense. BUT, Sleep mechanics have changed pretty dramatically in 5th gen and I think it's worth trying the game without the clause first.

Banning "Ubers" is a obviously a good idea, though what constitutes an "Uber" is up for debate. In a game where switching to a counter is no longer the correct move 90% of the time, Wobbuffet isn't quite so dominating.

I think his "Plat Map" comparison is closer to OHKO moves than regular Treasure Map.  Having a OHKO trigger in Pokemon is a huge boost (especially in 3v3 -- that's 33% of your team gone).  Connecting Treasure Maps is nice but not quite game-changing.  Aren't there ways to make OHKO moves hit more often -- No Guard, Lock-On, Mind Reader?

IMO, it would be OK to leave OHKO moves unbanned because they are weak anyway.  They would swing matches once in a while but would lose out in the long run.  But for that same reason, I don't see why Game Freak made OHKO moves at all.  They are so unreliable that using them successfully is far more a matter of luck than skill.  That makes them really underwhelming for in-game play and also unsatisfying in competitive matches even when they work.  And for that reason, I don't see a problem with banning them either.

Smogon does suspect testing.  I would wager that they did try the game without the clause for a while when the mechanics were changed, and then decided to ban it again after that testing.  Granted, didn't the gen V change to sleep actually make it a stronger status condition?  Yes, it went from 1-4 turns down to 1-3, but the counter would reset if you switched out.  Gen VI repealed that so the counter wouldn't reset.

6v6 singles is what the most dramatic battles in the game (Champion), Anime (rival/dragonite guy) and manga (championships) are. They're more epic than any other format.

First of all, that's just your opinion. Second, comparing in-game battles (with items, uneven levels, etc.) and competitive battles is apples and oranges. And what makes a good anime or manga does not necessarily also make a good game.

It's not just XP's opinion.  It's an opinion shared by many players.  Plenty of people enjoy 6v6 over other formats, and part of the reason for that is how battles work in-game and in other media.  You might not be a fan of Smogon's rules, and that's fair, but plenty of people like it and that's fair too.

[dondon151]

Smogon does suspect testing.  I would wager that they did try the game without the clause for a while when the mechanics were changed, and then decided to ban it again after that testing.  Granted, didn't the gen V change to sleep actually make it a stronger status condition?  Yes, it went from 1-4 turns down to 1-3, but the counter would reset if you switched out.  Gen VI repealed that so the counter wouldn't reset.

I'm almost certain that Sleep Clause was grandfathered, but there's no way that unrestricted sleep would make 6v6 singles a more "varied" metagame.

[Lekkit]

I vehemently disagree with both of you. You're under the illusion that the current roles in the metagame are "boring," yet without Sleep Clause or Swagger Clause, the metagames would be even more "boring." That's precisely why the bans exist! So now, for example, instead of walls *, which can be one of several Pokemon, you would much prefer to run Prankster + Thunder Wave + Swagger users, which are limited to Klefki and Thundurus. So much for increasing variety! If you haven't noticed by now, centralizing strategies are banned because they greatly limit the space of viable teams. If you really cared about a varied metagame, you should be the first to jump on the Smogon bandwagon.

(Also, FEAR is not banned...)

Here's the thing. You are under the illusion that one thing is boring while another is not. We are different. And enjoy different stuff. To say that I'm under the illusion that one thing is boring and that I would certainly think another thing is more boring is kind of rude.

I haven't been playing much online Pokémon since the end of fourth gen/beginning of fifth. But I clearly remember always seeing the same 10 monsters over and over again. Once in a while you saw something weird, but that was an anomaly. It may have been my less than stellar ranking, but if Smogon is for everyone and making the game more diverse, then I can tell you. At least then, it wasn't working properly.

I know FEAR isn't banned. It was just another example of what I consider out of the box.

The point is that Lekkit's statement, "the more you restrict, the less 'outside the box' battling is left" is strictly untrue. It is actually the case that the more you restrict (within limits), the more varied battling results! For example, why does LastFootnote advocate retaining Uber bans but not Sleep Clause or Swagger Clause? There's no consistent reasoning behind keeping one and not the other - LastFootnote tacitly acknowledges that restricting certain Pokemon leads to a better (in his opinion) metagame. But we know that not all cover legendaries are banworthy; Black Kyurem is OU and Zygarde is UU, to the best of my knowledge, and both of them are much weaker than Pokemon like Mega Kangaskhan or even Talonflame.

* LastFootnote's generalization about team composition is completely untrue. That sort of team composition may have been viable back in gen III, but nowadays most teams are designed around helping set up a win condition, which is basically to say that they're built around supporting one or two Pokemon.

I'm not talking about the pool of monsters. I'm talking about what the monsters actually do. Also, I don't see how LastFootnote's generalization is NOT a team that is built around supporting one monster. There may be other ways to do it, though, and that's fine. But you're still having a team that's built around supporting one or two monsters. That's not really as diverse as things could be, IMO.

In conclusion, we clearly enjoy different things. I don't really enjoy the Smogon tiers and what they bring to the table. As I've said earlier, I think it's great that they exist, and people are free to use and enjoy them as much as they want. I just don't like them myself. Kind of how I'm not religious, but I think it's great that people are.

[XerxesPraelor]

If you enjoy centralized metas, than props to you. But most people don't.

[dondon151]

Here's the thing. You are under the illusion that one thing is boring while another is not. We are different. And enjoy different stuff. To say that I'm under the illusion that one thing is boring and that I would certainly think another thing is more boring is kind of rude.

I haven't been playing much online Pokémon since the end of fourth gen/beginning of fifth. But I clearly remember always seeing the same 10 monsters over and over again. Once in a while you saw something weird, but that was an anomaly. It may have been my less than stellar ranking, but if Smogon is for everyone and making the game more diverse, then I can tell you. At least then, it wasn't working properly.

The problem with Pokemon and all competitive games that feature nonequivalent characters is that some characters are stronger than others, and disproportionately so. For Pokemon in particular, some strategies are stronger than others. In gen V, rain was the dominant strategy even though all forms of auto-weather induction existed.

Regardless of the metagame, you are going to see the "same 10 monsters over and over again." This is true whether you play ubers, OU, UU, RU, NU, VGC, and so on. That's just how competitive games are. If you manage to come up with some exotic strategy, it's going to fall into 1 of 3 camps: it's consistently weak, it's consistently strong, or it's plainly inconsistent. If you've picked a consistently weak strategy, then you've just picked a bad strategy, and you only get brownie points for "thinking out of the box" (think Trick Room in singles). If you've picked a consistently strong strategy, then that strategy will eventually crowd out weaker strategies (think rain in gen V or Baton Pass). If you've picked an inconsistent strategy, you're just going to annoy opponents with variance (think OHKO, evasion).

It's disingenuous to label all sorts of teams built around supporting a Pokemon or a core of Pokemon as the same. The Pokemon themselves are different; they are susceptible to different opponent Pokemon; they require different win conditions. You can build teams designed around quickly gaining momentum (often through switching, which is why LastFootnote's dislike of switching confounds me) or around preventing your opponent from gaining momentum. The implication that Smogon's metagame encourages monolithic teams is like lumping rain and trick room into the same archetype despite the fact that they are very different.



On switching: in 6v6 singles, assuming that none of your Pokemon are fainted, you have more options in switching than you have in selecting moves. It is a fundamental aspect of the game that dramatically increases the number of options a player has on any given turn in battle. Complaining that a Pokemon metagame has "too much switching" is as equally ridiculous as complaining that a Pokemon metagame has "too much attacking."

[werothegreat]

... can't we just go back to this? (without the high school bit in the middle)

[Lekkit]

The problem with Pokemon and all competitive games that feature nonequivalent characters is that some characters are stronger than others, and disproportionately so. For Pokemon in particular, some strategies are stronger than others. In gen V, rain was the dominant strategy even though all forms of auto-weather induction existed.

Regardless of the metagame, you are going to see the "same 10 monsters over and over again." This is true whether you play ubers, OU, UU, RU, NU, VGC, and so on. That's just how competitive games are. If you manage to come up with some exotic strategy, it's going to fall into 1 of 3 camps: it's consistently weak, it's consistently strong, or it's plainly inconsistent. If you've picked a consistently weak strategy, then you've just picked a bad strategy, and you only get brownie points for "thinking out of the box" (think Trick Room in singles). If you've picked a consistently strong strategy, then that strategy will eventually crowd out weaker strategies (think rain in gen V or Baton Pass). If you've picked an inconsistent strategy, you're just going to annoy opponents with variance (think OHKO, evasion).

Why is there such a big difference between seeing a Scizor/Breloom every game compared to a Klefki/Thundrus? Regardless of which 10 monsters you see, banning out one thing but leaving another comparable in is inconsistent. I honestly don't get why Smogon's tiers are soo good. If their lists are such a variation creator, why is there not that much variation?

[eHalcyon]

The problem with Pokemon and all competitive games that feature nonequivalent characters is that some characters are stronger than others, and disproportionately so. For Pokemon in particular, some strategies are stronger than others. In gen V, rain was the dominant strategy even though all forms of auto-weather induction existed.

Regardless of the metagame, you are going to see the "same 10 monsters over and over again." This is true whether you play ubers, OU, UU, RU, NU, VGC, and so on. That's just how competitive games are. If you manage to come up with some exotic strategy, it's going to fall into 1 of 3 camps: it's consistently weak, it's consistently strong, or it's plainly inconsistent. If you've picked a consistently weak strategy, then you've just picked a bad strategy, and you only get brownie points for "thinking out of the box" (think Trick Room in singles). If you've picked a consistently strong strategy, then that strategy will eventually crowd out weaker strategies (think rain in gen V or Baton Pass). If you've picked an inconsistent strategy, you're just going to annoy opponents with variance (think OHKO, evasion).

Why is there such a big difference between seeing a Scizor/Breloom every game compared to a Klefki/Thundrus? Regardless of which 10 monsters you see, banning out one thing but leaving another comparable in is inconsistent. I honestly don't get why Smogon's tiers are soo good. If their lists are such a variation creator, why is there not that much variation?

If it's broken either way, why hate on Smogon?

But there is one obvious way that Smogon tiers increase variety -- you can choose to play in, for example, the UU metagame and be able to use pokemon that aren't the most popular ones.

There also seems to be some confusion here about how Smogon's tiers are constructed.  Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm like 90% sure that it's based on usage statistics.  In the OU metagame, you can use pokemon that are in lower tiers.  Being BL tier doesn't necessarily mean the pokemon is weaker, just that it sees less frequent use.  If it gained popularity, it might get moved into OU.  Likewise, if a previously OU pokemon dropped in usage, it's fair to say that the reason is that it is no longer competitive due to new strategies in the shifting meta, and so that pokemon might drop down into BL or UU.

[Tables]

The problem with Pokemon and all competitive games that feature nonequivalent characters is that some characters are stronger than others, and disproportionately so. For Pokemon in particular, some strategies are stronger than others. In gen V, rain was the dominant strategy even though all forms of auto-weather induction existed.

Regardless of the metagame, you are going to see the "same 10 monsters over and over again." This is true whether you play ubers, OU, UU, RU, NU, VGC, and so on. That's just how competitive games are. If you manage to come up with some exotic strategy, it's going to fall into 1 of 3 camps: it's consistently weak, it's consistently strong, or it's plainly inconsistent. If you've picked a consistently weak strategy, then you've just picked a bad strategy, and you only get brownie points for "thinking out of the box" (think Trick Room in singles). If you've picked a consistently strong strategy, then that strategy will eventually crowd out weaker strategies (think rain in gen V or Baton Pass). If you've picked an inconsistent strategy, you're just going to annoy opponents with variance (think OHKO, evasion).

Why is there such a big difference between seeing a Scizor/Breloom every game compared to a Klefki/Thundrus? Regardless of which 10 monsters you see, banning out one thing but leaving another comparable in is inconsistent. I honestly don't get why Smogon's tiers are soo good. If their lists are such a variation creator, why is there not that much variation?

I dunno if it's changed much since the last time I looked at usage statistics (February ish) but back then, in OU for XY no pokemon was on more than about 15-20% of teams, and somewhere around 50-100 pokemon were on at least 1% of teams. You can easily find the numbers on Smogon's forums if you're interested.

15-20% seems fairly low to me, compared to what it could easily be without certain bans. That means even the most 'game dominating' pokemon are only seeing use in about one in five to one in six teams, and they're kept in check because they have counters and checks - if they were more common, then more people would run their counter pokemon, making them poor choices in short.

PPE: I believe what eHalc says is mostly correct, but I believe the BL tiers (Borderline) are effectively a category of "This pokemon doesn't meet the usage criteria to be in OU/UU/RU (for BL/BL2/BL3) but it is too powerful/overcentralising for the next tier down." I might be wrong because I've never been into competitive pokemon.

Edit: Here's some recent numbers (OU from November). Looks like the highest four pokemon are in the 20-28% range, which is a little higher than I expected but still means less than one in three teams. 88 pokemon are on 1% or more teams, which is quite a diverse range. It's maybe not quite as diverse as I'd have hoped, but still, that's enough diversity that there's a wide range of good teams you can potentially make.

[dondon151]

Pokemon Online also has usage stats for every metagame every month: http://stats.pokemon-online.eu/ORAS%20OU/index.html

There are also ranked stats, which only take into account players with >1000 rating: http://stats.pokemon-online.eu/ORAS%20OU/ranked_stats.txt

EDIT: Pokemon Global Link also has unquantified usage rankings for Battle Spot: http://3ds.pokemon-gl.com/battle/oras/
5 out of the top 12 Pokemon are banned from Smogon's OU metagame. Is this format really more varied than 6v6 singles?

[XerxesPraelor]

The problem with Pokemon and all competitive games that feature nonequivalent characters is that some characters are stronger than others, and disproportionately so. For Pokemon in particular, some strategies are stronger than others. In gen V, rain was the dominant strategy even though all forms of auto-weather induction existed.

Regardless of the metagame, you are going to see the "same 10 monsters over and over again." This is true whether you play ubers, OU, UU, RU, NU, VGC, and so on. That's just how competitive games are. If you manage to come up with some exotic strategy, it's going to fall into 1 of 3 camps: it's consistently weak, it's consistently strong, or it's plainly inconsistent. If you've picked a consistently weak strategy, then you've just picked a bad strategy, and you only get brownie points for "thinking out of the box" (think Trick Room in singles). If you've picked a consistently strong strategy, then that strategy will eventually crowd out weaker strategies (think rain in gen V or Baton Pass). If you've picked an inconsistent strategy, you're just going to annoy opponents with variance (think OHKO, evasion).

Why is there such a big difference between seeing a Scizor/Breloom every game compared to a Klefki/Thundrus? Regardless of which 10 monsters you see, banning out one thing but leaving another comparable in is inconsistent. I honestly don't get why Smogon's tiers are soo good. If their lists are such a variation creator, why is there not that much variation?

OU is more diverse than Anything Goes. Relatively, there is "that much variation". It's just that although GameFreak's bad job balancing makes it impossible for a meta to be diverse to the extent we want, we can at least make it more diverse than it would be anyways.

Also, the lists are up for debate because they aren't perfection. I bet almost everyone wants something to be different, just as in politics.

[Lekkit]

Pokemon Online also has usage stats for every metagame every month: http://stats.pokemon-online.eu/ORAS%20OU/index.html

There are also ranked stats, which only take into account players with >1000 rating: http://stats.pokemon-online.eu/ORAS%20OU/ranked_stats.txt

EDIT: Pokemon Global Link also has unquantified usage rankings for Battle Spot: http://3ds.pokemon-gl.com/battle/oras/
5 out of the top 12 Pokemon are banned from Smogon's OU metagame. Is this format really more varied than 6v6 singles?

Since you can't tell how often they are used, it's impossible to say if it's more or less varied. If you skip the 5 mons that are banned from OU, the other are still in the top of the used mons. So it's just like they banned a couple of monsters they didn't like and used the rest. Which has been my point the entire time. Also, no Thundorus or Klefki. So it can't be that bad to have Swagger allowed, right?

OU is more diverse than Anything Goes. Relatively, there is "that much variation". It's just that although GameFreak's bad job balancing makes it impossible for a meta to be diverse to the extent we want, we can at least make it more diverse than it would be anyways.

Also, the lists are up for debate because they aren't perfection. I bet almost everyone wants something to be different, just as in politics.

I don't know much about Anything Goes, but my point is that Smogon have this tier list that pretty much everyone have to follow. And of course everyone wants something different. It's just that as soon as you want something else than what "Smogon wants" this happens.

[eHalcyon]

Again, there seems to be  misunderstanding of the tiers. If you play OU, it's not like you can't use pokemon from lower tiers. They are only in the lower tiers because people don't use them as much. People gravitate towards the stronger picks. Without the tiers, there would be no environment where, for example, Magnemite is viable.

Smogon bans are for dominating strategies that crowd out everything else.  It's not like they just picked 5 at random to ban and let the rest in without a second thought.

Honestly, it sounds like you just want a tier that sits between OU and Ubers, or for people to stop enjoying 6v6 singles.

[eHalcyon]

In other news, I still only have 3 badges. I am spending an inordinate amount of time on Route 112 trying to find a good Numel.

Vigoroth is part of my regular team now. His name is Pumpernickel. Should I keep him as  a Vigoroth, or let him evolve so his name is punny again?

[Lekkit]

Again, there seems to be  misunderstanding of the tiers. If you play OU, it's not like you can't use pokemon from lower tiers. They are only in the lower tiers because people don't use them as much. People gravitate towards the stronger picks. Without the tiers, there would be no environment where, for example, Magnemite is viable.

Smogon bans are for dominating strategies that crowd out everything else.  It's not like they just picked 5 at random to ban and let the rest in without a second thought.

Honestly, it sounds like you just want a tier that sits between OU and Ubers, or for people to stop enjoying 6v6 singles.

That is not at all what I want. I know you can use lower tier monsters in higher tiers. I used Qwilfish in Ubers with great success. But that's not my point. My point is this. There are "dominant monsters". They are bumped up to the next tier. By now there are new monsters that are the common picks. Why aren't they bumped up? I realize that you have to stop at some point. But at the same time, who decides where to stop? From what I understand there are a couple of guys who ultimately decides what's banned and what's not. There was recently a thing where Shadow Tag was banned from Ubers due to a "shady" vote count. I guess my main thing is that I don't agree with where they draw the lines. I think they are not very straight drawn.

I also don't want people to stop enjoying the Smogon tiers. I just don't want them forced upon me.

In other news, I still only have 3 badges. I am spending an inordinate amount of time on Route 112 trying to find a good Numel.

Vigoroth is part of my regular team now. His name is Pumpernickel. Should I keep him as  a Vigoroth, or let him evolve so his name is punny again?

I still haven't beaten the Delta Episode yet. So much flying back and forth. It's boring.

[eHalcyon]

Where the line is drawn is arbitrary by nature. If every team has to have a pokemon and/or a specific counter to that pokemon that isn't good for anything else, it needs to be banned. Maybe if it appears on 50% of all teams it should be banned. If 20% of all teams, maybe that's OK. Where would you draw the lines?

It's a community decision, as far as I'm aware.

Smogon isn't forced on anyone.  You can always play BattleSpot or VGC.