Page 50 of 52 FirstFirst ... 4046474849505152 LastLast
Results 1,226 to 1,250 of 1296

Thread: Official Serebii 5th Gen Tier List & Standard Rules Discussion Thread

  1. #1226
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    Besides the fact that there's no way we're going to implement an exception for Sleep Clause just to be "nicer" to certain Pokemon, your proposal is based off of a false premise. Sleep Clause wasn't implemented because of Smeargle. It was implemented because of the nature of the sleep status. Sleep incapacitates a Pokemon for several turns at times, and it can almost be an effective KO due to the sleep timer being reset every time a Pokemon leaves the field as of 5th Gen. If you were allowed to put as many Pokemon to sleep at one time as you could, you might completely shut down the opponent's team with no effort. Smeargle is hardly the biggest reason for this; I'd be far more afraid of Breloom and Venomoth if there were no Sleep Clause. With Venomoth, if you could find just one opportunity to put something to sleep and guarantee at least one free turn, it might be "game over" right there. All you'd have to do is start setting up Quiver Dance while your opponent frantically switches around, and you'd just put whatever they brought out to sleep again. And just think of how dangerous a Pokemon like Breloom would be if it could just put whatever was in front of it to sleep with no consequence before setting up SDs and spamming Technician boosted Mach Punches and Bullet Seeds.

    Removing Sleep Clause (even just for some Pokemon) wouldn't be helping some Pokemon's viability, you would just be breaking an already powerful status condition.


    Yeah true. I can understand that.
    I cant even dispute any of that really because i was unaware of the fact that smeargle wasn't the primary sauce of the sleeping clause, but i'm sure its got some contributing factors .
    Regardless, if the logic behind the sleeping clause is (correct me if I'm wrong) that because of the status condition being able to prevent other pokemon from effectively battling to their fullest extent and or that sleeping moves incapacitates pokemon to the extent that the battle is futile, then, shouldn't similar movesets and or moves and situations that work of similar basis's be illegal as well??

    For example, If i had a mew that had whirlwind and thunder-wave (forget the other moves for a sec) it would and could essential incapacitate my opponents entire team, or at least the pokemon that offer a threat to my team. Which by essence is the reason why the sleeping clause is in effect, to prevent situations like this? By the logic of the sleeping clause ( again correct me if i'm wrong) multiple status conditions on opponents should also be illegal? And even movesets and or plays that consist of overpowering up and reaching the max power up status, ( example, registeel max's its stats in game with curse and or venomoth doing same things with quiver-dance) should also be illegal, shouldn't they?

    I mean, the reason I'm talking about all this is because the sleeping clause effectively is preventing an "unfair" situation arising, were, a pokemon is able to put multiple pokes to sleep and then gain an unfair advantage, or even gain one interdependently by putting a few pokes to sleep.
    Though by this premiss, their should be so many other situations that are illegal as-well.

    Now I'm be no means suggesting new rules be implement to prevent pokemon from battling, using moves and or participating in battles, but this rule that states;
    All moves that increase Evasion only (e.g. Minimize) are banned.
    Is based on the same premiss as the sleeping clause, is it not? With this same logic their should be a few more rules..

    Now obviously I'm being a bit biased here cause i like venomoth, but all I'm suggesting is that perhaps an exception towards certain move-sets and or situations be created.
    Because the situations were multiple pokes are allowed to be poisoned and or paralyzed are allowed...
    Bug-Type Represent !

  2. #1227
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Old West
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    For example, If i had a mew that had whirlwind and thunder-wave (forget the other moves for a sec) it would and could essential incapacitate my opponents entire team, or at least the pokemon that offer a threat to my team. Which by essence is the reason why the sleeping clause is in effect, to prevent situations like this? By the logic of the sleeping clause ( again correct me if i'm wrong) multiple status conditions on opponents should also be illegal? And even movesets and or plays that consist of overpowering up and reaching the max power up status, ( example, registeel max's its stats in game with curse and or venomoth doing same things with quiver-dance) should also be illegal, shouldn't they?

    At least while Registeel is using curse, your foe can still attack.
    Paralysis and Sleep are completely different. Sleep doesn't allow your opponent to do anything. That is a huge difference. If it was spore and whirlwind, your opponent really wouldn't be able to fight back, while when paralyzed, they still have a fighting chance.
    Though by this premiss, their should be so many other situations that are illegal as-well.
    Getting to +6 takes 3 rounds at the very least, and putting a foe to sleep only takes one. If you're faster, your foe can't even do anything in return for that one round.

    Also, nothing, and I mean nothing, can safely swap into spore unless it's ability does something about it. Which means, if your Quagsire ends up against a Breloom, you're screwed. It could be as simple as you try and swap it out, Breloom uses Spore on it's "counter", then sets up substitute to guard itself against whatever faster threat it has to face next, or in case the "counter" wakes up.
    Now obviously I'm being a bit biased here cause i like venomoth, but all I'm suggesting is that perhaps an exception towards certain move-sets and or situations be created.
    Well, if we do come across another set that's overpowered, it'll be banned. But so far, nothing is too dangerous.

    I mean, think about it, how difficult would Blaziken be if it didn't get Swords Dance or Speed Boost.
    Venemo Oscuridad - 6 Battles
    My Secret Base, Version 2.

  3. #1228
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zachmac View Post
    Paralysis and Sleep are completely different. Sleep doesn't allow your opponent to do anything. That is a huge difference. If it was spore and whirlwind, your opponent really wouldn't be able to fight back, while when paralyzed, they still have a fighting chance.
    Getting to +6 takes 3 rounds at the very least, and putting a foe to sleep only takes one. If you're faster, your foe can't even do anything in return for that one round.

    But bro,their not, they are no different on the basis that the sleeping clause is in effect because it generates an unfair advantage.
    If i somehow manage to paralyze your most destructive and or dangerous pokes. I am essentially removing them from the equation because
    they are no longer a threat because i have pokemon that can easily out-speed them now, with moves that can easily k0 them.
    Bug-Type Represent !

  4. #1229
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Old West
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    But bro,their not, they are no different on the basis that the sleeping clause is in effect because it generates an unfair advantage.
    If i somehow manage to paralyze your most destructive and or dangerous pokes. I am essentially removing them from the equation because
    they are no longer a threat because i have pokemon that can easily out-speed them now, with moves that can easily k0 them.
    Because you have some pokemon that can outspeed and defeat them?

    I guess that means that my Terrakion is useless because my opponent has a Gliscor in their team.

    Weakening and making completely useless are different. And that's what sleep does; it leaves almost every pokemon completely helpless. Unless you want a metagame were everything is forced to carry sleep talk? But that would be like a metagame where everything carried sheer cold; it's left up to luck and almost nothing else.
    Venemo Oscuridad - 6 Battles
    My Secret Base, Version 2.

  5. #1230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    Regardless, if the logic behind the sleeping clause is (correct me if I'm wrong) that because of the status condition being able to prevent other pokemon from effectively battling to their fullest extent and or that sleeping moves incapacitates pokemon to the extent that the battle is futile, then, shouldn't similar movesets and or moves and situations that work of similar basis's be illegal as well??

    For example, If i had a mew that had whirlwind and thunder-wave (forget the other moves for a sec) it would and could essential incapacitate my opponents entire team, or at least the pokemon that offer a threat to my team. Which by essence is the reason why the sleeping clause is in effect, to prevent situations like this? By the logic of the sleeping clause ( again correct me if i'm wrong) multiple status conditions on opponents should also be illegal? And even movesets and or plays that consist of overpowering up and reaching the max power up status, ( example, registeel max's its stats in game with curse and or venomoth doing same things with quiver-dance) should also be illegal, shouldn't they?
    No, paralysis and sleep are nowhere near the same thing. With paralysis, you still have a 75% chance of at least moving during that turn. Sleep completely shuts you down. Having a Pokemon paralyzed would still let your Pokemon fulfill its duties most of the time, and it wouldn't give you completely free turns like sleep would. There is an enormous difference between putting something to sleep and guaranteeing a free turn or more and paralyzing something in the hope that you'll get that 25% chance of a free turn.

    I mean, the reason I'm talking about all this is because the sleeping clause effectively is preventing an "unfair" situation arising, were, a pokemon is able to put multiple pokes to sleep and then gain an unfair advantage, or even gain one interdependently by putting a few pokes to sleep.
    Though by this premiss, their should be so many other situations that are illegal as-well.
    There are no other statuses that can produce such an unfair advantage beside freezing, which has no reliable method of infliction. Only paralysis comes even close, and it always comes with an enormous risk that your opponent will still attack.

    Now I'm be no means suggesting new rules be implement to prevent pokemon from battling, using moves and or participating in battles, but this rule that states;
    All moves that increase Evasion only (e.g. Minimize) are banned.
    Is based on the same premiss as the sleeping clause, is it not? With this same logic their should be a few more rules.
    No, each clause is added on a case-by-case basis. Evasion Clause was implemented because of the luck factor brought upon by modified evasion, which further destroys any competitiveness this game might have. Sleep Clause was implemented because of the raw power of the sleep status and the way that a player could effortlessly win if he/she were able to put the opponent's entire team to sleep. As many BW players have said before, the new sleep mechanics now make sleep an effective KO at times since a Pokemon will often die before they are able to wake up.

    Now obviously I'm being a bit biased here cause i like venomoth, but all I'm suggesting is that perhaps an exception towards certain move-sets and or situations be created.
    Because the situations were multiple pokes are allowed to be poisoned and or paralyzed are allowed...
    But situations where multiple Pokemon are poisoned ore paralyzed are nowhere near the same. In fact, poison isn't even in the same ballpark. Even then, making an exception for certain Pokemon would not only be a subjective slippery slope; it would do next to nothing to help the viability of most of those Pokemon you mentioned. All you would do is make the good sleep abusers broken, and the bad sleep abusers would still be bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    But bro,their not, they are no different on the basis that the sleeping clause is in effect because it generates an unfair advantage.
    But you have to look at exactly the unfair advantage it generates. Having multiple Pokemon poisoned just means that those Pokemon are losing a little extra health at the end of each turn, which is hardly game breaking. Having multiple Pokemon put to sleep means that a third or more of your team is incapable of doing anything whatsoever, no exceptions.

    If i somehow manage to paralyze your most destructive and or dangerous pokes. I am essentially removing them from the equation because
    they are no longer a threat because i have pokemon that can easily out-speed them now, with moves that can easily k0 them.
    Those Pokemon still have a 75% chance of hitting you, which may cause your paralysis inducer to die before it can really do anything. Again, you aren't getting free turns like you would with sleep, and you're certainly not removing them from the equation.

  6. #1231
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zachmac View Post
    Because you have some pokemon that can outspeed and defeat them?

    I guess that means that my Terrakion is useless because my opponent has a Gliscor in their team.

    Weakening and making completely useless are different. And that's what sleep does; it leaves almost every pokemon completely helpless.
    Well..Either way that's kinda irrelevant isn't it, because, their are countless more situations were my premiss still applies.
    The sleeping clause is in effect because it renders Pokemon useless due to a status condition? Though theirs a lot of other status related conditions and or effects that can
    render some pokemon useless, conditions and situations effected by status problems that are more detrimental to a match than the "sleeping clause", which are all legal.
    Though paralysis for example is evidently less of a threat than spore/sleep powder, but when raw threats are concerned if i have a tank with even roar or whirlwind and thunder-wave, i could effectively render the majority of your pokemon useless. Which is really the same result as putting a few pokes to sleep because now i could easily and effortlessly defeat those pokes now that i can outspead them.

    One of the very rules in essence prevents a pokemon from gaining an unfair advantage over other pokes: All moves that increase Evasion only (e.g. Minimize) are banned.
    But this rule , essentially, is saying that its illegal for a stat to become maxed in-game because it creates an unfair advantage. Again, my premiss with pokemons in game stats are still quite relevant and related to the status problems and or conditions that could be inflicted onto others concerning the sleeping clause. The difference between the status conditions in which allow a poke to gain an advantage over another ( maxing a stat in game with moves, eg minimize ) are virtually minimal, because ultimately their eventual outcome is the same, which is, an "UN-fair" advantage over another pokemona and or team.

    And that's what sleep does; it leaves almost every pokemon completely helpless. Unless you want a metagame were everything is forced to carry sleep talk? But that would be like a metagame where everything carried sheer cold; it's left up to luck and almost nothing else.
    Though it would seem that pokemon still has a usefully possibility in a battle, what use does it have if all your pokemon are paralyzed and i have pokemon that are now evidently faster than your pokes. I understand that the chance is still their that their still are possible outcomes, while paralyzed, were you could win but their minimal.
    Within the meta-game though, if one of the reasons as to why the sleeping clause exists is because it in itself decrease "chance" and or the effects of chance in the game, then
    why is Jirachi and its serene grace ability legal and exploited within games? Isn't that a Hippocratic acceptation to game-play and the meta-game??


    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    No, paralysis and sleep are nowhere near the same thing. With paralysis, you still have a 75% chance of at least moving during that turn. Sleep completely shuts you down. Having a Pokemon paralyzed would still let your Pokemon fulfill its duties most of the time, and it wouldn't give you completely free turns like sleep would. There is an enormous difference between putting something to sleep and guaranteeing a free turn or more and paralyzing something in the hope that you'll get that 25% chance of a free turn.

    Though theirs a chance in this particular situation, if the outcome of a paralysis would be a pokemon slower than usual, which it is, then essentially a person could exploit this. Because when under paralysis one of the key mechanics of paralysis is to make the pokemon slower. Which allows other pokemon to be faster than it, which allows pokemon to gain an advantage over it.
    There's a difference in these 2 status conditions. Definitely, I'll acknowledge that, though theirs still very much an advantage in which is gained through the status conditions. Different they may be, they still, provide an advantage in which people with the knowledge can exploit easily and effortlessly.


    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    There are no other statuses that can produce such an unfair advantage beside freezing, which has no reliable method of infliction. Only paralysis comes even close, and it always comes with an enormous risk that your opponent will still attack.
    Which is understandable. My point was more or less as leading into the fact that when slowed down, with paralysis, a pokemon which other could not be defeated is easily defeated due to the status condition and a situation in which would and could NEVER have happened if that status condition was applied. Which i still think is the premiss of the sleepling clause.
    That exact situation is aloud. Where I'm able to gain an unfair advantage over multiple opponents due a reduction in speed, because of a status condition. A status condition that renders a pokemon essentially useless in a situation were it is now versing a pokemon whom is faster than it.



    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    No, each clause is added on a case-by-case basis. Evasion Clause was implemented because of the luck factor brought upon by modified evasion, which further destroys any competitiveness this game might have. Sleep Clause was implemented because of the raw power of the sleep status and the way that a player could effortlessly win if he/she were able to put the opponent's entire team to sleep. As many BW players have said before, the new sleep mechanics now make sleep an effective KO at times since a Pokemon will often die before they are able to wake up.
    Fair enuf and its easily understood because the new mechanics are quite interesting lol. But ya see, a jirachi with iron head and a kinds rock is legal.. And jirachi's in multiple situations and varried move-sets are exploited because of its mechanics that improve "luck" and in essence adds to the meta-game itself.


    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    But situations where multiple Pokemon are poisoned ore paralyzed are nowhere near the same. In fact, poison isn't even in the same ballpark. Even then, making an exception for certain Pokemon would not only be a subjective slippery slope; it would do next to nothing to help the viability of most of those Pokemon you mentioned. All you would do is make the good sleep abusers broken, and the bad sleep abusers would still be bad.
    You correct again it would be a subjective and slippery slope. But how was this sleeping clause implemented in the first place, wasn't it a subjective decision on some part to create it? If the sleeping clause is in effect, then similar standard rules to prevent the exploitation of similar situations and or un-fair and unjust accerance's of advantages should also be implemented. First of my head would be look at the example of jirachi again ( i'm sorry to bring it up twice buts just a perfect multiple example), JIrachi with iron head @ kings rock will incapacitate.

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    But you have to look at exactly the unfair advantage it generates. Having multiple Pokemon poisoned just means that those Pokemon are losing a little extra health at the end of each turn, which is hardly game breaking. Having multiple Pokemon put to sleep means that a third or more of your team is incapable of doing anything whatsoever, no exceptions.
    But that little bit of extra health can mean the difference between a win and loss. I'm sure theirs countless situations were stealth rocks,spikes and toxic spikes have caused the death of a pokemon purely on those entree hazards alone. Weather it be the effect of a focus slash being negated or that one hp'd, switch out sturdy pokemon being killed on its way back in or wise versus. With toxic spikes though that status condition could provide the same result. They are all moves, which create a small advantage over an opponent. Now theirs a big jump between entree hazards and sleep powder. But it would be deemed an advantage non the less.



    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    Those Pokemon still have a 75% chance of hitting you, which may cause your paralysis inducer to die before it can really do anything. Again, you aren't getting free turns like you would with sleep, and you're certainly not removing them from the equation.
    But if my objective is purely to slow down your poke so i can out speed it with a different poke or even with the very poke that used t-wave. Then, i am essentially removing it from the equation?
    An exception or modification to the sleeping clause would obviously have to have a lot of thought put into it, though in my eyes the relative situations discussed couldn't be more similar. Which is why i cant help but thinking of situations were the outcomes could essentially be the same.
    Their is a difference in the unfair advantages generated from different status conditions, stat raising conditions and situations were an advantage is generated through either. But eliminating the effectiveness of a pokemon purely based upon the moves it can learn is in my eyes unfair in it self. Which is why i strongly believe a modification to the current sleep clause needs to be made, weather it be moveset exceptions or what have you.
    Bug-Type Represent !

  7. #1232
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Old West
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    I won't even argue at this point, since I'm feeling too lazy to read your post. I'll just ask you this: Have you ever had any of your pokemon put to sleep before? No matter how much you argue, I've seen and used it in practice, and it's so overly powered I can't always describe it in words if there is no restriction.

    Even though I know the rule is fair, sometimes, in the back of my head, I just wish sleep is just plain out banned.
    Venemo Oscuridad - 6 Battles
    My Secret Base, Version 2.

  8. #1233
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zachmac View Post
    I won't even argue at this point, since I'm feeling too lazy to read your post. I'll just ask you this: Have you ever had any of your pokemon put to sleep before? No matter how much you argue, I've seen and used it in practice, and it's so overly powered I can't always describe it in words if there is no restriction.
    Fair enuf, i encourage you to come back to this discussion when you've regained you energy

    I have and i have experience both.
    Bug-Type Represent !

  9. #1234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    The sleeping clause is in effect because it renders Pokemon useless due to a status condition? Though theirs a lot of other status related conditions and or effects that can
    render some pokemon useless, conditions and situations effected by status problems that are more detrimental to a match than the "sleeping clause", which are all legal.
    And again, none of those other status conditions can render a Pokemon useless like sleep can. Sleep makes a Pokemon completely unable to do anything whatsoever. It's free turns, which can literally make or break a game. No other status does that. You keep mentioning paralysis, but again, paralysis will only incapacitate a Pokemon 25% of the time. Not only that, but many Pokemon might actually prefer paralysis. Gastrodon would love to be paralyzed by a random Stun Spore since the speed drop doesn't bother it, and that would give it immunity to poison. But no Pokemon likes the sleep status at all.

    Though paralysis for example is evidently less of a threat than spore/sleep powder, but when raw threats are concerned if i have a tank with even roar or whirlwind and thunder-wave, i could effectively render the majority of your pokemon useless. Which is really the same result as putting a few pokes to sleep because now i could easily and effortlessly defeat those pokes now that i can outspead them.
    No, you would not be rendering those Pokemon useless like sleep would. They still have a shot at attacking and doing something during that turn, while a sleeping Pokemon will not. Besides, being able to outspeed something the next turn and kill them isn't exactly a super cool accomplishment. Running Agility or Rock Polish would do the same thing.

    One of the very rules in essence prevents a pokemon from gaining an unfair advantage over other pokes: All moves that increase Evasion only (e.g. Minimize) are banned.
    But this rule , essentially, is saying that its illegal for a stat to become maxed in-game because it creates an unfair advantage. Again, my premiss with pokemons in game stats are still quite relevant and related to the status problems and or conditions that could be inflicted onto others concerning the sleeping clause. The difference between the status conditions in which allow a poke to gain an advantage over another ( maxing a stat in game with moves, eg minimize ) are virtually minimal, because ultimately their eventual outcome is the same, which is, an "UN-fair" advantage over another pokemona and or team.
    Like I said earlier, it's not just about getting an "unfair" advantage. Lots of things could be considered "unfair" advantages, like extra hazards and weather. It's about the exact advantage in particular, and there is no battle condition that can make multiple Pokemon complete dead weights like sleep can.

    Though it would seem that pokemon still has a usefully possibility in a battle, what use does it have if all your pokemon are paralyzed and i have pokemon that are now evidently faster than your pokes.
    You'd have the exact same advantage if you ran some random Rock Polish user that can outspeed everything after just one move. Besides, how often do you think you'd be able to actually paralyze everything on the opponent's team? If your opponent has a 75% chance of attacking even after being paralyzed, then chances are your paralysis inducer will be dead before they can paralyze the entire opposing team. Sleep isn't like that. If something is put to sleep, it's completely useless for at least one turn (if not more), giving you a much better chance at setting up, phazing the opponent out to put anther Pokemon to sleep, etc.

    I understand that the chance is still their that their still are possible outcomes, while paralyzed, were you could win but their minimal.
    No, the chances of winning based on getting free turns with paralysis are minimal, seeing as how you only have a 25% chance each turn of doing so. You're really underestimating the importance of those free turns and the chance you'll actually get them.

    Within the meta-game though, if one of the reasons as to why the sleeping clause exists is because it in itself decrease "chance" and or the effects of chance in the game, then
    why is Jirachi and its serene grace ability legal and exploited within games? Isn't that a Hippocratic acceptation to game-play and the meta-game??
    Sleep isn't about chance. That's the whole point. Sleep is too easy to exploit because unlike paralysis, there's little to no risk involved. If the opponent is asleep, they're asleep. And no, we shouldn't just ban Serene Grace Jirachi just because there is some luck involved. According to the Characteristics of a Desirable Pokemon Metagame, we should only ban luck when absolutely necessary (i.e. when it breaks the game). Jirachi with Serene Grace has never once broken the game, and although it has been contested several times, such a ban has never received enough support from the community to even be suspected.

    There's a difference in these 2 status conditions. Definitely, I'll acknowledge that, though theirs still very much an advantage in which is gained through the status conditions. Different they may be, they still, provide an advantage in which people with the knowledge can exploit easily and effortlessly.
    Almost every decent action that can be performed in a game can "provide and advantage". It's the particular advantage and the extent of it that matters, and no advantage matches the potency of the sleep status.

    Which is understandable. My point was more or less as leading into the fact that when slowed down, with paralysis, a pokemon which other could not be defeated is easily defeated due to the status condition and a situation in which would and could NEVER have happened if that status condition was applied. Which i still think is the premiss of the sleepling clause.
    The premise of the sleep clause is sleep itself, not just making battles easier to win. Even if you wanted to paralyze a whole team to run through it with a faster Pokemon, you'd still have to get through the entire team when they can move freely 75% of the time, which is nearly impossible. Besides, your example is no different than if I softened up an opponent's team with Specs Keldeo just so I could clean it up with SD Scizor's Bullet Punch. Should we ban Specs in that case? or priority? No, because that would require skilled playing on my part to get the opposing team weak enough to clean up with SD Scizor. That's what the mid and end games are all about. But sleep isn't something that you have to be skilled about in order to achieve a winning condition. You literally just hit a button and BAM, free turns.

    That exact situation is aloud. Where I'm able to gain an unfair advantage over multiple opponents due a reduction in speed, because of a status condition. A status condition that renders a pokemon essentially useless in a situation were it is now versing a pokemon whom is faster than it.
    Do you ever wonder why people have the term "sleep fodder" and not "paralysis fodder"? It's because sometimes people will have a certain Pokemon for handling a sleep inducer (such as Breloom), but that particular check or counter might be easily defeated if put to sleep. So people have sleep fodders that they'll switch into the sleep move, something that they don't mind losing, and it's because they know they'll probably end up losing a Pokemon to it. You see, a sleep inducer like Breloom can make a potential counter like Amoonguss completely useless while they set up. Paralysis can't do that, though. You say that paralysis makes a Pokemon useless because it makes them slower, but that's simply not true. Even Pokemon that rely on their speed to be effective can still be a threat if they can get a hit in now and then, so even they aren't complete dead weights. Then there are Pokemon that do not rely on their speed stats at all, which couldn't care less about the speed drop. In that case, you effectively just hit them with Flash, which is hardly even comparable to sleep.

    Fair enuf and its easily understood because the new mechanics are quite interesting lol. But ya see, a jirachi with iron head and a kinds rock is legal.. And jirachi's in multiple situations and varried move-sets are exploited because of its mechanics that improve "luck" and in essence adds to the meta-game itself.
    This is a similar argument that was used in the test of Sand Veil/Snow Cloak, but I'll address it again here. Jirachi with Iron Head is not the same as the free turns that sleep would offer. If you get a free turn due to sleep (like you did with a Sand Veil/Snow Cloak miss), you can do whatever you want with that free turn. You can attack the opponent, set up, heal your Pokemon, whatever, Jirachi with Iron Head cannot do that, though, because his variety of hax is active, not passive. He is forced to spam a fairly weak STAB move with poor coverage just to attempt a flinch, not to mention it completely fails against faster Pokemon.

    You correct again it would be a subjective and slippery slope. But how was this sleeping clause implemented in the first place, wasn't it a subjective decision on some part to create it? If the sleeping clause is in effect, then similar standard rules to prevent the exploitation of similar situations and or un-fair and unjust accerance's of advantages should also be implemented. First of my head would be look at the example of jirachi again ( i'm sorry to bring it up twice buts just a perfect multiple example), JIrachi with iron head @ kings rock will incapacitate.
    The creation of the Sleep Clause was not subjective in the same manner that such a change as you have proposed would be. When the Sleep Clause was created, people saw just how powerful sleep was and decided to restrict it in some way. The most logical thing is to just limit it to one Pokemon at a time for starters, and even now we've seen through experience that just one Pokemon at a time is still a powerful thing. On the other hand, you're suggesting we give an exception to certain Pokemon based upon whether they are too "good" or not. That is where the extreme subjection comes into play. How do we decide which Pokemon are "bad" enough to get an exception? You mentioned Venomoth, but there's no chance on Earth that you can give a Pokemon with decent offenses, Quiver Dance, and Tinted Lens the ability to put an entire team to sleep and it still not be broken.

    But that little bit of extra health can mean the difference between a win and loss. I'm sure theirs countless situations were stealth rocks,spikes and toxic spikes have caused the death of a pokemon purely on those entree hazards alone. Weather it be the effect of a focus slash being negated or that one hp'd, switch out sturdy pokemon being killed on its way back in or wise versus. With toxic spikes though that status condition could provide the same result. They are all moves, which create a small advantage over an opponent. Now theirs a big jump between entree hazards and sleep powder. But it would be deemed an advantage non the less.
    But by that logic, should we ban wall breakers as well? Is their main purpose not to soften up the bulkiest members of an opponent's team so that a designated sweeper can clean up late game? Doesn't that bit of damage matter as well? The difference is that those benefits are something that you have to work towards. You don't just hit a button and get free turns. That takes careful prediction and planning.

    But if my objective is purely to slow down your poke so i can out speed it with a different poke or even with the very poke that used t-wave. Then, i am essentially removing it from the equation?
    And what if that Pokemon doesn't care about the speed drop? If you used Thunder Wave on a Forretress or Ferrothorn, you might have just strengthened its Gyro Ball and done little to hurt it otherwise besides a 25% chance of paralysis. Even if you use it on an offensive Pokemon like Terrakion, that Pokemon is still usable. I might switch Terrakion into your Volcarona (assuming you're not running Giga Drain or HP Ground) and you might switch out, giving me a 75% chance of tossing out one of my powerful STAB moves and nailing a switch-in. On the other hand, if my Terrakion were asleep, that would give you a completely free turn to switch to whatever you want, plus more possible free turns after that. Even with an offensive threat, you still aren't matching the restrictive power of sleep with paralysis.

    An exception or modification to the sleeping clause would obviously have to have a lot of thought put into it, though in my eyes the relative situations discussed couldn't be more similar. Which is why i cant help but thinking of situations were the outcomes could essentially be the same.
    But what would this accomplish exactly? If you really think that Pokemon like Watchog and Butterfree are in lower tiers simply because they can't sleep more than one Pokemon at a time, then you're sadly mistaken.

    Their is a difference in the unfair advantages generated from different status conditions, stat raising conditions and situations were an advantage is generated through either. But eliminating the effectiveness of a pokemon purely based upon the moves it can learn is in my eyes unfair in it self. Which is why i strongly believe a modification to the current sleep clause needs to be made, weather it be moveset exceptions or what have you.
    You're not eliminating the effectiveness of a Pokemon by preventing it from putting everything to sleep that it wants. You're only limiting the effectiveness of that particular status. If a Pokemon can't effortlessly snatch wins by putting everything in front of it to sleep, then too bad. This is no different than saying that we're unfairly punishing Drifblim for banning Minimize under the Evasion Clause, or that we're treating Walrein badly by banning Sheer Cold under the OHKO Clause. These Pokemon in particular are not being punished, it's just that we're restricting the use of the most powerful usable status in the game.

  10. #1235
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    You're not eliminating the effectiveness of a Pokemon by preventing it from putting everything to sleep that it wants. You're only limiting the effectiveness of that particular status. If a Pokemon can't effortlessly snatch wins by putting everything in front of it to sleep, then too bad. This is no different than saying that we're unfairly punishing Drifblim for banning Minimize under the Evasion Clause, or that we're treating Walrein badly by banning Sheer Cold under the OHKO Clause. These Pokemon in particular are not being punished, it's just that we're restricting the use of the most powerful usable status in the game.

    *errrheemm* *clears throat*
    For the record you basically just said Venomoth is one of the most powerful pokemon in the game hehehe. <3
    Praise jesus

    This might seem a bit inappropriate but would like you to summarize that quotation for me perhaps using venomoth as an example? >.<
    I didnt quite understand it

    buttt errhaa-that doesn't matter right now lol


    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    And again, none of those other status conditions can render a Pokemon useless like sleep can. Sleep makes a Pokemon completely unable to do anything whatsoever. It's free turns, which can literally make or break a game. No other status does that. You keep mentioning paralysis, but again, paralysis will only incapacitate a Pokemon 25% of the time. Not only that, but many Pokemon might actually prefer paralysis. Gastrodon would love to be paralyzed by a random Stun Spore since the speed drop doesn't bother it, and that would give it immunity to poison. But no Pokemon likes the sleep status at all.
    Alright, paralysis is some-what irreverent in some cases in comparison to the effects of sleep powder. Because their are obvious exceptions to the rule and or situations as to were it cause a brain splitting

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    No, you would not be rendering those Pokemon useless like sleep would. They still have a shot at attacking and doing something during that turn, while a sleeping Pokemon will not. Besides, being able to outspeed something the next turn and kill them isn't exactly a super cool accomplishment. Running Agility or Rock Polish would do the same thing.
    yeah i got nuthing to that lol


    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    Like I said earlier, it's not just about getting an "unfair" advantage. Lots of things could be considered "unfair" advantages, like extra hazards and weather. It's about the exact advantage in particular, and there is no battle condition that can make multiple Pokemon complete dead weights like sleep can.


    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    You'd have the exact same advantage if you ran some random Rock Polish user that can outspeed everything after just one move. Besides, how often do you think you'd be able to actually paralyze everything on the opponent's team? If your opponent has a 75% chance of attacking even after being paralyzed, then chances are your paralysis inducer will be dead before they can paralyze the entire opposing team. Sleep isn't like that. If something is put to sleep, it's completely useless for at least one turn (if not more), giving you a much better chance at setting up, phazing the opponent out to put anther Pokemon to sleep, etc.



    No, the chances of winning based on getting free turns with paralysis are minimal, seeing as how you only have a 25% chance each turn of doing so. You're really underestimating the importance of those free turns and the chance you'll actually get them.



    Sleep isn't about chance. That's the whole point. Sleep is too easy to exploit because unlike paralysis, there's little to no risk involved. If the opponent is asleep, they're asleep. And no, we shouldn't just ban Serene Grace Jirachi just because there is some luck involved. According to the Characteristics of a Desirable Pokemon Metagame, we should only ban luck when absolutely necessary (i.e. when it breaks the game). Jirachi with Serene Grace has never once broken the game, and although it has been contested several times, such a ban has never received enough support from the community to even be suspected.



    Almost every decent action that can be performed in a game can "provide and advantage". It's the particular advantage and the extent of it that matters, and no advantage matches the potency of the sleep status.



    The premise of the sleep clause is sleep itself, not just making battles easier to win. Even if you wanted to paralyze a whole team to run through it with a faster Pokemon, you'd still have to get through the entire team when they can move freely 75% of the time, which is nearly impossible. Besides, your example is no different than if I softened up an opponent's team with Specs Keldeo just so I could clean it up with SD Scizor's Bullet Punch. Should we ban Specs in that case? or priority? No, because that would require skilled playing on my part to get the opposing team weak enough to clean up with SD Scizor. That's what the mid and end games are all about. But sleep isn't something that you have to be skilled about in order to achieve a winning condition. You literally just hit a button and BAM, free turns.



    Do you ever wonder why people have the term "sleep fodder" and not "paralysis fodder"? It's because sometimes people will have a certain Pokemon for handling a sleep inducer (such as Breloom), but that particular check or counter might be easily defeated if put to sleep. So people have sleep fodders that they'll switch into the sleep move, something that they don't mind losing, and it's because they know they'll probably end up losing a Pokemon to it. You see, a sleep inducer like Breloom can make a potential counter like Amoonguss completely useless while they set up. Paralysis can't do that, though. You say that paralysis makes a Pokemon useless because it makes them slower, but that's simply not true. Even Pokemon that rely on their speed to be effective can still be a threat if they can get a hit in now and then, so even they aren't complete dead weights. Then there are Pokemon that do not rely on their speed stats at all, which couldn't care less about the speed drop. In that case, you effectively just hit them with Flash, which is hardly even comparable to sleep.



    This is a similar argument that was used in the test of Sand Veil/Snow Cloak, but I'll address it again here. Jirachi with Iron Head is not the same as the free turns that sleep would offer. If you get a free turn due to sleep (like you did with a Sand Veil/Snow Cloak miss), you can do whatever you want with that free turn. You can attack the opponent, set up, heal your Pokemon, whatever, Jirachi with Iron Head cannot do that, though, because his variety of hax is active, not passive. He is forced to spam a fairly weak STAB move with poor coverage just to attempt a flinch, not to mention it completely fails against faster Pokemon.



    The creation of the Sleep Clause was not subjective in the same manner that such a change as you have proposed would be. When the Sleep Clause was created, people saw just how powerful sleep was and decided to restrict it in some way. The most logical thing is to just limit it to one Pokemon at a time for starters, and even now we've seen through experience that just one Pokemon at a time is still a powerful thing. On the other hand, you're suggesting we give an exception to certain Pokemon based upon whether they are too "good" or not. That is where the extreme subjection comes into play. How do we decide which Pokemon are "bad" enough to get an exception? You mentioned Venomoth, but there's no chance on Earth that you can give a Pokemon with decent offenses, Quiver Dance, and Tinted Lens the ability to put an entire team to sleep and it still not be broken.



    But by that logic, should we ban wall breakers as well? Is their main purpose not to soften up the bulkiest members of an opponent's team so that a designated sweeper can clean up late game? Doesn't that bit of damage matter as well? The difference is that those benefits are something that you have to work towards. You don't just hit a button and get free turns. That takes careful prediction and planning.



    And what if that Pokemon doesn't care about the speed drop? If you used Thunder Wave on a Forretress or Ferrothorn, you might have just strengthened its Gyro Ball and done little to hurt it otherwise besides a 25% chance of paralysis. Even if you use it on an offensive Pokemon like Terrakion, that Pokemon is still usable. I might switch Terrakion into your Volcarona (assuming you're not running Giga Drain or HP Ground) and you might switch out, giving me a 75% chance of tossing out one of my powerful STAB moves and nailing a switch-in. On the other hand, if my Terrakion were asleep, that would give you a completely free turn to switch to whatever you want, plus more possible free turns after that. Even with an offensive threat, you still aren't matching the restrictive power of sleep with paralysis.



    But what would this accomplish exactly? If you really think that Pokemon like Watchog and Butterfree are in lower tiers simply because they can't sleep more than one Pokemon at a time, then you're sadly mistaken.
    Alright, *sigh*
    Unfortunately I'm smart enough to know when I've been defeated... hahaahaa

    Though I'm quite pleased with this discussion bro , cause I'm at least now aware of reasons of my poor little venomoth being unable to sweep in its own right, on an in depth level and i thank you for that (knowledge is power). I hope your now aware of a bug trainer point of view now though lol

    I can understand the reasoning behind why such a situation is deemed illegal. I still somewhat disagree with it, though, its understandable non the less.
    Bug-Type Represent !

  11. #1236
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,080

    Default

    I overheard Multiscale Lugia is outstanding (sadly, mine has a Brave nature) however Smogon is disallowing the combination of Multiscale and Roost on it. Thoughts?
        Spoiler:- 3DS friend-code:

  12. #1237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ParaChomp View Post
    I overheard Multiscale Lugia is outstanding (sadly, mine has a Brave nature) however Smogon is disallowing the combination of Multiscale and Roost on it. Thoughts?
    The analysis says that the combination is illegal simply because it's an old analysis. At the time that was written, there were no tutors yet, so Roost would have only been legal in-game with Multiscale if Lugia somehow got it as a DW move. Now that Roost is a tutor move, it's fully compatible with Multiscale. In fact, there is currently an analysis revamp for Lugia in progress in which Roost + Mulitscale is given as a possibility.

  13. #1238
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Los Santos, San Andreas
    Posts
    737

    Default

    Happy New Year folks, and congrats to the winners of the sppf competitive poll thingy.

    Tier changes time!

    I'm first gonna start off by reporting news that i've not reported yet: Hail is unbanned in every tier under OU. This in spite of forgetting that they originally banned it for blizzspam in the first place.

    DOWN TO UU
    chansey
    abomasnow
    ~None of these are surprises to me, they've been right on the 3% border for the majority of the BW2 meta.

    UP TO RU
    amoongus
    snover
    emboar
    absol
    cinccino
    ~Hello NU team shift.

    DOWN TO NU
    Stoutland
    Roselia
    ~And so continues stoutland's fall from grace. Remember when it and sawsbuck were both UU? Me neither. (J/k, Idk if anyone would remember that sawsbuck was UU until a year ago or so.)

    Mk, and since the NU <-> PU list is chaotic, I'm not gonna post it

  14. #1239

    Default

    Yeah, Amoonguss and Emboar moving up was really dumb. They only got there because of another Pokemon spamming prank, seeing as how their most used items are DeepSeaScale and Sticky Barb, respectively. Not that I'm complaining that Amoonguss is gone, but it honestly shouldn't be.

    As for the others, they were expected. I am a bit sad to see Hail gone from NU since it gave me one more team archetype to run through with Combusken, but we did get a new Spikes/Toxic Spikes user in Roselia.

    Now we just need to wait for the Tornadus-T and Keldeo tests and see where they land!

  15. #1240
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Serebii
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    Yeah, Amoonguss and Emboar moving up was really dumb. They only got there because of another Pokemon spamming prank, seeing as how their most used items are DeepSeaScale and Sticky Barb, respectively. Not that I'm complaining that Amoonguss is gone, but it honestly shouldn't be.

    As for the others, they were expected. I am a bit sad to see Hail gone from NU since it gave me one more team archetype to run through with Combusken, but we did get a new Spikes/Toxic Spikes user in Roselia.

    Now we just need to wait for the Tornadus-T and Keldeo tests and see where they land!
    I'm curious about that, actually. If Tornadus-T is banned, do you think a mixed rain dnite with Hurricane/Thunder/Extremespeed/Outrage would rise in usage? I run that set now because I had felt like it, and I personally like it and wonder why I don't see it more often. Probably because I can't ladder to high (like 1400-1500 on PS!), but still. I would expect to see it more as a Tornadus-T alternative. As for Keldeo, I don't think it's as hard to deal with as Tornadus-T simply because it doesn't have as good range. Or I feel like it doesn't have as much of a range so I don't feel as helpless against it. I don't know, but I wouldn't mind Keldeo staying in OU.


  16. #1241
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Up someone's a**crack
    Posts
    334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dewhinifier View Post
    Happy New Year folks, and congrats to the winners of the sppf competitive poll thingy.

    Tier changes time!

    I'm first gonna start off by reporting news that i've not reported yet: Hail is unbanned in every tier under OU. This in spite of forgetting that they originally banned it for blizzspam in the first place.

    DOWN TO UU
    chansey
    abomasnow
    ~None of these are surprises to me, they've been right on the 3% border for the majority of the BW2 meta.

    UP TO RU
    amoongus
    snover
    emboar
    absol
    cinccino
    ~Hello NU team shift.

    DOWN TO NU
    Stoutland
    Roselia
    ~And so continues stoutland's fall from grace. Remember when it and sawsbuck were both UU? Me neither. (J/k, Idk if anyone would remember that sawsbuck was UU until a year ago or so.)

    Mk, and since the NU <-> PU list is chaotic, I'm not gonna post it
    So far I've played the UU metagame with Chansey, and stall magically becomes much more viable now. Right now, Gligar + Chansey is probably by far the bulkiest defensive core out there atm. It walls a good 90% of the metagame and provides good heal synergy. The only problem is the existence of the tiers mixed fighters and Scrafty. DD Scrafty can easily 2HKO Gligar with Ice Punch and Chansey would be dumb as hell to switch in. Mixed Mienshao and Virizion can easily screw the core over. Plus, with Hail unbanned, residual damage is going to be extremely hard to deal with.

    I don't know if Abomasnow is gonna catch on though. With Snow Cloak banned, the only reason to use hail is gone. BlizzSpam isn't as easy as it used to be and Ice Body stall is just silly.

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    Yeah, Amoonguss and Emboar moving up was really dumb. They only got there because of another Pokemon spamming prank, seeing as how their most used items are DeepSeaScale and Sticky Barb, respectively. Not that I'm complaining that Amoonguss is gone, but it honestly shouldn't be.

    As for the others, they were expected. I am a bit sad to see Hail gone from NU since it gave me one more team archetype to run through with Combusken, but we did get a new Spikes/Toxic Spikes user in Roselia.

    Now we just need to wait for the Tornadus-T and Keldeo tests and see where they land!
    Yeah that kind of ticked me off Amoonguss and Emboar are gone. On the up side, though, we can observe a completely new metagame unfold in NU. Tangela is definitely going to see a huge spike in usage to fill in Mushroom's niche down there.

    I really think that instead of putting Torn and Kel on Suspect, they should suspect Excadrill to OU. As of right now, the metagame is extremely unbalanced in Rain's favor, and Sand right now has legitimately nothing on the table offensively. By dropping Excadrill, we would actually see a more balanced metagame, where rain setting isn't going to be all that easy.
    Join the Tutor Program. Started by JRCxyz & Salavoir

    [In Clan Memoriam]
    RIP Battling Academy, even though I just joined.
    Memories are eternal.

    RIP Toothpaste Clan. You kept my teeth clean.
    Dental hygiene is eternal.

    RIP Survival Island. Global warming drowned us all.
    Survival isn't eternal

  17. #1242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mysterious Stranger View Post
    I'm curious about that, actually. If Tornadus-T is banned, do you think a mixed rain dnite with Hurricane/Thunder/Extremespeed/Outrage would rise in usage? I run that set now because I had felt like it, and I personally like it and wonder why I don't see it more often. Probably because I can't ladder to high (like 1400-1500 on PS!), but still. I would expect to see it more as a Tornadus-T alternative. As for Keldeo, I don't think it's as hard to deal with as Tornadus-T simply because it doesn't have as good range. Or I feel like it doesn't have as much of a range so I don't feel as helpless against it. I don't know, but I wouldn't mind Keldeo staying in OU.
    I think Dragonite is certainly a possible replacement. No doubt its Rain abuser set does receive some competition from Tornadus-T. However, I expect Tornadus's Incarnate form to be the more likely candidate to fill its shoes. While it lacks the extra speed, bulk, and access to Regenerator that makes Tornadus-T so dangerous, Tornadus-I does still have a slightly more powerful Hurricane and I'm sure will fill the role decently enough. I wouldn't be surprised if we have a repeat of the Thundurus-I ban back in 2010. Tornadus-I had just dropped to UU due partially to the competition on Rain teams from the Electric genie, and it rose back into OU once Thundurus-I was banned. I see a similar possibility if Tornadus-T were to be banned as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eaglehawk View Post
    Yeah that kind of ticked me off Amoonguss and Emboar are gone. On the up side, though, we can observe a completely new metagame unfold in NU. Tangela is definitely going to see a huge spike in usage to fill in Mushroom's niche down there.

    I really think that instead of putting Torn and Kel on Suspect, they should suspect Excadrill to OU. As of right now, the metagame is extremely unbalanced in Rain's favor, and Sand right now has legitimately nothing on the table offensively. By dropping Excadrill, we would actually see a more balanced metagame, where rain setting isn't going to be all that easy.
    I've entertained the thought of testing Excadrill and even Blaziken myself, but I fear that while you would be giving Rain some stiffer competition, you would only be making the other weather types even more powerful. Non-weather still remains the most popular playstyle in regards to weather, and it would be even more difficult to have to deal with Pokemon like Excadrill on top of already having to handle Keldeo and Tornadus-T, among other things.

  18. #1243
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Serebii
    Posts
    374

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jesusfreak94 View Post
    I think Dragonite is certainly a possible replacement. No doubt its Rain abuser set does receive some competition from Tornadus-T. However, I expect Tornadus's Incarnate form to be the more likely candidate to fill its shoes. While it lacks the extra speed, bulk, and access to Regenerator that makes Tornadus-T so dangerous, Tornadus-I does still have a slightly more powerful Hurricane and I'm sure will fill the role decently enough. I wouldn't be surprised if we have a repeat of the Thundurus-I ban back in 2010. Tornadus-I had just dropped to UU due partially to the competition on Rain teams from the Electric genie, and it rose back into OU once Thundurus-I was banned. I see a similar possibility if Tornadus-T were to be banned as well.
    Probably true, which means I can keep using Dragonite. Yay!


  19. #1244
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Los Santos, San Andreas
    Posts
    737

    Default

    Chansey banned from UU. Sponged hits way too well for the tier to handle.

  20. #1245
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Deep Ocean
    Posts
    2,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dewhinifier View Post
    Chansey banned from UU. Sponged hits way too well for the tier to handle.
    Lemme guess, BL now?

    Credits to Sworn Metalhead

    ASB Squad

  21. #1246
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Los Santos, San Andreas
    Posts
    737

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OceanicLanturn View Post
    Lemme guess, BL now?
    yes

    Also, tornadus t is expected to be banned from smogon OU, keld expected to stay OU. Expect torny i to rise back to OU and then continue where it left off in bw1.

  22. #1247
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Tornadus-T is banned from Smogon OU and will be going to Ubers with majority. Keldeo will stay in OU with majority. Changes being modified at the moment, but the announcement is the same.

  23. #1248
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,805

    Default

    Smogon just shot themselves in the foot.

    I don't know how much the rest of you know about competitive Pokémon culture (I'm an expert!), but honour and shame are huge parts of it. It's not like in Yu-Gi-Oh, where you can become successful by banning things like Exodia, The Forbidden One. If you ban broken threats in Pokémon, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.

    What this means is the competitive Pokémon community, after hearing about this, is not going to want to use Smogon tiers on their sites, nor will they continue to use their Smogon account. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Smogon has alienated an entire competitive Pokémon market with this move.

    Smogon should publicly apologise and unban Tornadus-Therian or they can kiss their standing in the prestigious, honourable Pokémon community goodbye!

        Spoiler:- ....:

  24. #1249
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Old West
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragnarok View Post
    Smogon just shot themselves in the foot.

    I don't know how much the rest of you know about competitive Pokémon culture (I'm an expert!), but honour and shame are huge parts of it. It's not like in Yu-Gi-Oh, where you can become successful by banning things like Exodia, The Forbidden One. If you ban broken threats in Pokémon, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.

    What this means is the competitive Pokémon community, after hearing about this, is not going to want to use Smogon tiers on their sites, nor will they continue to use their Smogon account. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Smogon has alienated an entire competitive Pokémon market with this move.

    Smogon should publicly apologise and unban Tornadus-Therian or they can kiss their standing in the prestigious, honourable Pokémon community goodbye!

        Spoiler:- ....:
    I was desperately hoping you weren't being serious. Thank Arceus for that...

    Rain always did have the advantage over sand and sun. Sun will always be at a disadvantage against the others, unfortunately, but at least rain finally got that nerf everyone was hoping for. Even it is a small one...
    Venemo Oscuridad - 6 Battles
    My Secret Base, Version 2.

  25. #1250

    Default

    I've got a rules question. On the Gothitelle page on Smogon it says "the only legal Shadow Tag Gothitelle are male".

    Why is this? I've searched everywhere. I can't find anything preventing you from having a female Gothitelle with Shadow Tag, and I can't find any rulings making female ones with it illegal.
    Black: Keegan - 4127 4040 9358

Page 50 of 52 FirstFirst ... 4046474849505152 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •