Munya
-
Posts
13159 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
22
Posts posted by Munya
-
-
Keep in mind if this topic is going to happen, devs are always going to prefer path of least effected, so for instance nerfing Sharpness at this point in time directly nerfs Gallade without effecting any other pokemon currently. Changing the PP of recovery moves is something that effects many pokemon, it would be a last resort if ever considered.
-
If the development team seeks player opinions on it then a thread will be made for it, until that time this isn't the place for it. There is nothing wrong with players suggesting solutions, but in the right time and right place, which this is not.
-
It doesn't matter, those things happen after it is has been decided and voted upon to be banned, that is not the case here. This is for deciding if it needs to be banned.
-
Wait until we swerve you and release gen 1 and 2
- Edwardinho, Imrose, Enzo and 1 other
-
4
-
This topic isn't about a potential nerf it is about gallade and why is it banworthy or not - please keep on topic.
- AwaXGoku, PoseidonWrath and DoubleJ
-
3
-
-
Hasn't been overlooked.
-
Where were you at when it overleveled, how did it gain the experience that made it overlevel?
-
-
That will almost coincide with the end of the season, I will try my best to make that the point at when we have a decision yes. At the very least of if it or its ability will be banned or not until we figure out what to do with it.
- ArtOfKilling, gbwead, RysPicz and 1 other
-
4
-
On 5/19/2023 at 1:53 PM, ArtOfKilling said:
I understand that there might be disagreements within, which lead to this delay, but the longer we wait, the more the work is going to stack up. I offered possible and easy-to-handle solutions in my previous replies in order to move on with this matter and focus on what's next. I'm waiting for a reply. Thanks @Munya
The overseeing staff(not just myself) would like to see it for 2 months before potentially gutting the pokemon, that said we also recognize the high possibility that the pokemon is broken and are in discussion with the TC on how to resolve that issue. Nerfing the ability, nerfing the movepool, new pokemon that could be added, have all been brought up. Nothing has been been decided yet but from a development standpoint the ideal is that removing something entirely from a pokemon should be the last resort.
- Makarovs, ArtOfKilling and Johnwaynee
-
3
-
14 hours ago, Imperial said:
I said that and someone deleted my response in literally 30 seconds even though it contributed to the discussion. I was just talking slang like the dude was, why did it get removed?
I said to keep the thread civil, that goes for everyone. Posts that can't will be removed and users issued warnings. We've been pretty lenient thus far but its not going to be anymore. If you or anyone else cannot do that I would suggest not responding to that guy, same for him towards everybody else.
14 hours ago, Ajbramberg said:Did i double post somewhere? Also still not relevant because lucario is still a sp atker and its not a serious comp mon . And i know you didnt just try to justify a bad nature by addimg two numbers together to make 70% of 5% do it thats 0.035% and adamant isnt even half that number if you are going to sit here and throw out less than a percent of a percent numbers as a way to back something up idk what to even say.
They were removed. Also you cannot present an argument and then say its irrelevant when someone rebukes that argument, it doesn't really work that way.
- PoseidonWrath, Scootter, Cristi and 3 others
-
6
-
Please use the edit button instead of double posting. Also if you click on usage in game and go to the pokemon in question you can see its most used nature and usually based off that see somewhat how it is used. Lucarios most used natures right now are Adamant and jolly making up roughly 70% of its usage, I think its mostly being used as a physical attacker right now even if it has the potential to be used either way.
-
15 hours ago, caioxlive13 said:
Correction: It get quickbanned to OU and that's my heavily disagreement on the Gallade's movement. He shouldn't be banned and treated differently than other mons when they got new abilities. All of them got Moved. What are difference you may ask. I answer: When the mon are Banned, even if at the end of month if he are below cut-off, to it had a properly suspect test, TC needs to vote and approval it's drop and it can took a while.(Electrode's Ban, even if he had usage to fall it kept stuck on NUBL for a while, and Alakazam that end more than a year on BL waiting a suspect). However, when he got only Moved, If at the end of month the mon has usage to end dropping, unless TC quickban it in one week they cannot stop the test(Example: Nidoking and Salamence. Both got moved to OU, later get below 4,36% usage and get a properly suspect on tier. Staraptor gets moved and he would drop. It only didn't dropped due to ban approval on 1st day of month.) And like some people point, not me(Here is the message:
so don't trashtalk), some mons of UU can check Gallade. And it mentioned a few examples.
It was "temporarily" quickbanned at best, no official poll/vote was taken but one can be had if we ever get to that position.
As a reminder, keep personal attacks out of posts, all posts that contain any in the future will be hidden and warnings issued even if its only a small part of the post. If you cannot be civil with your arguments don't make them at all. This goes for everybody.
-
-
Its been a topic of discussion since you brought up reforming the system, then it was asked a week or two ago my a member of the TC to move along with this particular reform of how it works, I asked if there were any objections, a few days passed some outright said no and to go ahead with it the others held there peace.
-
The update obviously kind of came out of nowhere so forgot to do this. Upon request by the Tier Council we will be trying a season where we do not have usage based movements during the first 2 months of a season and the last month will currently have the old cutoff of 4.36% but we are open for discussion on changing the cutoffs for that. You are free to discuss things still during the first 2 months and things can still be banned/moved manually during them.
Again this is on a trial basis right now and may or may not be permanent.
- DoubleJ, epicdavenport and Edwardinho
-
2
-
1
-
For quickbans there's not really a deadline, end of the month voting is typically over at the time of tier changes though. Quick bans have surprisingly little procedure considering how seriously they are treated in the thread only to be used sparingly. After this vote ends there will be some changes coming for the procedure for them.
-
-
19 minutes ago, gbwead said:
Warned of what? It's a quick ban vote. If someone is not ready to vote, they vote "NO" to the quick ban. What's the issue? That's not preventing Nidoqueen from getting banned at the end of the month. Why are you warning against anything? A tc member asks for quick ban vote. TC members vote. You enforce that decision. It's extremely simple.
You keep saying I am against anything, I am not, I am not against banning something in the middle of the month, I'd PREFER not to during the third month, but not against that either. You did propose something useful here though and that is the idea of going from a quick ban into standard procedure. The policy doesn't really cover that, normally it would just end the thread but we can try it out.
-
They have expressed their opinions, at least one person said they needed more time to make their decision - I'm not waiting for anybody, I just warned against the possibility of where the vote will go if that person isn't given adequate time to make an informed decision. If they want to vote now it can be started, I am stopping nobody from requesting it.
-
-
3-1 is not how many tc members we have
-
Gallade Nerf Suggestions
in Competition Archive
Posted
One is a change to fall in line with the official pokemon games, the other is a potentially completely custom nerf, big difference.
Just to be clear, I am not saying the pp nerf could never be reverted, I may say its unlikely but I wouldn't say no. I would say its less likely in this particular case than it normally would be, you would need to seek that reversion elsewhere if you want to make a serious push for it.