April 2024 Movement Discussion Thread

[bobliu]

Offensive trends back to UU and NU again.

[ChronoRike]

Can we just give a chance to Swampert even if his % is just a 0,2% bigger Than the drop rate? It can be an interesting Mon also it’s legit in the 3,75 atm and it’s a Mon that’s his usage in UU is getting low every week since it has the 3,75 and a bad win rate

Edited March 28 by ChronoRike

[ChronoRike]

23 hours ago, VadimEmpoleon said:

I suggest testing Rhyperior in NU.

U gonna get the same result than 4 years ago a dissaster

[Godhelll]

Nothing is planned to be done in UU about PZ or Entei ? Also, Empo leaving the tier gonna make many pokemons harder to deal with, like CM Sigi, Ninjask, PZ, etc etc

[CaptnBaklava]

Can we just agree that usage based tiering does not suit our unpopulated lower tiers?

 

[DoubleJ]

3 hours ago, CaptnBaklava said:

Can we just agree that usage based tiering does not suit our unpopulated lower tiers?

 

What do you fear? This is a high usage month and these moves look very stable and balanced (and nothing significantly different than what we've seen before).

[CaptnBaklava]

5 hours ago, DoubleJ said:

What do you fear? This is a high usage month and these moves look very stable and balanced (and nothing significantly different than what we've seen before).

If we take Eelektros as an example which is a important part of the NU meta but has a 40% winrate in UU, it sits at around 3.44% usage with 839 games right now. All it takes to make it move up and drastically change the NU landscape is me and a friend with a week of time. Does that sound good and competitive? And it's not like this didn't happen before, I did it with Blaziken once just to see a month of NU with out it (can look for the month, was a couple of months before it moved up naturally) which drastically shifted the meta. 

A single player shouldn't be allowed to have such impact and that's the problem about the usage based tiering in lower tiers. 

[Sargeste]

4 hours ago, CaptnBaklava said:

If we take Eelektros as an example which is a important part of the NU meta but has a 40% winrate in UU, it sits at around 3.44% usage with 839 games right now. All it takes to make it move up and drastically change the NU landscape is me and a friend with a week of time. Does that sound good and competitive? And it's not like this didn't happen before, I did it with Blaziken once just to see a month of NU with out it (can look for the month, was a couple of months before it moved up naturally) which drastically shifted the meta. 

A single player shouldn't be allowed to have such impact and that's the problem about the usage based tiering in lower tiers. 

If the Randoms ladder was killed off like it should be, this would be much harder to do since some of those who played RD would naturally move to a different tier and bolster the playerbase.

[caioxlive13]

5 hours ago, CaptnBaklava said:

If we take Eelektros as an example which is a important part of the NU meta but has a 40% winrate in UU, it sits at around 3.44% usage with 839 games right now. All it takes to make it move up and drastically change the NU landscape is me and a friend with a week of time. Does that sound good and competitive? And it's not like this didn't happen before, I did it with Blaziken once just to see a month of NU with out it (can look for the month, was a couple of months before it moved up naturally) which drastically shifted the meta. 

A single player shouldn't be allowed to have such impact and that's the problem about the usage based tiering in lower tiers. 

And this is not something exclusive from MMO metas. On Smogon's Gen 7 PU or ZU, i don't recall right now, Mesprit was a top mon. But all that taked to mesprit rise, was a player with plenty of time, to not say other things, spam it from day 1 to 31 on the highest tier. And the meta shifted a lot, Skuntank on that meta became irrelevant overnight. The problem is the same can be done there, just need like you said, 2 players with a full week avaliable, someone alone with a full month free, or you can call like 10 teammates to assist and move a lot of key mons up simultaneously.

[caioxlive13]

Shall we look on OU since there is no major threat right now to solve, and look onto Wish chansey? The strat is broken, I won't write an essay listing why ,because KeldeoCrowned already did that. Letting the quote below for the interessed in read:

On 7/28/2023 at 10:35 PM, KeldeoCrowned said:

Wish Teleport is broken, here is why
 

 

Hello, it's me again, and after some testing and playing the game, I've come across another issue:
Wish+Teleport Chansey.
 

Analysis:

Moveset:

Chansey @ Eviolite  
Ability: Natural Cure  
Level: 50  
EVs: 252 HP / 252 Def / 4 SpD  
Bold Nature  
IVs: 0 Atk  
- Wish  
- (Protect/Soft-Boiled)  
- Teleport  
- (Toxic/Seismic Toss)
 

Eviolite Chansey's bulk (357/93/189) is enough to stomach almost the entire metagame. Chansey's defensive utility
isn't new, Chansey's role as a Specially Defensive wall has been the same since RBY (Gen 1); however in Sword and Shield (Gen 8), 
Chansey got a buff: Teleport. With this move, chansey is able to generate momentum, and consequently becoming able to fit into
other archetypes outside of Stall and Fat Balance. However, it's impossible to get Teleport and Wish in the same set in 
Sword and Shield, but it's not impossible in PokeMMO. This factor majorly impacts the metagame.
 

Wish from max HP Chansey (lvl 50) heals 178 points of health, in other words, chansey can heal 100% of base 75 mons with
max hp spread, common defensive mons such as Weezing, Rotom, Ferrothorn and Skarmory get their HP completely restored after a wish (this wouldn't be a big problem, because it isn't a new thing, and also, chansey learns wish since ADV (Gen 3) and you can break
wish pass through pressurizing her hurt allies. Now with teleport, wish becomes even stronger, and it becomes useful in balance teams, in another words, Wish+TP is basically a 2-turn Lunar Dance, where you don't need to sacrifice the user.

The main way to deal with wish (Threat the pokémon that your opponent want to heal) Isn't efficient, so, to deal with it, you need to threat the wish user, however
there aren't so many things that represent a menace for Chansey, this role is limited to some strong wallbreakers or physical fighting types, but even this isn't an
efficient way to deal with it for some reasons, 1- Some of these wallbreakers dislikes being statused, so is a risky play switch into them,
2- Chansey's most popular teammates synergizes with her and cover her threats, Weezing hard walls conkeldurr, mienshao and breloom, Rotom-Wash deals with Scizor, Metagross, Infernape and Darmanitan , and this defensive core don't get easily weakened because of wish support, this is pretty strong in long games , and if you don't threat chansey with something, she can just teleport ensuring free momentum and health restore to your opponent.

 

Clarifying this post. My point isn't that Chansey is broken, is about how stupid is Wish+Teleport combo in a insane bulky pokémon such as chansey/blissey is, and it isn't an exclusive thing, in the future, when alomomola gets regenerator, PokeMMO will face an even bigger problem with Wish+Baton Pass

 

Answering possible counter-arguments
 

A- Just run taunt: This might work one time if you surprise your opp, but isn't a solid counterplay, 1- because there aren't so many taunt users in OU, and they aren't exactly a threat 2- The Wish User can just directly switch without Teleport to a check and provide him health and momentum 3- Taunt creates a 50/50, if wish user switch into the pokémon that he wants to wish, the main objective is concluded and the taunt was almost useless
 

B- Just don't give them momentum to Wish: This is almost impossible, unless if you're running 6 choice bands or 6 taunt users, Chansey's bulk is enough to stomach almost the entire metagame, even some strong physical attackers such as CB Weavile Excadrill or Garchomp can't break her with ease
 

C- When chansey use wish, she can't heal herself, so you can try to weaken her with the time: Chansey can choose if want to heal the teammates or herself with Protect/Soft-Boiled

 

So, this is my analysis, let here a comment if you disagree with some point

Thank you for reading

Writen by @KeldeoCrowned
Special thanks to @zLitium 

 

The major problem is that broken strategy combined with the timer rule. Theorically you could beat this strat on long-term. Your team just has to have enough longevity... But this doesn't apply in pratice because of one fundamental reason: You still has to play slowly to convert the advantage. And this kill the most efficient counterplay. Why? Because if you play slowly, timer runs out and the opponent has the advantage on tiebreak criteria. He won by that.

And that using the current resources we have. There is others not released yet that can make Ladder basically unplayable. Slowbro is one of the biggest examples, due to it's regenerator ability.

Spoiler

Now you may think: "Slowbro is better on BO than stalls, what you're talking about" Well, people who say that are right. But Slowbro in BOs are extremelly OP and i doubt it would last 2 months before the ban hammer hits it. According to the policy it has to be nerfed, and since TP and Regen are both "legit options" on stall teams, Future sight would be choosen to be banned(TC stated previously, on the 1,4x Sharpness buff: "The goal of the nerfs are to nerf the species as little as possible" so they obviously will pick the one that harms less the slowbro's viability) . That would kill Slowbro's niche on BOs but stalls could still abuse it.  

So we had to review that. My idea is transform the Tiebreaking into a clasule. That clasule would be disabled for Ladder, and enabled for tours. When it's not enabled, if the match reaches the limit, it's a forced tie. Like on smogon, that if reach the 1000 turn cap, the game is tied. Also, add the option, not in tours but in ladder, where an player can once per match, after 15 minutes of battle, propose a tie. Why put on clasules and not code it? Because it's easier to players to know what is going on, and allow the tours that does not want to apply the tiebreak criteria or apply their own criteria , to have that option.

Why tie? Why not ban wish tp or something like that? - It's not needed. If the matches end in tie, stall players will realize it's not worthy to stall for that long and abandon the strat, as the opponent can take advantage of the passivity of the team to hold the game if needed and not lose("If you're in a losing position, don't try to win, try to not lose!"). This also means that for tours or when you're playing without timer, let's say on a PSL, players can still use it if they want. Also, it won't harm PvE without reason. We doesn't need a complex solution like banning a move and facing the consequences of it on legit strats, or changing move mechanics that will let players, especially newer ones, confused as f***. Just this simple one solves the problem.  

Edited March 30 by caioxlive13

[ChronoRike]

On 3/28/2024 at 6:24 PM, ChronoRike said:

Can we just give a chance to Swampert even if his % is just a 0,2% bigger Than the drop rate? It can be an interesting Mon also it’s legit in the 3,75 atm and it’s a Mon that’s his usage in UU is getting low every week since it has the 3,75 and a bad win rate

@Munyaswampert getting 3.71... u want to make it...

[EEdays]

Swampert getting 3.71 under 3.75 and still in March, would it getting test in NU next month?

[Imperial]

Once Munya posts this thread, the usage changes are locked, unless I misunderstood anything

[Axelgor]

Tier changes are final

[YourAngst]

Might be better to make usage base tiering based on tournament usage only insteed of both tournament and ladder usage , i feel this way a lot of yoyoing can be stop as well as other players tring to artificially rise something and if something where to rise it would atleast rise for a good reason this way , also if possible usage to be taken from only tours and not community combats as well since the stakes are not as high in those

[caioxlive13]

2 hours ago, YourAngst said:

Might be better to make usage base tiering based on tournament usage only insteed of both tournament and ladder usage , i feel this way a lot of yoyoing can be stop as well as other players tring to artificially rise something and if something where to rise it would atleast rise for a good reason this way , also if possible usage to be taken from only tours and not community combats as well since the stakes are not as high in those

This has been suggested for a long time... To prevent 0 knowledge players for contribute, the usage could be counted on R3 onwards. For 128 players tours this would mean 31 matches on a tour, for 64 man tours that would be 15 matches, 32 players would be 7 matches. The overall problem is getting this usage, i'm pretty sure Munya is not willing on going on every tour and look match by match to look for usage, for all the tours that happens in a single month. Munya can do that suggestion, but only with the Devs' help to get the usage automated. Otherwise, not a chance. However, there is hope: After raids being on the Game devs will have a brief time. Kalos won't be added anytime soon and there is no major feature to implement, so devs can focus on QoL features like this one.

Edited March 30 by caioxlive13

[Ziiiiio]

7小时前，YourAngst 说：

Might be better to make usage base tiering based on tournament usage only insteed of both tournament and ladder usage , i feel this way a lot of yoyoing can be stop as well as other players tring to artificially rise something and if something where to rise it would atleast rise for a good reason this way , also if possible usage to be taken from only tours and not community combats as well since the stakes are not as high in those

Rank winrate/usage is fine, I dont see any problem cause by that when they doing the tier movement. And I do not think tour usage/winrate make these things better. because still billions of copycat there. 

 

And you mentioned artificially rise, would you like to show a example of any pokemon artificially rised? I think usage rise up shows a pokemon fit this metagame, Such as bronzong rise to OU when CB mamos became so popular, and now people starting change back to sash because OU meta became more offensive, then Brongzong drop back to UU like what we see right now. Even it is Yoyoing or something but we can see the reason.

[JurassicMick]

19 hours ago, caioxlive13 said:

Shall we look on OU since there is no major threat right now to solve, and look onto Wish chansey? The strat is broken, I won't write an essay listing why ,because KeldeoCrowned already did that. Letting the quote below for the interessed in read:

The major problem is that broken strategy combined with the timer rule. Theorically you could beat this strat on long-term. Your team just has to have enough longevity... But this doesn't apply in pratice because of one fundamental reason: You still has to play slowly to convert the advantage. And this kill the most efficient counterplay. Why? Because if you play slowly, timer runs out and the opponent has the advantage on tiebreak criteria. He won by that.

And that using the current resources we have. There is others not released yet that can make Ladder basically unplayable. Slowbro is one of the biggest examples, due to it's regenerator ability.

  Reveal hidden contents

Now you may think: "Slowbro is better on BO than stalls, what you're talking about" Well, people who say that are right. But Slowbro in BOs are extremelly OP and i doubt it would last 2 months before the ban hammer hits it. According to the policy it has to be nerfed, and since TP and Regen are both "legit options" on stall teams, Future sight would be choosen to be banned(TC stated previously, on the 1,4x Sharpness buff: "The goal of the nerfs are to nerf the species as little as possible" so they obviously will pick the one that harms less the slowbro's viability) . That would kill Slowbro's niche on BOs but stalls could still abuse it.  

So we had to review that. My idea is transform the Tiebreaking into a clasule. That clasule would be disabled for Ladder, and enabled for tours. When it's not enabled, if the match reaches the limit, it's a forced tie. Like on smogon, that if reach the 1000 turn cap, the game is tied. Also, add the option, not in tours but in ladder, where an player can once per match, after 15 minutes of battle, propose a tie. Why put on clasules and not code it? Because it's easier to players to know what is going on, and allow the tours that does not want to apply the tiebreak criteria or apply their own criteria , to have that option.

Why tie? Why not ban wish tp or something like that? - It's not needed. If the matches end in tie, stall players will realize it's not worthy to stall for that long and abandon the strat, as the opponent can take advantage of the passivity of the team to hold the game if needed and not lose("If you're in a losing position, don't try to win, try to not lose!"). This also means that for tours or when you're playing without timer, let's say on a PSL, players can still use it if they want. Also, it won't harm PvE without reason. We doesn't need a complex solution like banning a move and facing the consequences of it on legit strats, or changing move mechanics that will let players, especially newer ones, confused as f***. Just this simple one solves the problem.  

Wishers are a pretty annoying strategy, I can agree with that but it ain't a broken strategy. Just get a good wallbreaker/stallbreaker into your team and call it a day.

 

About Regen mons, I don't know why most ppl are scare of those while they keep complain about how stagnant our current meta game is. Yes, facing a regen mon is somewhat a pain to deal with, but in this case (Slowbro) it has already a few checks into the tier and it could help with any new HA/legendary coming next. 

[caioxlive13]

1 hour ago, JurassicMick said:

Wishers are a pretty annoying strategy, I can agree with that but it ain't a broken strategy. Just get a good wallbreaker/stallbreaker into your team and call it a day.

 

About Regen mons, I don't know why most ppl are scare of those while they keep complain about how stagnant our current meta game is. Yes, facing a regen mon is somewhat a pain to deal with, but in this case (Slowbro) it has already a few checks into the tier and it could help with any new HA/legendary coming next. 

The problem with wwishes is that you get forced to run stallbreakers to win. Again, you can't count with winning on long term due to time cap and tiebreak rules. If you don't have an stallbreaker you has to hope that your opponent does an blunder, and go behind you in some way in tiebreak criteria. With wishers, win by the second tiebreak, aka HP% sum, is not an option. You has to knock out some mon to be in the lead and hold the 1-mon advantage but with wish support it's difficult to knock out someone.  

And Regen's problem is the longevity it gives to stall teams, making even harder to take the lead on the tiebreak. Also, it denies most of the progress done in the match. Usually when you are in a long match, PP being burned is important because it can lead that mon to struggle. Most walls have limits of how much they can heal themselves, an finite and easier to opponent to track. But with regen, he can heal ω times, the maximum amount of switches the opponent can do is how much times he can heal, and this is not bounded to PP, thus making you incapable of making progress. For every heal he does in a match, there is a bigger amount of heals he could've done. It's still finite, but is uncountable. Gbwead sayed it once: "A rotom volt switching a chansey makes progress, the same rotom volt switching an Amoongus is pointless." 

Edited March 31 by caioxlive13

[caioxlive13]

3 hours ago, Ziiiiio said:

And you mentioned artificially rise, would you like to show a example of any pokemon artificially rised? I think usage rise up shows a pokemon fit this metagame, Such as bronzong rise to OU when CB mamos became so popular, and now people starting change back to sash because OU meta became more offensive, then Brongzong drop back to UU like what we see right now. Even it is Yoyoing or something but we can see the reason.

I just saw this now. But i won't argue since my arguments there no matter how good will be ignored. Just read Baklava's post, it talks for me, it's also on this thread if you wanna see it for youself and be sure it's not edited.(2nd page, idk if this post will go to the third page)

 

On 3/29/2024 at 2:33 AM, CaptnBaklava said:

If we take Eelektros as an example which is a important part of the NU meta but has a 40% winrate in UU, it sits at around 3.44% usage with 839 games right now. All it takes to make it move up and drastically change the NU landscape is me and a friend with a week of time. Does that sound good and competitive? And it's not like this didn't happen before, I did it with Blaziken once just to see a month of NU with out it (can look for the month, was a couple of months before it moved up naturally) which drastically shifted the meta. 

A single player shouldn't be allowed to have such impact and that's the problem about the usage based tiering in lower tiers. 

Note: I bolded the part on Baklava's post which answers your question. 

Edited March 31 by caioxlive13

[Munya]

These are now in game.

[Umbramol]

As mentioned above. The shaymin ban on UU should be discussed and I suggest it gets unbanned. Sun, Entei, salamence, all add up to the ways of checking it/dealing with it. In my opinion it belongs in UU

[caioxlive13]

1 hour ago, Umbramol said:

As mentioned above. The shaymin ban on UU should be discussed and I suggest it gets unbanned. Sun, Entei, salamence, all add up to the ways of checking it/dealing with it. In my opinion it belongs in UU

If wants to revise Shaymin UU, better hope for Entei stay on UU which is very unlikely. If not, you wait until may, then you can ask for their revision.

[VadimEmpoleon]

2 hours ago, Umbramol said:

As mentioned above. The shaymin ban on UU should be discussed and I suggest it gets unbanned. Sun, Entei, salamence, all add up to the ways of checking it/dealing with it. In my opinion it belongs in UU

Agreed, specially because its best counter is back in the tier (Mandibuzz), Bronzong can stall Seed Flare too, with Empoleon gone and Bronzong back things like Rotom Heat will gain even more viability also.

[Ziiiiio]

于2024/3/31 AM3点35分，caioxlive13 说：

Note: I bolded the part on Baklava's post which answers your question. 

bro it still stays in someone's mind, this game last for many years, someone really did it？

 

Even if you spend a week playing Eelek, won't the number of other Pokémon played increase during the week......?