[UU Discussion] Lucario

[pachima]

1 hour ago, Quinn010 said:

@gbwead, @pachima Why you guys always argue with eachother in these threads y'all are grown-up men.

 The Tier Council wants to get your inputs to the topic, such as:

- Is Lucario Offensive Uber Chacteristics in your opinion?

- Does Lucario affect teambuilding in an unhealthy manner?

- Or do you feel that Lucario has enough counterplay or can have that counterplay as metagame develops? Or is it too early to tell yet?

They asked for your input just give it and move on. If you don't like eachother just ignore the post and move on. You guys derailing these threads as important members of the community it only works against these discussion and game in general.

You don't seem to understand.

If Staraptor is a bigger issue than Lucario, then discussing Lucario is pointless, because it implies we are discussing it in a tier where Staraptor is in it. And how do you know Lucario is what creates an unhealthy environment and not Staraptor or any other dropped threat? You don't, and this is what I don't like.

However, if we can agree that something else is the primary problem, then we should be discussing it first. Then, and only then, we could properly evaluate other stuff in the tier. 

 

In other words: What would discuss Lucario without discussing Starptor accomplish? Nothing. The entire conversation would revolve around a tier potentially warped around something else, in this case, Staraptor. The entire conversation would be absolutely irrelevant. This is why I dislike when random threads are opened for the sake of it, hoping they miraculously fix the tier. No. We shouldn't be discussing Lucario before trying to understand why or if there is a problem with the tier. We should be discussing whether Lucario is the first Pokémon to discuss. And in my opinion. It is not. 

[caioxlive13]

15 minutes ago, pachima said:

You don't seem to understand.

If Staraptor is a bigger issue than Lucario, then discussing Lucario is pointless, because it implies we are discussing it in a tier where Staraptor is in it. And how do you know Lucario is what creates an unhealthy environment and not Staraptor or any other dropped threat? You don't, and this is what I don't like.

However, if we can agree that something else is the primary problem, then we should be discussing it first. Then, and only then, we could properly evaluate other stuff in the tier. 

 

In other words: What would discuss Lucario without discussing Starptor accomplish? Nothing. The entire conversation would revolve around a tier potentially warped around something else, in this case, Staraptor. The entire conversation would be absolutely irrelevant. This is why I dislike when random threads are opened for the sake of it, hoping they miraculously fix the tier. No. We shouldn't be discussing Lucario before trying to understand why or if there is a problem with the tier. We should be discussing whether Lucario is the first Pokémon to discuss. And in my opinion. It is not. 

I'll have to agree with Pachima on this one. That was even the point on the policy of "Wait once a suspect finish to the tier stabilize before taking another one". Like, Lucario can be broken Right now, but what guarrantees that if Staraptor is gone, some mon that couldn't be viable before because of it's presence, emerges, and it just so happens to Counter Lucario? like some 95 speed offensive mon with enough bulk to resist an Extreme Speed? Or maybe machamp which is just an Slighty Weaker Conkeldurr(Literally), that could potentially resist lucario's Extreme Speed(Not 100% sure on that one but based on his bulk i believe it's possible) but couldn't be viable because a single Brave Bird from Staraptor was enough to scare the s*** out of him? That's why we should discuss the most broken mons first.

Edited October 27 by caioxlive13

[pachima]

1 hour ago, gbwead said:

1- So when I ask you to back up your statements with actual numbers, you do this? Really? The only number here is that 30% more usage in July. I agree, the tier is less popular in October than July. Then you talk about diversity, people lying, the tier getting progressively worse, etc. Where are the numbers to back up these statements? Oh right, nothing once again. 

2- Can you please answer this? Have you played the tier or just spectated? Since you don't have anything tangible to back up your statements, you should at least let people know that what you are saying is based on your experience as a player or as a spectator.

 

3- If you don't believe in discussing a less problematic issue before dealing with the most problematic ones, you have very little to contribute in a Lucario thread then.

 

4- You ask me to be consistent with my own words by creating a fake post with my name on it where I say that Staraptor is banworthy??? WTF. This is so deranged, I don't even know where to begin. I guess this could point out my hipocrisy if I was fighting for Staraptor to stay in the tier, but it turns out that I haven't given my opinion about Staraptor yet and why would I since this is a Lucario thread. I'm just assuming that's your reasoning, but I'm not a psychiatrist so I'm sure how to rationalize your delusions?! 

 

 

1- October to July is the only comparable metric. You cannot and should not compare the first month of a new season to a non-first month of any other season. 

You said yourself the tier was more diverse and others said more people were playing it. That's a lie. Less people are playing it when compared to the same first month of last season. Neither is the tier more diverse, but that's a bit more complex and I will just choose to agree to disagree here. As you rightfully said, there is a subjective aspect in this issue and I will not be dragging it any further. 

The tier getting progressively worse is very much expectable. We have never seen a season in where subsequent months increased their usage when compared to the first month in its season. Maybe you could argue that I cannot 100% guarantee it will happen again. Yes, you could, and yes, I would agree with it. But you can't convince me to ignore what until now was an extremely consistent fact either. 

 

2- I have played the current tier. Otherwise, I wouldn't be here typing. 

 

3- I explained this in the post above.

 

4- I agree that post was not entirely necessary. I do not agree that you haven't given your opinion about Staraptor yet. You have claimed that the tier is fine and that nothing warrants any discussion yet. Staraptor is in the tier so that includes Staraptor too. 

 

Unironically, I am not really against any of the mons extending their suspect test. I am against this thread. Discussing Lucario without discussing other issues is irrelevant. It is less than a subatomic band aid. If TC wants to properly confirm how much damage the drops created, they should be extending these suspect tests one month further, so we can actually see by how much usage keeps dropping when compared to the same timeframe last season. Maybe I am wrong and this season will be an anomaly where people took longer to adapt, and will play it more next month. Maybe I am not. We would know for sure if suspect tests were actual tests and not random trash flying around every month. In sum, while I was opposed to some of these drops, now that they are here, at least properly evaluate them, otherwise you have accomplished nothing in understanding which threats specifically are the issue. 

[gbwead]

I'm sorry but it's simply mind boggling for someone who doesn't play the tier and didn't even bother to ask for a Staraptor thread to act all offended that TC worked to get a Lucario thread opened up. There is nothing wrong with this thread. Sure some mons should or could be discussed first, but it's seriously fucked up to say nothing, do nothing and then throw stones when TC doesn't do exactly what you wanted them to do. 

edit: 

22 minutes ago, pachima said:

4- I agree that post was not entirely necessary. I do not agree that you haven't given your opinion about Staraptor yet. You have claimed that the tier is fine and that nothing warrants any discussion yet. Staraptor is in the tier so that includes Staraptor too. 

The tier is absolutely fine even with Staraptor in it. It could probably be improved but this should be done carefully and not in a few days like the hyenas on this forum asked. Imagine me saying that nothing warrants any discussion lmao. Like that ever happened. 

Edited October 27 by gbwead

[pachima]

2 hours ago, Luke said:

I don’t mind TC dropping things that seem "broken," but they should be banned very quickly once it's established they are for sure broken. Lucario & Staraptor should've been gone ages ago, near like day 2-3.

 

I feel people in general are being dishonest on both sides; as one side wants a huge messy chaotic tier (because they hate how it was before: a lot of stall) and the other wants it to be exactly how it was before. Where is the middle ground? 

I don't think anyone wanted UU to be exactly as it was before. It was bad. I don't disagree with dropping new Pokemon to test them. I disagree with dropping that many Pokémon in a tier that wasn't yet solved nor balanced. There is a massive difference between adding variables to something that is somewhat fine (Confines the variables to only those that are added), and adding variables to a tier that was already a mess. (How do you know the new stuff is creating issues, or are they just exacerbating the issues that were before them?) This is why I don't like how they handled UU. Tests are supposed to test how impactful new stuff is. You cannot meaningfully test anything without understanding how impactful the previous tests were. 

 

Instead, these tests hope to magically fix the mess they created before. Over the past months, we have witnessed a chain of drops, where each one justified the one after it, in a neverending loop of nonsense. Obviously it wouldn't have gone well.

 

While I don't think anyone was for the status quo of the past format, I can answer your final question: We should be willing to test new stuff only after the current meta is somewhat balanced. It is harder, yes. But necessary if we don't want to spiral into whatever we are witnessing right now. 

[Frag]

Pachima been playing the game for like 10 years and with no more than 5 hof entries the guy talk like he's the fountain of wisdom, basically a caio but at least one of them actually play the game, and gb just talking about his own meta, guy said trio was fine and wobbo needed a buff to counter gallade.

 

About the topic, Lucario is just too good to not use, good resists, good speed, the best priority move, surprise factor, just too versatile.

[Makarovs]

1 hour ago, razimove said:

I agree with you, but I also think people offered solutions that were ignored, I can think of a few. Both sides arent necessarily wrong, but as is, neither side really got anything done towards a healthy environment on the tier. Sure rn its more fun, chaos is fun, but is that how UU should be? 

I wasn't so engaged in those discussions in the past so I dont remember seeing those solutions, but this is my mistake them. As I said, yeah the tier is chaos now but is not how we want it to be in the end for sure.

[FlacuSkye]

I mean, it can't really be said Lucario fits as Uber Offensive, given players are trying to find more counterplay in interesting options such as Mantine / increase of usage of already UU Pokemon like Sableye; which isn't too much of a problem I would say? These options are usually viable enough to not hinder your builds i.e you face a worse matchup against everything else.

 

Then, we are back to unhealthiness and centralisation. How can you say a Pokemon is alright when you are pretty much forced to run answers for it unless you want to lose?
First, i believe we need to truly define what centralisation even means. To me, centralisation is just the natural course of a metagame, where the strongest Pokemon are on top and everything orbits around them. This doesn't happen when a metagame is either in development or not stable.

 

The BL reset brought many behemoths back to UU, and it's not a surprise they have a lot of presence in the tier. But when one of these doesn't meet any ban criteria, how can we know quickly enough that their presence is ruining the tier? It's almost impossible to conclude if something is unhealthy or not in a short period of time, specially when the meaning of centralisation varies for each individual.

[caioxlive13]

24 minutes ago, FlacuSkye said:

I mean, it can't really be said Lucario fits as Uber Offensive, given players are trying to find more counterplay in interesting options such as Mantine / increase of usage of already UU Pokemon like Sableye; which isn't too much of a problem I would say? These options are usually viable enough to not hinder your builds i.e you face a worse matchup against everything else.

 

Then, we are back to unhealthiness and centralisation. How can you say a Pokemon is alright when you are pretty much forced to run answers for it unless you want to lose?
First, i believe we need to truly define what centralisation even means. To me, centralisation is just the natural course of a metagame, where the strongest Pokemon are on top and everything orbits around them. This doesn't happen when a metagame is either in development or not stable.

 

The BL reset brought many behemoths back to UU, and it's not a surprise they have a lot of presence in the tier. But when one of these doesn't meet any ban criteria, how can we know quickly enough that their presence is ruining the tier? It's almost impossible to conclude if something is unhealthy or not in a short period of time, specially when the meaning of centralisation varies for each individual.

For me, Overcentralizing has other concept. Is when three criterias are met:
- A mon makes the entire meta revolves around it;

- Puts at a massive disadvantage whotever refuses to use it. Sometimes, reaching the point which the teams are "Pick that mon, then build the rest of the team."

- The Checks/Counters are not great or severely outclassed under normal circunstances, but they had to be used because of the centralizing mon(i.e. Poliwrath, which prior to Crawdaunt and Feraligatr was NU/Untiered, but people were forced to use it or Toxicroak instead of better options because it was it or lose to them. Currently you're still forced to use it because of Entei. Or Empoleon when Draco Hydrei was avaliable. Your steel choice couldn't be other than him on a slow-paced team because it's either Empoleon or your team might struggle to Hydrei. Today Empoleon is still an Option but it can easily be replaced by other Steel or Water-types with some adapting.)

Edited October 27 by caioxlive13

[OrangeManiac]

1 hour ago, VadimEmpoleon said:

Guess we need to have 2 months suspect test per mon just to have 2 new mons later and keep doing suspect tests forever.

Quick Bans under Uber Characteristics don't need suspect tests. In general, I am under the impression we were given permission to act pretty trigger happy with bans when needed with this BL-release.

 

Personally, I don't even need the Staraptor thread to convince me anymore that Staraptor is Uber Offense in this newly established UU tier. If anything, I want people to look at the arguments to either say "Yep, we agree" or counter-argue some points they don't think is correct. But I think the timeline should be really fast.

 

I think it's fair that a couple of weeks were given to people to discover the metagame more than with their "initial thoughts". But now we have like 30k usage in UU from this month and I think the picture about this newly established UU meta should be clear enough to start making decisions, and quickly.

 

I still think Lucario is probably bad for UU and should be looked at really closely, even if Staraptor would be the main priority. But I really start to agree that Staraptor should probably handled first tiering wise to figure out whether Lucario's dominance partly comes from an insanely broken wallbreaker like CB Staraptor cleaning the table for Lucario. Until that part is handled, I don't see Lucario discussion resolving in any way - despite the fact that I really still think Lucario is a Pokemon that should be thoroughly discussed now and in the future.

[razimove]

37 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

Quick Bans under Uber Characteristics don't need suspect tests. In general, I am under the impression we were given permission to act pretty trigger happy with bans when needed with this BL-release.

 

Personally, I don't even need the Staraptor thread to convince me anymore that Staraptor is Uber Offense in this newly established UU tier. If anything, I want people to look at the arguments to either say "Yep, we agree" or counter-argue some points they don't think is correct. But I think the timeline should be really fast.

 

I think it's fair that a couple of weeks were given to people to discover the metagame more than with their "initial thoughts". But now we have like 30k usage in UU from this month and I think the picture about this newly established UU meta should be clear enough to start making decisions, and quickly.

 

I still think Lucario is probably bad for UU and should be looked at really closely, even if Staraptor would be the main priority. But I really start to agree that Staraptor should probably handled first tiering wise to figure out whether Lucario's dominance partly comes from an insanely broken wallbreaker like CB Staraptor cleaning the table for Lucario. Until that part is handled, I don't see Lucario discussion resolving in any way - despite the fact that I really still think Lucario is a Pokemon that should be thoroughly discussed now and in the future.

This is just my opinion, and keeping in mind that I might be way more strict about it, but the first problem started with randomly releasing every BL at once. This could have been done in batches. And staraptor shouldnt even have been tested, heck if OU had less strong priorities and similiar speed tiers to UU, staraptor would also be king there. After staraptor new problems will show up and a next uber offensive threat will then become the new FoTM, I'm betting on Lucario

[OrangeManiac]

3 minutes ago, razimove said:

This is just my opinion, and keeping in mind that I might be way more strict about it, but the first problem started with randomly releasing every BL at once. This could have been done in batches. And staraptor shouldnt even have been tested, heck if OU had less strong priorities and similiar speed tiers to UU, staraptor would also be king there. After staraptor new problems will show up and a next uber offensive threat will then become the new FoTM, I'm betting on Lucario

I think the BL list was getting kind of obsolete because those ban decisions were made in an era where the metagame was so vastly different. The reasoning why those Pokemon were banned years ago just simply aren't holding up anymore. I think the BL-list should have been revisited eventually, just the fact so many OUs were usage dropping to UU made it good time in my opinion to allow all UU eligible Pokemon to co-exist, and see which Pokemon truly are the broken ones in this very metagame we have. In my eyes, it would have made no sense to keep Pokemon in BL "because they have been BL forever" while there were Pokemon dropping that potentially could be even stronger. The key point is that we don't know, it was all speculation.

 

That being said, now we do know. And we absolutely should start sorting this out now.

[razimove]

15 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

I think the BL list was getting kind of obsolete because those ban decisions were made in an era where the metagame was so vastly different. The reasoning why those Pokemon were banned years ago just simply aren't holding up anymore. I think the BL-list should have been revisited eventually, just the fact so many OUs were usage dropping to UU made it good time in my opinion to allow all UU eligible Pokemon to co-exist, and see which Pokemon truly are the broken ones in this very metagame we have. In my eyes, it would have made no sense to keep Pokemon in BL "because they have been BL forever" while there were Pokemon dropping that potentially could be even stronger. The key point is that we don't know, it was all speculation.

 

That being said, now we do know. And we absolutely should start sorting this out now.

I agree with you on everything, but wish things were done in a more controlled environment, release them a few at a time, instead of all together, see how people adapt to them, then push them up or let them stay, and release the next batch, this way UU wouldnt suffer as much.

[VadimEmpoleon]

8 minutes ago, razimove said:

I agree with you on everything, but wish things were done in a more controlled environment, release them a few at a time, instead of all together, see how people adapt to them, then push them up or let them stay, and release the next batch, this way UU wouldnt suffer as much.

The problem with releasing them one by one is that if they all drop together one of the mons that drop can help balance another but this wouldn't be possible if they dropped one by one.

[gbwead]

24 minutes ago, VadimEmpoleon said:

The problem with releasing them one by one is that if they all drop together one of the mons that drop can help balance another but this wouldn't be possible if they dropped one by one.

I completly agree with this. If we look at the last few months, there has been ban requests for Entei, Shaymin, Salamence, Blissey, Kabutops, Togekiss, Lucario, Haxorus, P2 and Staraptor.

Entei is quite nice vs Shaymin, Blissey and a decent RK to Lucario.

Shaymin is quite nice vs Kabutops.

Salamence is quite nice vs Entei, Shaymin and Lucario. 

Togekiss is nice vs Blissey, Shaymin, P2 and sometimes even Salamence.

Blissey is nice vs Salamence et sometimes Shaymin.

Kabutops is nice vs Entei, Togekiss, Blissey, Salamence and even sometimes Lucario.
P2 is nice vs Entei, Salamence, Kabutops and sometimes Haxorus.

 

If we test Togekiss without Lucario and Kabutops, it would be a shame for it to get banned when it could have been useful against mons like Blissey, Shaymin, P2 and Mence that were all also suspected to be banworthy. I'm not saying Togekiss should not get banned (even though that's what I believe), just that it does have some positive traits that would have been completly overlooked because of the potential lack in answers.

When so many things need to be tested, it's optimal time wise to test everything at the same time. Our metagames are not static. They change every update, sometimes multiple times per year. We don't have the luxury to wait and go through multiple tests to make sure everything is good and balanced. The bandaid needs to be ripped off so we can move on as swiftly as possible.

 

 

[VadimEmpoleon]

1 hour ago, OrangeManiac said:

Personally, I don't even need the Staraptor thread to convince me anymore that Staraptor is Uber Offense in this newly established UU tier. If anything, I want people to look at the arguments to either say "Yep, we agree" or counter-argue some points they don't think is correct. But I think the timeline should be really fast.

 

I think it's fair that a couple of weeks were given to people to discover the metagame more than with their "initial thoughts". But now we have like 30k usage in UU from this month and I think the picture about this newly established UU meta should be clear enough to start making decisions, and quickly.

It's really nice to hear that.

 

1 hour ago, OrangeManiac said:

Quick Bans under Uber Characteristics don't need suspect tests. In general, I am under the impression we were given permission to act pretty trigger happy with bans when needed with this BL-release.

My concern was actually Lucario which I believe most of us don't see as offensive uber but can see the centralization it causes, I understand that bans for unhealthiness (centralization) are harder to analyze and require more time, the thing is that I don't think we need very long periods of time to determine if it's banworthy or not, when a mon drops to the tier and causes centralization around it, the biggest centralization effects happen during the first days, then new answers are explored but they have a lower impact on the tier most of the time, in Lucario's case we most likely won't see bigger changes than the ones that already happened like Sableye, Hippowdon, Tentacruel and Raikou's rise in usage and Heracross dropping in usage just to name a few.

 

I think as of now (27 days) we had a lot of time to analyze Lucario's presence in UU to determine if it should stay or leave or at least I think that would be enough if no other changes were made but since Staraptor is higher priority and Staraptor leaving can cause some changes we should wait a bit more. From my point of view, Staraptor doesn't have a very big impact when it comes to Lucario in the tier but some test time would be needed regardless but I don't think we need another 1-2 months of testing, I think 1-2 weeks is more than enough (afterall we still have some data about it from these 27 days) and specially now, if needed changes are delayed then NU will be hurt more than needed, right now if every mon with a low usage was released to NU it would be a mess, specially considering that it wouldn't have much sense to drop some of them without reverting some BL2 bans, that leaves the option of paralyzing UU-NU movements which is also pretty bad but better than the other option, the faster UU reaches stability with no more testing needed the faster this problem will be solved.

 

When BL was getting a reset I expected TC to make extra effort in aranging any problem as fast as possible to have a good playable tier soon and without affecting NU too much, of course I don't expect TC to arange every problem with 1-3 days but like I said, at least in Lucario's case I think 1-2 weeks of testing after Staraptor rising to OU is more than enough.

 

I personally find Staraptor, Lucario and Togekiss banworthy and I expect Porygon2 and Haxorus to have a more remarkable presence in UU if the first three happen to leave the tier, this would of course require more testing, I think there is still a lot of work to do, that's why I think needed changes shouldn't be delayed too much.

 

Also I would like to thank you Orange for all this communication as TC and for being active in this thread. Keep up the good work.

[OrangeManiac]

Alright guys, Staraptor is rightfully removed from the UU now under Uber Offensive, thanks for pointing out that it should have been the priority. We've acknowledged your very legitimate concerns that Staraptor tearing down defenses also paved way for Lucario to shine. What we want to know with Staraptor removed that does Lucario feel less oppressive now and does it feel like it can be more reasonably counterplayed against now, or does it feel like a problem still. We're waiting to hear your input as you guys explore the metagame without Staraptor.

[caioxlive13]

4 hours ago, OrangeManiac said:

Alright guys, Staraptor is rightfully removed from the UU now under Uber Offensive, thanks for pointing out that it should have been the priority. We've acknowledged your very legitimate concerns that Staraptor tearing down defenses also paved way for Lucario to shine. What we want to know with Staraptor removed that does Lucario feel less oppressive now and does it feel like it can be more reasonably counterplayed against now, or does it feel like a problem still. We're waiting to hear your input as you guys explore the metagame without Staraptor.

I feel like Lucario now has more problems. Some Fighting-types with Priority are now options because there's no longer Staraptor melting them, like Machamp. Also, base 90+ has less problems now because they aren't threatened by a literal nuke now, and can be used to kill it now.

[DoubleJ]

52 minutes ago, caioxlive13 said:

I feel like Lucario now has more problems. Some Fighting-types with Priority are now options because there's no longer Staraptor melting them, like Machamp. Also, base 90+ has less problems now because they aren't threatened by a literal nuke now, and can be used to kill it now.

Ciaox bro, Lucario's priority often trumps other priority users because of its speed. Not to say Lucario will always be in the perfect situation to sweep, it has proven that it can get into that perfect situation pretty easily with even just a little support. 

[Asgron]

Traiga les unos garchomps a las niñas, Lucario no está roto, simplemente que sus nulas neuronas les impiden pensar en un poke que no sea Tier list para hacerle counter

 

No leo lloros 

Edited October 30 by Asgron

[gbwead]

Lucario's win rate/usage is going down and that was already the case prior to the Staraptor ban. It is overated and just suffering from recency bias. Raikouu has been UU for much longer and, despite being significantly more viable, threatening and centralizing than Lucario, people don't seem to mind that much. That is likely what people will think of Lucario in a few months. Just a good/viable staple UU mon.

 

[Zokuru]

On 10/27/2024 at 7:40 PM, FlacuSkye said:

How can you say a Pokemon is alright when you are pretty much forced to run answers for it unless you want to lose?

You are forced to run answers to everything in the game, that's called teambuilding. The problem is when the answers are bad pokemon and/or few and far between, which doesnt seem to be the case at all for Lucario. 

[FlacuSkye]

57 minutes ago, Zokuru said:

You are forced to run answers to everything in the game, that's called teambuilding. The problem is when the answers are bad pokemon and/or few and far between, which doesnt seem to be the case at all for Lucario. 

that's what i kinda said in the first part of the post tho; what you quoted is in italics cuz it's what a player might think, and added it for the sake of argument -not my opinion-

 

i'll use actual quotations next time i guess

[caioxlive13]

2 hours ago, Zokuru said:

You are forced to run answers to everything in the game, that's called teambuilding. The problem is when the answers are bad pokemon and/or few and far between, which doesnt seem to be the case at all for Lucario. 

If UU ends like OU, where your team will get f*** by 1/4 of the meta at least, and none of the mons are exempt from having viable counterplay, it's fine.

[CarolML]

Lucario is trash, does nothing in UU. Don't ban pls