[Discussion] Snorlax (OU)

[ThinkNice]

exact IVs when

i dunno meng

[codylramey]

That's why the big 3 basically got instant banned and nobody had a chance to adapt to it either

Only salamence got instabanned, and thats bc we tested it on showdown. I hate instabans and quit frankly seniles bad at them. But we did have ttar for a bit and Dnite in the meta for a long time b4 they were banned. And something for being Op and banning something for being unhealthy are two totally different things. You can post calcs to prove something is OP but not to prove something is unhealthy.

Fact is Exel the usage stats were a terrible and flawed way of determining lax's impact on the meta. They werent reliable enough at this point to draw any real conclusions from them.

[DrCraig]

Excel you entered the Ubers tournament, how do you not see how broken a Salamence/Dnite/Ttar meta?
Theses bans also did not require observing the meta's changes. Just because Snorlax was test banned doesn't mean that every pokemon is eligible to be test banned because why the fuck not. Snorlax was test suspected as being unhealthy. Mence, ttar, and Dnite fit the offesive ubers characteristics. You do not need to test how the meta changes because offensive uber characteristics doesn't entail observing meta changes.

[Senile]

JJ bro how many laxless meta pokes were you able to make in a month? I made 1, ofc im REALLY REALLY slow at breeding (was able to make 3 pokes in the month but only one was made bc lax was gone). I had plans to make a miltank, gardevior (might still make this WoW is good), umbreon, ursaring, DDance kingdra,and lanturn. I had plans to make other things too but they are still good like fake tears jolt and SD hera.
The usage stats were poo and a shit way of determining whether the meta changed or not. The meta did change and most people who actually have built teams for both metas noticed that. Not all ofc but you can also chalk some things up to bias. Also we completely missed the fact that Blazekin went from UU usage to OU usage, i think umbreon did too.

Actually, the pre-Snorlax Blaziken usage is actually wrong. It says 12 blazikens were used first round, but 6 total.

Umbreon went up like 2% and is still shit so lmao

[Gunthug]

"I wanted lax banned but the usage stats didn't change enough for him to be banned so the usage stats were shit. Also if you actually played in the meta and built pokes youd see that the meta adapted - but I didn't play in any tournaments and I only built one poke but that's irrelevant because the usage stats are shit"

Some things never change

[Excelimpulse]

Excel you entered the Ubers tournament, how do you not see how broken a Salamence/Dnite/Ttar meta?
Theses bans also did not require observing the meta's changes. Just because Snorlax was test banned doesn't mean that every pokemon is eligible to be test banned because why the fuck not. Snorlax was test suspected as being unhealthy. Mence, ttar, and Dnite fit the offesive ubers characteristics. You do not need to test how the meta changes because offensive uber characteristics doesn't entail observing meta changes.

I entered and lagged out and didn't get back on so no I didn't see how it turned out.

And there is a saying out there. Numbers don't lie. Edited May 14, 2015 by Excelimpulse

[codylramey]

"I wanted lax banned but the usage stats didn't change enough for him to be banned so the usage stats were shit. Also if you actually played in the meta and built pokes youd see that the meta adapted - but I didn't play in any tournaments and I only built one poke but that's irrelevant because the usage stats are shit"
Some things never change

Yea ur right, some things never change. Like the way you take someones arguments and misrepresent them. Srsly are you sure ur going to school for this shit bc ur really bad it.

The meta changed, but we havent had enough time to change our teams accordingly. That is my argument plain and simple. The usage stats are shit at representing the change in the meta after lax was banned bc of that lack of time. Now if you are going to attack my arguments at least attack what i am actually arguing. Not some made up shit you have in your head.

Actually, the pre-Snorlax Blaziken usage is actually wrong. It says 12 blazikens were used first round, but 6 total.
Umbreon went up like 2% and is still shit so lmao

Oh wow, but even if it was used 12 times then the usage still doubled for him.

[Gunthug]

Yea ur right, some things never change. Like the way you take someones arguments and misrepresent them. Srsly are you sure ur going to school for this shit bc ur really bad it.

The meta changed, but we havent had enough time to change our teams accordingly. That is my argument plain and simple. The usage stats are shit at representing the change in the meta after lax was banned bc of that lack of time. Now if you are going to attack my arguments at least attack what i am actually arguing. Not some made up shit you have in your head.
 

I'm not going to school for this shit - I graduated and am about to start making more money per year than youve made in the last decade. I'd say I'm decent at it.

 

That being said, I know what a strawman is, even if you don't. But what's funny is I didn't have to misrepresent your argument - that's exactly how you presented your case. What your argument ACTUALLY should be, is that the meta hasn't changed because we didn't have enough time for it to change. Instead, you're trying to say that the meta changed, but the usage stats don't show it. Which is literally a level of retarded that only you could muster

 

If you noticed, I was actually for an extention of the test - you just present your arguments so poorly it hurts my head and eyes. Also, lol at you ignoring the fact that you claim to have not played a tournament during the test, yet you are passionately convinced that the meta has changed. I'm sure your vermillion duels have told you quite a bit

[Shaniqualela]

I'm not going to school for this shit - I graduated and am about to start making more money per year than youve made in the last decade. I'd say I'm decent at it.
 
That being said, I know what a strawman is, even if you don't. But what's funny is I didn't have to misrepresent your argument - that's exactly how you presented your case. What your argument ACTUALLY should be, is that the meta hasn't changed because we didn't have enough time for it to change. Instead, you're trying to say that the meta changed, but the usage stats don't show it. Which is literally a level of pooped that only you could muster
 
If you noticed, I was actually for an extention of the test - you just present your arguments so poorly it hurts my head and eyes. Also, lol at you ignoring the fact that you claim to have not played a tournament during the test, yet you are passionately convinced that the meta has changed. I'm sure your vermillion duels have told you quite a bit

Typical gunt post:
Brag
Insult
Small note about actual argument

[Gunthug]

Typical gunt post:
Brag
Insult
Small note about actual argument

it's a winning formula

[DrCraig]

I entered and lagged out and didn't get back on so no I didn't see how it turned out.
And there is a saying out there. Numbers don't lie.

Ok?

[dataforce]

The no-Snorlax meta was a lot of fun, in my opinion. There were so many more options, and, as was mentioned earlier, team building was less restrictive.
I could be much more creative with my teams before the unban, but I guess we just have to deal with it now.

[Excelimpulse]

The no-Snorlax meta was a lot of fun, in my opinion. There were so many more options, and, as was mentioned earlier, team building was less restrictive.
I could be much more creative with my teams before the unban, but I guess we just have to deal with it now.

It doesn't matter what u could do. It's because we're eliminating ou pokes to uber to justify using bl pokes that are usually out classed by something.

And on top of that yes u could use more special walls but at the end of the day the fat blob was still going to be the used wall.

[codylramey]

I'm not going to school for this shit - I graduated and am about to start making more money per year than youve made in the last decade. I'd say I'm decent at it.

That being said, I know what a strawman is, even if you don't. But what's funny is I didn't have to misrepresent your argument - that's exactly how you presented your case. What your argument ACTUALLY should be, is that the meta hasn't changed because we didn't have enough time for it to change. Instead, you're trying to say that the meta changed, but the usage stats don't show it. Which is literally a level of pooped that only you could muster

If you noticed, I was actually for an extention of the test - you just present your arguments so poorly it hurts my head and eyes. Also, lol at you ignoring the fact that you claim to have not played a tournament during the test, yet you are passionately convinced that the meta has changed. I'm sure your vermillion duels have told you quite a bit

The meta did change, The numbers just hasnt shown it changed as much as most of us had hoped. If you are still trying to say the meta didnt change then you need to leave, even thinknice and spartacus said that stall has become more valid (sparticus tried to say its too powerful). So no i am not trying to say the meta didnt change im saying it did and but we havent gotten enough time to adjust to the shift yet. Things became good that wasnt used, not because they arent good but because ppl either A. didnt realize they were good or B. didnt have time to breed.

I didnt attend any tournies but I have built teams, and planned on building teams for tournies. I knew what the meta looked like and what could be used and not used well in both metas. Also i didnt just deuel vermellion scrubs i duel people in LYLE too. I also dueled eloyriptor and sparticus in vermillion during the test (not sure if they were using their real teams or just testing shit). So i didnt just duel scrubs and i know what the meta was like. Edited May 14, 2015 by codylramey

[SpartacusGD]

im pretty sure my point was the stall was too boring and used too much = too much boredom and since its too used then, its only natural you build a team to handle stall and its not particularly healthy

[Gunthug]

The meta did change, The numbers just hasnt shown it changed as much as most of us had hoped. If you are still trying to say the meta didnt change then you need to leave, even thinknice and spartacus said that stall has become more valid (sparticus tried to say its too powerful). So no i am not trying to say the meta didnt change im saying it did and but we havent gotten enough time to adjust to the shift yet. Things became good that wasnt used, not because they arent good but because ppl either A. didnt realize they were good or B. didnt have time to breed.

I didnt attend any tournies but I have built teams, and planned on building teams for tournies. I knew what the meta looked like and what could be used and not used well in both metas. Also i didnt just deuel vermellion scrubs i duel people in LYLE too. I also dueled eloyriptor and sparticus in vermillion during the test (not sure if they were using their real teams or just testing shit). So i didnt just duel scrubs and i know what the meta was like.

I mean, in a literal sense of the word, sure the meta "changed" - snorlax, the highest used pokemon, was removed. That's a massive change. Other than that, nothing much else happened - blissey took lax's place atop the usage charts and viable pokemon remained viable, unviable pokemon remained unviable for the most part. You know as well as I do that in order to prove a pokemon is unhealthy, a noticable change for the better would have to occur when that pokemon is removed.

 

You can argue that the usage stats don't reflect the change, but usage stats are pretty telling - if people were using pokemon that weren't viable when lax was around, the stats woulda shown that. But the usage stats are extremely uncompelling - and instead of arguing that the usage stats would reflect the true change after another month, you are tirading about how usage stats are a shit way of determining the health of a pokemon and taking pot shots at senile and the tier council, which by the way, voted 75% in favor of bringing lax back.

 

If usage stats aren't gonna be used to determine whether a positive change in the meta occured upon the removal of a pokemon, what the hell are we supposed to use? Arguments that look like "well I feel like the meta has cahnged, I can be more creative" are just so subjective, and they clash with arguments that go "nothing has cahnged, now the fat pink blob dominates and i hate it." Neither argument is inherently better than the other, so do you see the problem?

 

Again, another month of the test woulda been nice but 3/4s of the tier council disagreed, so here we are

[Arimanius]

Man people is so fucking blind, they just don't see different pokes were used because YOU guys didn't use them but that's you, I agree 100% with cody, I did breed like 20 different pokes and I used them in viridian and most of them worked (I know this is not the best for statistics) I also tried to participate in officials but I couldn't get in to the bracket I only could enter to Ubers tournament and I reached 3rd round even using UU pokes like donphan and houndoom so I don't know how the hell u don't see that what game were u playing? e.e

[fredrichnietze]

i dunno meng

i heard it was already coded on one of these threads. cbf to look it up thou.

[xXKhryon]

Oh curselax is back, so now dragonite and salamence discussion.

 

[spoiler]

 

Because whynaut

 

[/spoiler]

[codylramey]

You can argue that the usage stats don't reflect the change, but usage stats are pretty telling - if people were using pokemon that weren't viable when lax was around, the stats woulda shown that. But the usage stats are extremely uncompelling - and instead of arguing that the usage stats would reflect the true change after another month, you are tirading about how usage stats are a shit way of determining the health of a pokemon and taking pot shots at senile and the tier council,

Imma stop you right there, and ill let you finish in a min, I never said that the usage stats are a shit way of telling the state of a meta period. I am saying that with the time we had to develope the usage stats we used, those particular stats were shit at telling the state of the meta. Quite a few pokes who became more viable werent being used because people didnt have them yet.
[spoiler]
Idt calling senile bad at instabans is a pot shot. Its kind of the truth if you look at his record with them
[/spoiler] Edited May 14, 2015 by codylramey

[Excelimpulse]

Imma stop you right there, and ill let you finish in a min, I never said that the usage stats are a shit way of telling te state of a meta period. I am saying that with the time we had to develope the usage stats those particular stats were shit at telling the state of the meta. Quite a few pokes who became more viable werent being used because people didnt have them yet.
[spoiler]
Idt calling senile bad at instabans is a pot shot. Its kind of the truth if you look at his record with them
[/spoiler]

Have 6 espeons 4 kangas 1 gardevoir 3 porys um yeah I had them and I have 1 blissey and that's all you need.

[Gunthug]

Imma stop you right there, and ill let you finish in a min, I never said that the usage stats are a shit way of telling the state of a meta period. I am saying that with the time we had to develope the usage stats we used, those particular stats were shit at telling the state of the meta. Quite a few pokes who became more viable werent being used because people didnt have them yet.
[spoiler]
Idt calling senile bad at instabans is a pot shot. Its kind of the truth if you look at his record with them
[/spoiler]

Just because you didn't have the pokes you wanted to use doesn't mean others faced the same problem. I know this isn't an end all factor, but I haven't seen a lot of support for that argument here on this thread - that is, I've seen very few people come on here and echo your assertion that they didn't have time to adapt. isn't it possible that a lot of Ou players HAD alternative pptions, but stuck with the same old options because it's what they know, and it's safe? We've had a history of a slow adapting meta, so that wouldn't surprise me. Another month very well may have changed nothing if this was the case.

Regarding your point about usage statistics and semantics, I'm on my phone and I can address the exact language you used earlier - it certainly wasn't the language you just used in retrospect

[codylramey]

Just because you didn't have the pokes you wanted to use doesn't mean others faced the same problem. I know this isn't an end all factor, but I haven't seen a lot of support for that argument here on this thread - that is, I've seen very few people come on here and echo your assertion that they didn't have time to adapt. isn't it possible that a lot of Ou players HAD alternative pptions, but stuck with the same old options because it's what they know, and it's safe? We've had a history of a slow adapting meta, so that wouldn't surprise me. Another month very well may have changed nothing if this was the case.
Regarding your point about usage statistics and semantics, I'm on my phone and I can address the exact language you used earlier - it certainly wasn't the language you just used in retrospect

I mean you could be right about that. Although the rise in usage in pokemon such as Aero, Ursa, Espy, Blaze, and the drop in suage of problem pokes such as Gengar and heracross tells me that something was happening to the meta. It had changed and may have been still in the middle of evolving.

Also gunt i have said the same thing 1000 times trying to get my point across, im sure i have said it a 1000 diff, prolly more confusing, ways.

[Excelimpulse]

I mean you could be right about that. Although the rise in usage in pokemon such as Aero, Ursa, Espy, Blaze, and the drop in suage of problem pokes such as Gengar and heracross tells me that something was happening to the meta. It had changed and may have been still in the middle of evolving.

Also gunt i have said the same thing 1000 times trying to get my point across, im sure i have said it a 1000 diff, prolly more confusing, ways.

Or people were breeding them anyways . The only one that has an effect on snorlax is espeon and that's about it. And even now it can still lead with screens if you choose to. But your argument that people were adjusting to laxless meta could also be used to the fact that people were breeding them and using them regardless of snorlax. Aero blaziken and ursaring all still have their specific traits at what they are good at.

[Gunthug]

I mean you could be right about that. Although the rise in usage in pokemon such as Aero, Ursa, Espy, Blaze, and the drop in suage of problem pokes such as Gengar and heracross tells me that something was happening to the meta. It had changed and may have been still in the middle of evolving.

Also gunt i have said the same thing 1000 times trying to get my point across, im sure i have said it a 1000 diff, prolly more confusing, ways.

I've seen the rise of each of those pokemon explained pretty adequately in this thread already. At the end of the day, we're talking about pokemon who went from viable to viable but used slightly more, aside from maybe Espy which was solely because it couldn't be broken by blissey. When I look at those usage stats, I just don't see a healthier, more dynamic meta. What bothers me about the 1 month testing period is that most if not all of the changes fall within your standard margin of error - another month would have solidified the data more and put a little more weight behind the changes we did see. But like I've said, I'm sceptical that the outcome woudl be different - I think it would have only made the pro-snorlax argument stronger

 

 

The usage stats were poo and a shit way of determining whether the meta changed or not. The meta did change and most people who actually have built teams for both metas noticed that. Not all ofc but you can also chalk some things up to bias.

This was what I was addressing earlier - if you only meant that in THIS CASE the usage stats were shit, then I'd say you can't just cherry pick when to use usage and when to disregard them. If you meant that usage stats are shit period then I can't help you there.

 

Also, cmon, writing off people who disagree with you by saying "chalk some things up to bias" is pretty fucking weak