UU Tier Discussion Request Thread

[Guerinf]

3 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

 

You can't switch Cradily against everything due to its weaknesses. Kanga meanwhile can be switched against everything with very low risk. The number of LO users that can even 3HKO Kanga is very low. And I wasn't even arguing for this, I was arguing that Kanga needs absolutely no support unlike other UUs. (but still not inherently broken)

 

Also what comes to me complaining about offensive playing being too unviable, this isn't first time that people intepret it as banning a wall would make it better / bringing a sweeper down would help with this. Ironically the problem for this issue isn't so much Kanga or Cradily for that matter, but Typhlosion. The fact I need to run offense that isn't swept by Typhlosion for breakfast is really hard, unless I opt to run something like Slowking or Lanturn to stop Typhlosion and even then. The existence of a powerful offensive Pokemon can make offense less viable. The same way if special sweepers weren't so powergul Marowak would be the one of most used OU Pokemon.

 

What comes to last paragraph, I agree.

Not like tenta ice beam is anihilating Crad. And I think Jynx hits kanga hard too. And yeah crad has weaknesses (ice beam and on a lower level signal beam) that Kanga hasn't. But on the other hand it has resistances that Kanga hasn't (tbolt especially). What I say isn't that crad is better, nor kanga. It's that both are useful and have particularities.

 

And I totally agree on typhlo reducing offense viability. I just thought we were more on a kanga focus but you are entirelly right.

[Spaintakula]

Are we talking special attackers here only, or?

 

Because cradily usually soaks more and has access to a better recovery move, so. More susceptible to status, but yeah.

And as gayrinf said, even if it's non-stab SE moves, it can still handle them fine.

But if we're talking straight out walling power, cradily has more of it.

[Laz]

On 01/11/2016 at 7:49 PM, Gunthug said:

 

I actually changed my mind on kanga a few days ago (was originally pro ban and fully supported the test ban)

 

I'm glad that you are admitting your mistake, now if gbweed, daftfoolio and the others could gently admit theirs too, that would be great

Edited November 2, 2016 by Noad
No need to be so personal. #TierCouncilLivesMatter

[gbwead]

10 hours ago, Lazaro23 said:

I'm glad that you are admitting your mistake, now if gbweed, daftfoolio and the others could gently admit theirs too, that would be great

I don't think test banning Kanga is a mistake considering it has been troublesome since late 2015. I will recognize that the timing is pretty bad.

 

 The new implemented items have helped a lot of pokemons to deal with Kanga, but when I look at stall nothing has really changed. Kanga stall outclasses all other kinds of stall in UU to the point where other kinds of stall become to some degree unviable. The Kanga ban doesn't really advantages stall since Kanga stall is pretty god damn powerful, so removing Kanga hurts stall teams directly, but it does allow stall players to be more creative. 

 

Imo, there are clear downfalls to having Kanga in UU when we look at the health of the tier. The only thing I wonder is if these downfalls weigh more than the healthy benefits of having Kanga in UU.

Edited November 3, 2016 by gbwead

[Laz]

sarcasm, not for everyone..

[Gunthug]

I promise I didn't forget about this, I spent 15 hours in a courtroom yesterday waiting for my scumbag client to be found guilty. Will weigh in on the "skillful play" discussion hopefully after work today 

[BlackJovi]

Fun tier. Two of the best wall breakers banned, gonna be fun watching people stall each other to death now 

[OrangeManiac]

Right when I said I'm glad to see no hasty decisions being made from council Zangoose which didn't even get massive support to get banned gets banned just because Haunter gets banned.

 

Serious question, what the heck should offensive players use in UU now without being walled to death?

 

Edit: What even is that ban post, what the hell. Of course any Pokemon with a set up move will do massive damage if you let it set up. There's no mention of how risky this is, there's no mention how 90 speed isn't really amazing and that plenty of Pokemon outspeed it. There's no mention that every scarfer will make Goose life hard.... Oh wait no one runs Scarfs in UU because you need those CBs and Life Balls to break those walls. The fact none of these things are even mentioned while getting unanimous vote, what are you guys doing? 

Edited November 8, 2016 by OrangeManiac

[gbwead]

11 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

Right when I said I'm glad to see no hasty decisions being made from council Zangoose which didn't even get massive support to get banned gets banned just because Haunter gets banned.

 

Serious question, what the heck should offensive players use in UU now without being walled to death?

Armaldo, Donphan, Jynx, Aggron, Steelix, Omastar and other things like XATU have all good wallbreaking power imo. Offense seems very viable right now from my point of view.

 

25 minutes ago, BlackJovi said:

Fun tier. Two of the best wall breakers banned, gonna be fun watching people stall each other to death now 

Seriously? people were uguuing about the fact Typhlosion made offense unviable and now you are implying the exact opposite. 

[BlackJovi]

6 minutes ago, gbwead said:

Armaldo, Donphan, Jynx, Aggron, Steelix, Omastar and other things like XATU have all good wallbreaking power imo. Offense seems very viable right now from my point of view.

 

Seriously? people were uguuing about the fact Typhlosion made offense unviable and now you are implying the exact opposite. 

No, I am just saying stall is more viable now because 3 of our top threats are gone.. Shouldn't it be easier to stall out someone now with top threats gone? That's just what I think, please, stall players, correct me if I'm wrong 

[OrangeManiac]

3 minutes ago, gbwead said:

Armaldo, Donphan, Jynx, Aggron, Steelix, Omastar and other things like XATU have all good wallbreaking power imo. Offense seems very viable right now from my point of view.

Barring Donphan, Armaldo and Steelix (which is often used as a defensive pivot instead of wallbreaker) and Omastar (been a long time since Ive seen a non Spiker Omastar) do enjoy alright usage, the rest are basically non existant in UU usage.

 

Let's take a look.

 

Cradily - Special wall - 32,49% usage

Scizor - the only go to wallbreaker for everyone - 32,1 % 

Slowking - the wall for every wallbreaker ever - 31,1%

Altaria - the wall for everything (and Scizor, I'll admit) - 31,1 %

Manectric - the sweeper that can actually do something - 28,8%

Tentacruel - I know you're gonna argue something else but I feel like it's used for its defensive/support capabilities than offensive - 28.02%

Lanturn - used only because Typ was there - 18,48 %

Exeggcutor - used for its defensive capabilities more than offensive lately - 18,09 %

Clefable - special wall now that Kanga is banned - 16,54 %

Armaldo - Hey, our first reliable wallbreaker!! - 15,18%

 

Am I honestly the only one seeing some massive problems with this? And until someone provides me a replay of someone actually beating someome with offensive team without needing to god predict every turn, I just don't believe you. The data is against you. Everyone feels safer taking the stall route.

[BlackJovi]

1 minute ago, OrangeManiac said:

Barring Donphan, Armaldo and Steelix (which is often used as a defensive pivot instead of wallbreaker) and Omastar (been a long time since Ive seen a non Spiker Omastar) do enjoy alright usage, the rest are basically non existant in UU usage.

 

Let's take a look.

 

Cradily - Special wall - 32,49% usage

Scizor - the only go to wallbreaker for everyone - 32,1 % 

Slowking - the wall for every wallbreaker ever - 31,1%

Altaria - the wall for everything (and Scizor, I'll admit) - 31,1 %

Manectric - the sweeper that can actually do something - 28,8%

Tentacruel - I know you're gonna argue something else but I feel like it's used for its defensive/support capabilities than offensive - 28.02%

Lanturn - used only because Typ was there - 18,48 %

Exeggcutor - used for its defensive capabilities more than offensive lately - 18,09 %

Clefable - special wall now that Kanga is banned - 16,54 %

Armaldo - Hey, our first reliable wallbreaker!! - 15,18%

 

Am I honestly the only one seeing some massive problems with this? And until someone provides me a replay of someone actually beating someome with offensive team without needing to god predict every turn, I just don't believe you. The data is against you. Everyone feels safer taking the stall route.

To be fair, I have seen a lot of offensive exeggutors lately and they work out pretty well, but as to the others, I agree. Scizor is used a lot as an defensive pivot too btw. 

[NikhilR]

Just now, BlackJovi said:

To be fair, I have seen a lot of offensive exeggutors lately and they work out pretty well, but as to the others, I agree. Scizor is used a lot as an defensive pivot too btw. 

The trick to beating offensive exeggutors is to not knock their specs off, correct @Toast ?

[LifeStyle]

Exeggutor rapes almost the entire tier tbh, also topkek banning goose because it breaks stuff at +2, implying it's that easy to just send a goose out there and sd with 0 risk

[Mike]

So I am not really mad about Zangoose getting banned to BL but I am moreso confused. You guys said to keep it in UU for 2 tournaments to not only experience what zangoose is like for you, the TC, but also for the players who would be able to give some feedback. Now here you are banning Zangoose because it is deemed OP now that haunter is gone. I mean I trust you guys at the TC, but what if you gave it some more time so people could get adjusted to the changes? I mean look at Typhlosion, at first it seemed really OP. And ofcourse it was. But at the end of the month people had more and more ways to play around it. I think banning Zangoose wasn't smart seeing as there only has been 1 tournament with the new UU. There is no way in hell people would instantly be used to changes like these, especially when such a vital mon gets moved up. 

 

On top of that 60 def/spdef really isn't something to be tanking hits from. It can't easily set up SDs as Armaldo or something can. Imo Zangoose is moreso known for its late game sweeping potential. Which is a fair enough point. But it's not like you send in Zangoose in turn 1, set up SD, and just wipe a team off the table. 

 

But what do I know eh?

[Guerinf]

10 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

Am I honestly the only one seeing some massive problems with this? And until someone provides me a replay of someone actually beating someome with offensive team without needing to god predict every turn, I just don't believe you. The data is against you. Everyone feels safer taking the stall route.

I won my last psl match with a pretty good helping hand from god and à full offensive team which was made of :

Donphan ada soft sand

Oma specs

Manec LO

Exeg LO

Glalie

CB Swellow

 

This team works pretty good and i'M pretty sure offense isn't à dead and burried playstyle. Typhlo made it harder but not impossible.

The haunter ban may be a tough thing but i'm not sure about zangoose.

I however admit the ban was made quickly 

[OrangeManiac]

I mean I know I'm getting hit by that "we don't keep broken shit to check broken shit" argument for asking what is there to wallbreak walls now that the only offensive threat with no surefire counters is banned but how can we consider a Pokemon that doesn't reach 15% usage too powerful while plenty of tier enjoys 30 % usage and no one even questions if there's something wrong with them. I'm aware defensive Pokemon like Altaria and Slowking are used partly with their ability to counter particular offensive Pokemon but doesn't this show the more reliable way to win is to run these Pokemon than likes of Zangoose? I honestly don't even know what is going on now.

Edited November 8, 2016 by OrangeManiac

[Gunthug]

1 minute ago, OrangeManiac said:

I mean I know I'm getting hit by that "we don't keep broken shit to check broken shit" argument for asking what is there to wallbreak walls now that the only offensive threat with no surefire counters is banned but how can we consider a Pokemon that doesn't reach 15% usage too powerful while plenty of tier enjoys 30 % usage and no one even questions if there's something wrong with them. I'm aware defensive Pokemon like Altaria and Slowking are used partly with their ability to counter particular offensive Pokemon but doesn't this show the more reliable way to win is to run these Pokemon than likes of Zangoose? I honestly don't even know what is going on now.

Pointing to gooses usage is a terrible argument since haunter was the #1 most used poke in the tier  

[OrangeManiac]

Just now, Gunthug said:

Pointing to gooses usage is a terrible argument since haunter was the #1 most used poke in the tier  

Are you seriously implying Haunter was used just because of Zangoose? That is ridiculous.

[Gunthug]

9 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

Are you seriously implying Haunter was used just because of Zangoose? That is ridiculous.

Lol no. I was implying that zangoose was used less because of haunter 

 

to everyone else: "ooh there might not be enough wallbreakers left in the tier if we ban this" is not a valid reason not to ban something. I've thought zangoose was problematic for about two years now. Haunters rise temporarily put the discussion on the back burner, but now was a good time to get out ahead of this before it caused too much trouble in the tier, imo. That's why I voted ban. If haunter ever comes back down, I think zangoose can as well 

Edited November 8, 2016 by Gunthug

[OrangeManiac]

Just now, Gunthug said:

Lol no. I was implying that zangoose was used less because of haunter 

... And without waiting and seeing how people like their Zangoose now that Haunter is banned you just automatically assume it's too strong and boot it away.

 

lol ok

[Gunthug]

4 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

... And without waiting and seeing how people like their Zangoose now that Haunter is banned you just automatically assume it's too strong and boot it away.

 

lol ok

Haunter wasn't banned, and I only bring that up because you've been tearing apart the semantics of the TC ever since, well I'm sure you know what I'm referring to. There were plenty of accusations that we didn't act fast enough last month with typhlosion, and that people just knew it was too strong even before it was tested. Now we give zangoose a whole tournament (even though it likely woulda been a majority ban vote before the tournament) and cue more outrage. Look at the usage after this month and tell me the tier lacks wallbreakers. Until then, you're really just speculating 

[OrangeManiac]

5 minutes ago, Gunthug said:

Haunter wasn't banned, and I only bring that up because you've been tearing apart the semantics of the TC ever since, well I'm sure you know what I'm referring to. There were plenty of accusations that we didn't act fast enough last month with typhlosion, and that people just knew it was too strong even before it was tested. Now we give zangoose a whole tournament (even though it likely woulda been a majority ban vote before the tournament) and cue more outrage. Look at the usage after this month and tell me the tier lacks wallbreakers. Until then, you're really just speculating 

 

Banned from UU because it's OU usage, yes.

 

And if you're referring that I'm just buttmad because they don't want me in the council, this is such a ridiculous attempt to try to devaluate my criticism I have towards your recent decisions because if you have read your little TC sub forum even a little bit you would know I was always very critical and careful of the TC policies and semantics for consistency reasons, probably even more when I was there. Now I'm just voicing out these publicly. If you were refering about something else, then please let me know because what you're trying to do now in my eyes seems something very low.

 

Also what is this "us and they" mentality? I have always been very careful from banning anything from anywhere just because of gut feeling. I didn't want to ban NU Zangoose at 15 % usage even though it felt to me broken in every way. Literally the only Pokemon have ever wanted instantly gone is UU Vaporeon on the era when UU was already horribly stally. Just because majority of people wanted a fast Typhlosion decision, I never asked for one. I'm no part of what other of the community wanted.

[Gunthug]

43 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

 

Banned from UU because it's OU usage, yes.

 

And if you're referring that I'm just buttmad because they don't want me in the council, this is such a ridiculous attempt to try to devaluate my criticism I have towards your recent decisions because if you have read your little TC sub forum even a little bit you would know I was always very critical and careful of the TC policies and semantics for consistency reasons, probably even more when I was there. Now I'm just voicing out these publicly. If you were refering about something else, then please let me know because what you're trying to do now in my eyes seems something very low.

 

Also what is this "us and they" mentality? I have always been very careful from banning anything from anywhere just because of gut feeling. I didn't want to ban NU Zangoose at 15 % usage even though it felt to me broken in every way. Literally the only Pokemon have ever wanted instantly gone is UU Vaporeon on the era when UU was already horribly stally. Just because majority of people wanted a fast Typhlosion decision, I never asked for one. I'm no part of what other of the community wanted.

Yeah that's what I was referring to, and it's blatantly obvious. Im not using it to invalidate your criticisms, you're doing a fine job of that on your own when you claim you knew zangoose was broken despite its usage. The reason I brought it up is because your "criticisms" have focused almost exclusively on the council itself and not the Pokémon being banned. Go back and look at a few of your recent "public outrages," they're laced with backhanded shots at the council. if you want to be taken seriously, then focus on zangoose. Otherwise, be prepared for obvious accusations that you are letting your emotions get the better of you 

[OrangeManiac]

2 hours ago, Gunthug said:

Yeah that's what I was referring to, and it's blatantly obvious. Im not using it to invalidate your criticisms, you're doing a fine job of that on your own when you claim you knew zangoose was broken despite its usage. The reason I brought it up is because your "criticisms" have focused almost exclusively on the council itself and not the Pokémon being banned. Go back and look at a few of your recent "public outrages," they're laced with backhanded shots at the council. if you want to be taken seriously, then focus on zangoose. Otherwise, be prepared for obvious accusations that you are letting your emotions get the better of you 

 

Isn't me bringing up the usage a discussion of tiering? How is that directed attack towards council on its own?

 

Since the beginning I became a council member ThinkNice criticised the old NU Council for doing the decisions we felt right, instead of working as "tier leaders" and that would be looking every decision from the outside - looking the most objective we can without having any bias. Part of this was not banning things we felt strong if others didn't by usage statistics or forum discussion. Later I realized how right he was about everything.

 

Lately my critique was particularly about these two things: lack of taking usage into consideration (Zangoose) and lack of discussion (Kangaskhan, not even a thread). It's just what I believe in about the tiering in this game and it was the standard that was set on and which I considered to be the only thing working.

 

Also are you the sole arbitrer who can be taken seriously and who can't? Do you have any idea how arrogant that sounds?

 

Edit: Like, I always wanted this system to work well and all and now it's apparently allowed to call out someone for "personal bias" just because they have a different opinion about certain way of running things. Also no need to note those multiple times where I voiced out agreeing with you about the reasons for Kanga ban even though it was out of nowhere for no reason or agreeing that not quickbanning Nidoking was the right thing to do from you...

 

No, it's just me being mad and emotional trying to call out everything you do as wrong, you haven't ever done a single questionable action.

Edited November 8, 2016 by OrangeManiac