[Discussion] Snorlax/Blissey's Place in the OU Meta (Snorlax AND Blissey moved to Ubers)

[SpartacusGD]

Well this just illustrates how limited PokeMMO has been when it comes to playstyle: you don't *need* a defensive core to win matches if stall/bulky offense/balance/hyper offense are all equally represented: in fact, a team of Walls might end up getting rekt by a single Umbreon that can heal status and pass wishes to the right pokemon. Similarly, you can beat bulkier offense teams by running Spikes, a spinblocker and some nuclear attackers like Aerodactyl who can plow through weakened, slower pokemon without fear. Basically, offensive cores are a real thing in most metagames, and it's really likely that we could have them here.

For instance, Flygon+bulky Metagross+Gyarados+Blaziken is a pretty cool combo because you can abuse type resistances to beat the common special sweepers that check these pokemon without sending in a wall. Gyarados kills all the special sweepers at+1, Metagross traps Starmie, Flygon dodges Quake/Slide and stops non-Ice Jolteon (HP Grass is a 4HKO), Gyarados counters Heracross and Blaziken can switch in on Weezing's Will-O-Wisp and proceed to break walls with its solid coverage attacks. You could pair them with Houndoom/Umbreon to keep Gengar/Weezing/Gardevoir/Zam from shitting on you with Psychic/Wisp and Ludicolo or to provide support against bulky waters and Starmie, while adding some anti-stall capability with Toxic, Leech Seed, Protect etc.

In a healthy metagame it's more likely that you're going to lose from being unprepared, but that's just part of what makes the game interesting. If you know everything your opponent might run and can cover it by using the same 6 pokemon, you'd end up with a metagame that looks a lot like OU does right now.

But your iltimate core for example, cant possibly deal with a shadowball spamming gengar, sub hp ice jolteon, ok ofx ul scout for the hidden power and what if jolt subs that turn? So 1 of your core is going down and after that, what? Another thing an alakazam with cm, can spam signal beam early game to damage metagross And after its withing range of +1 signal beam, rip your whole team. So yeah thats how powerful sp atkers will be, you know in ou, snorlax / blissey is like food in real life, they have high demand cause they are musts, they are totally different from ttar and dnite which are both like fancy cars or something you dont need, they just too much not to use and makes everything cool and swift. Blisslax and ttardnite they have different reasons why they are/were on top of usage stats. So lets not pick on the fat couple anymore, if anything it'll just ruin ou to ban them. This is my opinion

[bl0nde]

• Banning Blissey+Snorlax should actually result in significantly more variety in OU
• forcing people to actually build against, plan for, and play around special attackers moreso than before
• there will be more thought put into teambuilding

Robofiend made a post in the original snorlax thread that is almost a mirror of the OP of this thread and the reasoning behind the argument is still bias and false. It is bias because you're just singling two pokemon out and saying if you take these two pokemon out with high usage rates there will be more variety. You can pitch that same argument with other pokemon in the metagame:

[spoiler]

Ban Weezing.

• It is on 50%+ of teams. Because of it's unique ability and typing, it is an easy "go to" choice as a defensive pivot. If banned, players will have to plan for and play around pokemon like heracross and machamp moreso than before. This puts more thought into team building and adds variety to the metagame.

Ban Starmie, Espeon and Jolteon.

• These special attacking elite are among the highest usage of special attackers in the game because of their high speed, high special attack, and good movepools. Players will now have to put more thought into team building for the pokemon in the special attacking slot since these "go to's" are no longer around. This puts more thought into team building and will result in significantly more variety.

Ban heracross and ursaring.

• With only a few pokemon in the metagame that can resist the brutal attack power of these two physical hitting giants, it's easy to see that they are optimal choices for any team builder. Without these two pokemon in the metagame, players will be forced to put more thought into finding an outstanding physical attacker. Pokemon like Aerodactyl and Machamp will rise in usage as we see more variety and a more healthy metagame to enjoy.[/spoiler]

Besides this bias, the argument is false in the first place because:

• A ban does not cause a big variety boom. A ban just causes a "shuffle" to the next best thing in line behind the current OP stuff. This was easily seen in the blissey test, and people are already talking about it here: "well, we will use this ludicolo/umbreon is the next best thing."
• Also, increasing special attacker usage as the result of a ban does not create more variety either, it just raises the usage rates on the most favorable special attackers. We also saw this with the blissey test - when snorlax was the main special wall, special attackers were slightly more used. Did you see slighty more variety of pokemons used? No. Mostly all we saw was starmie usage go slightly up.

At the end of the day, it is my opinion that the discussion you guys are looking for should be less focused on characteristics of snorlax and blissey and more focused on questions like:

• whether a metagame without definite checks for special attackers is a desirable metagame (and why)?
• What kind of special attacking power should pokemon typically be capable of producing in a balanced metagame?
• and what kind of balance is appropriate between our offensive and defensive forces in a healthy metagame?

Edited June 10, 2015 by bl0nde

[Gunthug]

 

Robofiend made a post in the original snorlax thread that is almost a mirror of the OP of this thread and the reasoning behind the argument is bias and false. It is bias because you're just singling two pokemon out and saying if you take these two pokemon out with high usage rates there will be more variety. This same statement can be applied to a varity of pokemon in our metagame:

[spoiler]

Ban Weezing.

• It is on 50%+ of teams. Because of it's unique ability and typing, it is an easy "go to" choice as a defensive pivot. If banned, players will have to plan for and play around pokemon like heracross and machamp moreso than before. This puts more thought into team building and adds variety to the metagame.

Ban Starmie, Espeon and Jolteon.

• These special attacking elite are among the highest usage of special attackers in the game because of their high speed, high special attack, and good movepools. Players will now have to put more thought into team building for the pokemon in the special attacking slot since these "go to's" are no longer around. This puts more thought into team building and will result in significantly more variety.

Ban heracross and ursaring.

• With only a few pokemon in the metagame that can resist the brutal attack power of these two physical hitting giants, it's easy to see that they are optimal choices for any team builder. Without these two pokemon in the metagame, players will be forced to put more thought into finding an outstanding physical attacker. Pokemon like Aerodactyl and Machamp will rise in usage as we see more variety and a more healthy metagame to enjoy.[/spoiler]

 

The entire first 2/3rds of your post doesn't make much sense to me. It is NOT "singling out" two pokemon when those two pokemon are notoriously THE HIGHEST in usage time and time again - Lax if he's in, and if he's out, then Bliss takes that spot. Again, there's no bias involved there, no matter how thin you stretch the word - We're talking about two pokemon who, when a totality of their abilities is taken into consideration, represent extremely easy solutions to the problem of special attackers in the meta.

 

Because of this (the fact that lax and bliss were not chosen randomely or haphazardly, but because of their constant link to the top of the usage charts and their role in walling special attackers effortlessly), your examples are way off the mark. It stuns me that you would compare weezing to lax/bliss. People already use a decent variety of physical walls and pivots - it's not like weezing is blocking other, less effective physical walls from being used.

 

Hell, the physical wall choice in OU is pretty balanced - none is perfect, so it's situational which you should choose based on how your team is composed. Notice how different that is than the special side, with lax/bliss. They fit on any team composition.

 

I'm not going to address the jolteon/starmie/espeon comparison because....really? And same goes with ursa/heracross - plenty of other physical attackers are viable and see usage, neither of these pokes is above 30% or so usage (i don't think, though I could be wrong on hera) so the comparison to lax/bliss in terms of metagame health is unfounded and confusing. [spoiler]though I honestly think hera should have been banned a while ago[/spoiler]

 

 

 

 

Besides this bias, the argument is false in the first place because:

• A ban does not cause a big variety boom. A ban just causes a "shuffle" to the next best thing in line behind the current OP stuff. This was easily seen in the blissey test, and people are already talking about it here: "well, we will use this ludicolo/umbreon is the next best thing."
• Also, increasing special attacker usage as the result of a ban does not create more variety either, it just raises the usage rates on the most favorable special attackers. We also saw this with the blissey test - when snorlax was the main special wall, special attackers were slightly more used. Did you see slighty more variety of pokemons used? No. Mostly all we saw was starmie usage go slightly up.

 

To address your first point, what the fuck did you just say? A ban does not cause a big variety boom? That is literally what bans do, when they're warranted. You should be arguing that this ban is warranted, or it is not warranted, and why. Yet, you are arguing that bans in general do not improve variety?

 

That aside, you can't just blindly spew theory while covering your eyes to the reality of our OU metagame. On top, there's snorlax, which is an impeccable special tank choice because it can do so many things at once. When you take snorlax away, blissey becomes the most used pokemon - it, too, can handle special attackers with very little thought. But after blissey, can you honestly say any special wall comes to mind that is foolproof? That comes in on any special attack with ease, like bliss/lax did?

 

After the bliss/lax shelf is a group of pokemon that may provide a solution for the tier. I've seen at least 5 differnet pokes mentioned in this thread, and many have already begun discussing the pros and cons of using each one, or combinations of these pokes. That is variety, blonde. This isn't the "next in line" shuffle that you're describing - it's forcing players to expand their pool of possible pokemon to utilize in the OU metagame, as the important job of stopping special attackers no longer can be filled by one pokemon for every team you run.

 

At least, that's the theory lel. We'll see how it pans out. Regarding your final questions, yeah those are all important things to be thinking about whenever the health of a metagame is discussed. That doesn't mean you can shift the focus away from bliss/lax, both of which are largely believed to be the CAUSE of the poor health of the meta.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Gunthug

[ThinkNice]

It's too bad your whole argument collapses on the premise that both Snorlax and Blissey fill a role that cannot be filled by any other Pokémon that are available to us. For example, your example of Weezing doesn't address this point as there are more physical walls that stop what Weezing stops. In fact, Weezing's role can be taken over by Pokémon that have Intimidate and desirable typing, this makes Weezing replaceable. Snorlax and Blissey both are simply not replaceable. And if you are saying Snorlax doesn't define the meta around him than I don't know what you've been doing for the past few years.

 

Anyway I'm not going to address a post build on a wrong perspective any further.

[YagamiNoir]

 

Robofiend made a post in the original snorlax thread that is almost a mirror of the OP of this thread and the reasoning behind the argument is bias and false. It is bias because you're just singling two pokemon out and saying if you take these two pokemon out with high usage rates there will be more variety. This same statement can be applied to a varity of pokemon in our metagame:

[spoiler]

Ban Weezing.

• It is on 50%+ of teams. Because of it's unique ability and typing, it is an easy "go to" choice as a defensive pivot. If banned, players will have to plan for and play around pokemon like heracross and machamp moreso than before. This puts more thought into team building and adds variety to the metagame.

Ban Starmie, Espeon and Jolteon.

• These special attacking elite are among the highest usage of special attackers in the game because of their high speed, high special attack, and good movepools. Players will now have to put more thought into team building for the pokemon in the special attacking slot since these "go to's" are no longer around. This puts more thought into team building and will result in significantly more variety.

Ban heracross and ursaring.

• With only a few pokemon in the metagame that can resist the brutal attack power of these two physical hitting giants, it's easy to see that they are optimal choices for any team builder. Without these two pokemon in the metagame, players will be forced to put more thought into finding an outstanding physical attacker. Pokemon like Aerodactyl and Machamp will rise in usage as we see more variety and a more healthy metagame to enjoy.[/spoiler]

The argument is false because:

• A ban does not cause a big variety boom. A ban just causes a "shuffle" to the next best thing in line behind the current OP stuff like we saw in the blissey test.
• Also, increasing special attacker usage as the result of a ban does not create more variety either, it just rasises the usage rates on the most favorable special attackers. We also saw this with the blissey test - when snorlax was the main special wall, special attackers were slightly more used. Did you see slighty more variety? No. All we saw was starmie usage go slightly up.

At the end of the day it is my opinion that the discussion you guys are looking for should be less focused on characteristics of snorlax and blissey and more focused on questions like:

• whether a metagame without definite checks for special attackers is a desirable metagame (and why)?
• What kind of special attacking power should pokemon typically be capable of producing in a balanced metagame?
• and what kind of balance is appropriate between our offensive and defensive forces in a healthy metagame?

 

Le slippery slopes. I'm probably not the most appropriate person to respond to this, but it admittedly intrigued me, in a somewhat negative way. 

 

Those examples and comparisons are terrible, so to speak. I mean, there's a far more justified reason the two obese Special Walls are being suspect banned this way over everything else you've listed, and evidenced in practice as well. Removing Heracross and Ursaring, for instance, unless they fall under the offensive characteristic suddenly is not justified at all, apart from the stupid idea of "creating more variety for stuff like Machamp, and all." I'm pretty sure it's logical to say that physical attacking is not stagnant nor is it stagnating anything -- in a significant way, at least. Variety in physical attacking still exists, whereas Bliss/Lax on the other hand display stagnation not only on the Special Attacking end but also some other minor things as well; heck, it mainly stagnates the usage of special walls. This test doesn't approach the standard policy of "fall under characteristics", but, well, just check some text walls in this thread explaining why. 

 

"A ban does not result in a variety boom. A ban results in a shuffle, etc."

When something that is stagnating the metagame is banned, the variety will change, inevitably, if not increase. Whether or not this will be true to the case in regards to the Blissey/Snorlax ban is unsure since we've not tested it yet, but it's what the council has come up with under the observation of the solo Bliss and the Bliss/Lax metas. And the council, with apologies for this presumptuous statement, perhaps believes that the near-fail safe ability to counter or check Special Attackers of Blissey and Snorlax, in tandem with a lot of other things they can do, are stagnating the metagame. As much as it's possibly false as it may turn out in practice, I believe it's true to word that special walling will no longer be failsafe and the variety of other special cushions will have to be used; people will have to think and plan instead of slapping an irreplaceable wall on their team which is the "variety" a healthy metagame desirably possesses. 

 

As for your final paragraph...that's what the council's been focusing on, to be fair. There was never any "characteristic ban" in this discussion to begin with, so not sure how you're pulling that out of your hat.

 

EDIT: Two ninjas, damn. 

Edited June 10, 2015 by YagamiNoir

[OldKeith]

I think it's worth mentioning that Arcanine can sponge special hits pretty well if ev trained accordingly, it also retaliates with Crunch/Extremespeed.

[bl0nde]

Guys, I put a lot of thought into that post and referenced the usage stats. I'm not saying it's perfect (it's just an opinion) but seriously approach it with an open mind:

 

• Banning snorlax and blissey then replacing them with 3-4 (umbreon, ludicolo, etc) is a "big variety boom"? Do you consider that a banworthy increase in variety? (just asking).
• The secondary effect of higher special attack usage is not a big varierty increase to me either. People do not think: "oh look, snorlax and blissey are gone, woot, I am going to try to sweep with my fav shiny sharpedo I have never used in OU". People think this: "yes, now I can finally freely spam my Jolteon and starmie up that guys butt". lol? To me it is a similar thing?

 

• in the end my opinion at this time is that It depends on the balance you are looking for in the game. which was my overall *point* and suggestion for discussion.
• I would appreciate you referencing the usage stats for evidence (none of you did) if you are going to directly quote me and imply the information I typed in regards to usage stats is false.

Edited June 10, 2015 by bl0nde

[Robofiend]

9/10 worst comment I've seen in a while.

 

Won't beat a dead horse too much, but 

 

Ban Weezing.

• It is on 50%+ of teams. Because of it's unique ability and typing, it is an easy "go to" choice as a defensive pivot. If banned, players will have to plan for and play around pokemon like heracross and machamp moreso than before. This puts more thought into team building and adds variety to the metagame.

Ban Starmie, Espeon and Jolteon.

• These special attacking elite are among the highest usage of special attackers in the game because of their high speed, high special attack, and good movepools. Players will now have to put more thought into team building for the pokemon in the special attacking slot since these "go to's" are no longer around. This puts more thought into team building and will result in significantly more variety.

Ban heracross and ursaring.

• With only a few pokemon in the metagame that can resist the brutal attack power of these two physical hitting giants, it's easy to see that they are optimal choices for any team builder. Without these two pokemon in the metagame, players will be forced to put more thought into finding an outstanding physical attacker. Pokemon like Aerodactyl and Machamp will rise in usage as we see more variety and a more healthy metagame to enjoy.

 

We have no reason to believe that any of these pokemon are actually unhealthy, which dissolves this entire hypothetical. Why would we ever ban Starmie or Espeon when they aren't Offensively Uber, they aren't Defensively Uber, they aren't Support Uber, and they aren't unhealthy and centralizing? You need to re-read these posts to get a feeling for what "healthiness" is, and why our current metagame lacks it.

 

the argument is still bias and false.

 

It's "biased"

 

 

At the end of the day, it is my opinion that the discussion you guys are looking for should be less focused on characteristics of snorlax and blissey and more focused on questions like:

• whether a metagame without definite checks for special attackers is a desirable metagame (and why)?
• What kind of special attacking power should pokemon typically be capable of producing in a balanced metagame?
• and what kind of balance is appropriate between our offensive and defensive forces in a healthy metagame?

 

There are definite checks/counters for Special attackers so I'm not sure what you're saying:

• Specially defensive Kangaskhan stops Jolt, Starmie and Zam.
• Ludicolo stops Starmie.
• Porygon2 stops Jolteon and Starmie. 
• Metagross checks Starmie.
• Swampert checks non-grass sweepers
• etc.

Please read my post on page 2 for a more definitive look at this.

 

Honestly, the second question isn't that relevant, nor is there a good answer. Special sweepers should at least be usable and they just aren't with our favorite blobs around. Special sweepers don't NEED to be viable, however. You could have a theoretical metagame where there just aren't good special sweepers, or they lack the coverage to do anything meaningful against top threats - but it could still be healthy because teams are diverse and evolution allows for new sets to arise and check old threats/introduce new ones.

 

As for the last question, the proper balance between offense and defense is that if you're good and use top pokemon you should be able to run a stall team, a bulky offense team, a balanced team or an offensive team and be able to win with some regularity. Basically, offense should be strong enough to break walls while defense should be strong enough to hold up to offensive assault - in either case, however, you'd need actual skill to win. As with other things, there are shades of this: maybe bulky offense is bad because you don't have a lot of slow, bulky attackers to build cores with or maybe there are only a couple good walls and your other defensive options are kind of meh - leading to you getting beat more often. For instance, DPP is light on stall, making bulky offense less useful (since bulky offense usually takes advantage of stallers' low damage output). But it's still a relatively healthy metagame because teams are diverse and there aren't any horribly centralizing pokemon around that stifle attempts to build new and different teams.

 

EDIT: In response to last post

 

OK nvm I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Robofiend

[YagamiNoir]

 

Guys, I put a lot of thought into that post and referenced the usage stats. I'm not saying it's perfect (it's just an opinion) but seriously approach it with an open mind:

 

• Banning snorlax and blissey then replacing them with 3-4 (umbreon, ludicolo, etc) is a "big variety boom"? Do you consider that a banworthy increase in variety? (just asking).
• The secondary effect of higher special attack usage is not a big varierty increase to me either. People do not think: "oh look, snorlax and blissey are gone, woot, I am going to try to sweep with my fav shiny sharpedo I have never used in OU". People think this: "yes, now I can finally freely spam my Jolteon and starmie up that guys butt". lol? To me it is a similar thing?

 

• in the end my opinion at this time is that It depends on the balance you are looking for in the game. which was my overall *point* and suggestion for discussion.
• I would appreciate you referencing the usage stats for evidence (none of you did) if you are going to directly quote me and imply the information I typed in regards to usage stats is false.

 

....You should read the thread thoroughly before actually posting next time. To an extent, yes, that in theory should be a "variety boom", although it's yet to be proven in practice. You can find the details as to why within the thread. 

 

>Sharpedo. Well, I get for Slowbro, but Sharpedo. And why isn't it an increase apart from the fact that "you don't think so", which means...close to nothing? Why isn't the significant decrease of stagnation in special attacking making the game more variable? 

 

...What in oblivion's name are you trying to prove? Everything the thread has been trying to centralize is to reduce the stagnation and therefore produce a "balanced" meta. A meta where your Jolteons or whatever will "fly around" and where Special wall variety is more diverse is better than one with irreplaceable obese wall stagnation. What is it in this thread that so opposes your ideals? 

 

....Don't make snide demands, and usage stats as of this current discussion are irrelevant since usage stats in a meta without Lax/Bliss don't exist yet. I didn't even think your post had anything to relate to usage stats for that matter. Oh, you're talking about the Starmie thing in your first post? An obese wall still existed, so it's irrelevant to what's being proposed now. 

[bl0nde]

You guys don't agree with any of the opinions I wrote. It is okay, continue on with the discussion you feel is appropriate. I don't want us to derail the thread a lot just in regards to my one post.

[Excelimpulse]

Cough* dugtrio just becomes a bigger issue with special sweepers. Think dugtrio needs added to the ban.

[DrCraig]

Cough* dugtrio just becomes a bigger issue with special sweepers. Think dugtrio needs added to the ban.

Yea, dugtrio in combination with Gengar/Jolteon/Espeon is probably broken. Well see.

[Excelimpulse]

Yea, dugtrio in combination with Gengar/Jolteon/Espeon is probably broken. Well see.

I don't really want to see. It doesn't take any more skill then throwing blissey or lax in then it does to run trio plus them. And what's even better....you could do that with snorlax and blissey. this really isn't a solution imo and I wanted blissey gone for a long time. There will always be something that is unhealthy in ou until we get the items,abilities,and moves needed. This split was cancerous with out them. But I could say I told you so but I won't. This just looks desperate.

[codylramey]

How is dugtrio more dangerous w/o these two?

[DrCraig]

How is dugtrio more dangerous w/o these two?

I'm not going to say it's 'more dangerous,' but it does take out most of the new walls used in cores like Arc, Magn, Pory and metagross to name a few with good specially defensive typing, but shit on by dug.

[Excelimpulse]

I'm not going to say it's 'more dangerous,' but it does take out most of the new walls used in cores like Arc, Magn, Pory and metagross to name a few with good specially defensive typing, but shit on by dug.

^. It doesn't make it more dangerous it just makes it more noticeable and a easier way to let the special sweepers sweep. I don't know how many times I gotta say it but when you keep removing pokes your gonna end up having another one rise and become centralizing With the limited pokes we have. And I'm pretty sure everyone hates dugtrio more then lax and blissey. But if we don't remove it also then ou becomes centralized around trio which makes the meta just funny.Either way trio does it's job against the fat blobs but will be more noticeable without having to kill them when it can revenge kill everything with a cb set now without spikes.

If blobs go trio must go with it or this test is pointless. It actually takes us back to 2013

[codylramey]

Idt trio is going to be much more of a problem than he is now. The only thing removing lax and blis does is eliminate some of the need for the reversal set (which he still needs to take pory and kanga). Pokes like ludicolo and maybe gardevior can handle a dug switch in fairly well if they are at a decent health. Even metagross can take an EQ from it. Although most of these pokes, after taking a hit, may not be able to sponge spcl hits w/o coming in and recovering at some point.

[Excelimpulse]

Idt trio is going to be much more of a problem than he is now. The only thing removing lax and blis does is eliminate some of the need for the reversal set (which he still needs to take pory and kanga). Pokes like ludicolo and maybe gardevior can handle a dug switch in fairly well if they are at a decent health. Even metagross can take an EQ from it. Although most of these pokes, after taking a hit, may not be able to sponge spcl hits w/o coming in and recovering at some point.

True but that's based on if everything is at full health. And what really stops gengar now? I think that thing is gonna be op. One poison and it becomes basically snorlax hax with para. I really think removing these frees a lot of stuff up making it more diverse but will create a lot of things to be broken.

[codylramey]

True but that's based on if everything is at full health. And what really stops gengar now? I think that thing is gonna be op. One poison and it becomes basically snorlax hax with para. I really think removing these frees a lot of stuff up making it more diverse but will create a lot of things to be broken.

It was mentioned in OP that gengar might have to be looked at. Umbreon can also do a pretty good job at coming in on gengar and pursuit trapping gar, poison would suck but with access to heal bell its not the end for umby. IF it did turn out that a lot of things would be broken then the test would be considered a failure and the ban will be undone. So i see no harm in testing this. Edited June 10, 2015 by codylramey

[Excelimpulse]

It was mentioned in OP that gengar might have to be looked at. Umbreon can also do a pretty good job at coming in on gengar and pursuit trapping gar, poison would suck but with access to heal bell its not the end for umby. IF it did turn out that a lot of things would be broken then the test would be considered a failure and the ban will be undone. So i see no harm in testing this.

I think it's a waste of time. To many things become unbroken. instead of having a physical meta it becomes trio+ gengar starmie jolt and eventually you sweep. And banning all those things lol I'm sure ou will be beyond boring.

Lf gen 4 moves abilities and items or reverse the split back. Devs should start to consider this. Ou is broken as broken gets with the split and even banning these two makes it more boring and more broken. We shouldn't even have to test this. You should be able to look at the huge hole that is presented with those two gone.

[DrCraig]

Well Excell if you think about it.
CB and the split was introduced. Physical pokemon became way more viable then before. Now we have a lop sided relation shop between viability of special and physical. Special attackers are handle by 1 or 2 pokemon on a team, namely Bliss or Lax. Physical pokemon require a core. Unless you run a core, you will get shit on and that's quite obvious. Weezing, Skarmory, Arcanine, Metagross, Vaporeon, Slowbro, Gardevoir, etc all need to be built with one another. So now we are faced with an obvious trend. Special attackers are walled easy, not viable, so why use them? Physical attackers are clearly more viable. I'm not saying special attackers are completely garbage and shit but they are undoubtedly outclassed. Now. If we remove Blissey and Snorlax we almost restore a viability 'equilibrium,' if you will. Now physical pokemon require a core to defend and ALSO special attackers require a core. In this meta both special and physical are roughly equally viable. Just like physical pokemon can pressure and break cores, special attacker can do this also. This promotes diversity, waters down stall, makes other playstyles more viable. I'm not saying 'the meta is only good of I need to run cores,' but it's just evidence of promoting diversity.

Yea I know this hasn't been proven or seen yet, but I predict this is what we'll see. There's no harm in testing, especially when the result could be the increase in viability of a whole new spectrum of pokemon. It's not a waste of time, I don't think you can theorymon this shit enough to predict an exact outcome.

[codylramey]

Thhorymoning can only get us but so far. Look at the lax test, most people predicted that splc attackers would become overly dominate, CM would become too powerful, and things will shift too much to the special side. Yet when i was listing off the pokes that became more viable w/o lax there were more physical attackers than special ones. As a matter of the fact some would argue that special attackers became less viable (I wouldnt but some would). No one saw any of that coming. So no the test isnt a waste of time, it will at the very least, if they just undo the bans after the test for what ever reason, provide us with needed information to help take the next steps in developing a more balanced meta. Even if it didnt do that, its not really like we dont have the time to waste. We arent getting any significant changes to the meta from the devs anytime soon.

Edited June 10, 2015 by codylramey

[Excelimpulse]

And if you guys are both talking about removing them are you not doing the same theorymon I'm doing but on the other side of it?

Your guessing that this is what could happen when ignoring dugtrio. There is a big difference you banned 3 of the top physical threats yet no big spec attackers are banned. So don't tell me it's an equilibrium because it isn't on so many levels. yeah there is cb to help but that can also hurt you a lot. Spec attackers can literally just fire away after trio destroys a special core....so does that mean I now have to run a defensive core and special core? Hhmmmmm stall based meta inbound so you don't get swept by trio and spec attackers.

Yes you have magneton on the special side to do the opposite but let's face it. That removes two defensive walls. Dugtrio can literally remove a special core without even hesitating. All you would have to do is run a mix attacker like metagross to beat down the walls and trio to clean up then send in starmie And company.

So no I'm not all about this and again I want blissey gone because I hate it but I also know that it will not be balanced. Starmie gengar and jolt are way to strong.

[Robofiend]

And if you guys are both talking about removing them are you not doing the same theorymon I'm doing but on the other side of it?

Your guessing that this is what could happen when ignoring dugtrio. There is a big difference you banned 3 of the top physical threats yet no big spec attackers are banned. So don't tell me it's an equilibrium because it isn't on so many levels. yeah there is cb to help but that can also hurt you a lot. Spec attackers can literally just fire away after trio destroys a special core....so does that mean I now have to run a defensive core and special core? Hhmmmmm stall based meta inbound so you don't get swept by trio and spec attackers.

Yes you have magneton on the special side to do the opposite but let's face it. That removes two defensive walls. Dugtrio can literally remove a special core without even hesitating. All you would have to do is run a mix attacker like metagross to beat down the walls and trio to clean up then send in starmie And company.

So no I'm not all about this and again I want blissey gone because I hate it but I also know that it will not be balanced. Starmie gengar and jolt are way to strong.

 

If Dugtrio needs to be banned, we'll ban it too.

[Excelimpulse]

If Dugtrio needs to be banned, we'll ban it too.

Cough* slippery slope. Throw gengar and trio in it with the test while your at it.