[UU Discussion] Chansey

[Artemiseta]

it has been a month and there has been no change in the meta at all. we have seen that chansey has been a problem not just for this one month but really since it was re-introduced back into the meta 3 or 4 months ago. You said people should start using counters more and I agree with hat statement but we have no way of forcing them to do that. Chnasey has high usage being found on most teams as either a way to make special attacking not viable and heal its team mates back up and status the enemy team.

Chansey has ways to do acceptable damage with toss. unless you are haunter or missyd and the toic dmg can add up and if spike are down your counters die in a matter of a couple turns

the same teams are being run. frags is one of the best on the server and he managed to figure out a way to simply wear it down. that is not a great answer as it is one person and one of the best at that

you say significant portion of the gam can cope but I count 8 pokemon there. also nidoqueen will still get stalled out with wish protect to recover damage. while it super fangs what is chansey going to do? it will get a wish off and then the cycle begins of that and superpower is the only move Queen possesses in order to get the kill from half health. once that wish is off there are otions like switch out to something to take dmg and get healed by wish. we have seen that non CB hitmonlee is not that good you and I have actually tested that out. it looks good on paper but simply doesn't work.

bulky grandbull, and muk are 2 great options zangoose is also decent but has issues with low health and needs a SD in to get dmg on Chansey that will not kill it unless zangoose is running Silk scarf

Also pair chansey up with spikes and all of a sudden on non flying/levitate users they are taking large chunks of health each time they come in

[Noad]

I will be banning Chansey in the next hour.

[DrCraig]

get rid of that 'eat out' part please

[Noad]

get rid of that 'eat out' part please

Yes I only just saw that, I am rewriting it with Darkshade. -.-

[BurntZebra]

did no one look at my edit :(

[DrCraig]

Yea Zebra fixed it nicely

[Artemiseta]

zebra did it nicely srry I couldn't fix rl issues hitting hard today.

ps I usually type bette than that just didn't get my own edit in before I had to stop cause of said rl stuff

[Barrage]

Alright so clearly based on this thread I have no idea how test bans are actually supposed to function. Why is it that we can't suspect ban if we think a Pokemon fits an uber characteristic? That is completely illogical to me. Who cares how you define it, wouldn't you want to see how the meta develops without the Pokemon in question? Pls explain, for I am apparently noob when it comes to the tiering policies.

[DrCraig]

Alright so clearly based on this thread I have no idea how test bans are actually supposed to function. Why is it that we can't suspect ban if we think a Pokemon fits an uber characteristic? That is completely illogical to me. Who cares how you define it, wouldn't you want to see how the meta develops without the Pokemon in question? Pls explain, for I am apparently noob when it comes to the tiering policies.

How do you test if something is too powerful? If it is too powerful, and fits an uber characteristic, it shouldn't effect the variety, play style balance, etc. to the extent an unhealthy pokemon would. Not significant enough.

 

Let's look at Gengar in OU, assuming no Bliss/Lax. Gengar is undeniably powerful and for discussion's sake, ban worthy. Gengar main counters and checks would include Umbreon/Porygon2/Magneton/Arcanine etc. So now let's say we decided to test ban Gengar. What are we looking for now? If it effects variety and what not significantly, that deems Gengar unhealthy, but Gengar is not unhealthy. If we ban it, we may see a decline in Magneton, but Umbreon/Porygon2/Arcanine are still top tier special defensive walls. Gengar does not effect their usage significantly enough to assume it's too powerful.

 

I might have worded it bad, or maybe I'm even wrong, but how I look at:

Pokemon A is so powerful, you have to run multiple specific counters = Centralizing (Health argument, not an uber characteristic argument.

We can't deem Pokemon A to fit an uber characteristic because it effected the meta sorta-significantly.

[fredrichnietze]

ok so if it is anything other then unhealthy for the metagame, then you dont test ban. if it is unhealthy or suspected unhealthy then you test ban. 

 

reasoning for this is:

if something is uber offensive/defensive/support then the only thing you will learn from a test ban, is what the meta will be like without the suspected pokemon. since that data is non relevant to anything other then unhealthy for the reasoning behind the slippery slope. 

the difference between unhealthy and offensive/defensive/support is that what constitutes unhealthy is the pokemons effect on the rest of the meta game. if you remove that pokemon and nothing changes, then that pokemon is either

• not a problem
• not the only problem
• test was too short

 

testing thing in a meta and testing things outside of a meta is completely different set of rules because they happen for different reasons. 

 

credits to based senile for teaching me this

[Barrage]

Sorry, still not following you guys. The reason it makes no sense to me is because it is based on the erroneous notion that we can undeniably qualify a Pokemon as "unhealthy". I think that is an egotistical thing to assume. The system assumes that you already know a Pokemon fits ubers characteristics or does not. If anything, Chansey fits defensive uber characteristics more than anything. So why are we bothering with a suspect ban if that's the case? I wasn't aware that's how it worked. "Unhealthy" isn't the category under which I would put Chansey. If anyone has some good reasoning to explain why we are calling it "unhealthy" moreso than defensive uber, please specify.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Barrage

[DrCraig]

Sorry, still not following you guys. The reason it makes no sense to me is because it is based on the erroneous notion that we can undeniably qualify a Pokemon as "unhealthy". I think that is an egotistical thing to assume. The system assumes that you already know a Pokemon fits ubers characteristics or does not. If anything, Chansey fits defensive uber characteristics more than anything. So why are we bothering with a suspect ban if that's the case? I wasn't aware that's how it worked. "Unhealthy" isn't the category under which I would put Chansey. If anyone has some good reasoning to explain why we are calling it "unhealthy" moreso than defensive uber, please specify.

Why are you asking this now?

You voted for a test ban and now you are asking why it is deemed as 'unhealthy' instead of defensive uber?

Why didn't you say it is a defensive uber, now we have to wait 6 tournaments to analyze Chansey in an aspect it isn't even ban worthy for.

damnit ;-;

 

Aside from how baffled I am:

If something is uber, how does a test ban prove it is uber? Isn't it easier to analyze it's characteristics? Testing doesn't prove much. If it was strong enough to significantly effect the tier like you're implying, I assume, then it is unhealthy. For example being centralizing.

[Robofiend]

Sorry, still not following you guys. The reason it makes no sense to me is because it is based on the erroneous notion that we can undeniably qualify a Pokemon as "unhealthy". I think that is an egotistical thing to assume. The system assumes that you already know a Pokemon fits ubers characteristics or does not. If anything, Chansey fits defensive uber characteristics more than anything. So why are we bothering with a suspect ban if that's the case? I wasn't aware that's how it worked. "Unhealthy" isn't the category under which I would put Chansey. If anyone has some good reasoning to explain why we are calling it "unhealthy" moreso than defensive uber, please specify.

 

That's the point: "unhealthiness" is really subjective, and sometimes it takes playing a metagame without a given pokemon to realize what "unhealthiness" looks like. However, it's easier to see (and to argue empirically) that something is Uber by definition. Chansey was that. 

 

To reiterate how this should work: To ban or not to ban?

 

- Is it Uber? If so, ban it and never look back. Being ban-averse helps no one.

- Is it clearly not Uber? Kek in the face of the person who suggested it and move on (e.g. Dugtrio recently)

- Is it not Uber. not necessarily unhealthy but definitely uncompetitive? Either wait for it to become cancerous and then take action or don't do anything at all. 

- Is it probably not Uber but unhealthy, uncompetitive and cancerous? We just ban things like this - Dugtrio 2014 was a good example

- Is it not Uber but probably unhealthy, but people just can't see it without it being forced on them? NOW we test ban

 

As you see, test ban's last on the list, and that's because testing is a pain in the ass and it usually doesn't tell you anything useful that you didn't already know. Also, test bans are bad because of how subjective they are. The only time test banning *really* makes sense is if one or more of the TC members say "I honestly don't know if I can ban this thing in good faith, I need to see if banning it fixes X aspect of the metagame."

 

The only reason OU has had so many test bans lately is because none of us actually KNEW if banning Snorlax/Blissey would make the metagame any more diverse or competitive, we just suspected it. It's hard to see any way that Chansey couldn't be Uber because it's a god-tier staller/supporter.

 

If anything, could someone who voted for the test ban explain to me why we're doing this instead of just banning it?

[DrCraig]

gotta print that and stick it on my refrigerator

[fredrichnietze]

ok so chansey could be argued to be 3 things.

 

-Defensive Characteristic

A Pokémon is uber if, in common battle conditions, it is able to wall and stall out a significant portion of the metagame.

 

-Support Characteristic

A Pokémon is uber if, in common battle conditions, it can consistently set up a situation in which it makes it substantially easier for other pokemon to sweep.

 

-Unhealthy

things which restrict the metagame in ways which are unfavorable for an evolving competitive metagame

 

[hr]

so for defensive, chansey is not. it has many counters that kill or force out chansey. sure chansey can protect but it will have to tank the hit the next turn or switch out. on a wall heavy team cb users may have trouble with this but they are still counters. their are dig and trampinch to trap chansey and mean look umbreon with toxic/taunt. and their are numerous other things like haunter, muk, nidos, aggron, ect.. that can switch in and force out chansey or kill it. 

yes chansey can protect scout, but it is still countered by the definition that it i forced out or killed if it stays in. therefore it is not uber defensive.

 

support. maaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe. definitely best wish passer, status absorber, and cleric. it also walls a lot of things putting it in S class for good. 

 

unhealthy. ok first off this helpful pic

[spoiler]

healthy

unhealthy

 

[/spoiler]

when you look at these two graphs you can clearly see the difference, but how can you tell without a test? ding ding ding you cant. you have to test both metas and take the data form both and compare.

[hr]

do i think chansey is unhealthy? i dont know, i think we do not yet have enough data yet. only been 2 UU officials and one TT. chansey at 37.5% putting it on 1/3 of teams.

 

do i think chansey is uber support? maaaaaaybe but i do not know enough about the definition to make up my mind.

 

do i think chansey is uber defensive? no.

[hr]

i see art arguing for defensive, and me and barrage saying maybe support/unhealthy. but the response for each is something different.

doing the right thing is not enough, we have to do it the right way.

if chansey is defensive/support it needs to be banned. if chansey is unhealthy it needs to be tested.

 

art/barrage, thoughts?

[Artemiseta]

I think it is unhealthy for UU overall
It's combination of other semi über qualities help it to be unhealthy though walling significant portions of the meta, limiting team building and supporting its team mates
Might not make total sence about to pass out will probably edit tomorrow

[gbwead]

[spoiler]Hi guys, I just finished reading everything and I am really happy to be here.[/spoiler]

 

My thoughts on Chansey:

 

I completly agree with fred. I don't think chansey being able to wall nearly all special attackers in the game makes him an uber defensive threat. When I think of Uber defensive, I think of something unbreakable, something like Lugia, something that has base stats that cover both special attacks and physicals attacks. When I look at Chansey, I see 250 hp (really good), 105 spdef (good) and a 5 def which is completly exploitable by the opponent. 

 

As for Uber support, I think there is case to be made here. Chansey is - like you all said - one of the best wish passer of UU and he is also an amazing cleric (natural cure+aroma). However, its ability to scout choice banders has the huge downfall: making chansey a set up bait. Azuramrill vs Chansey: if Chansey does protect and Azumarill does substitute, there little to no chance Chansey's team will be able to break the sub and keep 6 pokemons alive.

 

As a uber support, Wobbufet can be played with no downfalls. This is not the case with chansey that stays ultimetaly a bait regardless of all the support he can give. I guess Chansey could still fit the uber support characteristic if maybe we strecht the definition just a bit. Does a uber support needs to be perfect? Does he need to support with no downfalls?

 

As for unhealthiness, this is where chansey seems to be causing the most issues. Imo, being neither a 100% uber defense nor a 100% uber support pokemon, Chansey got some flaws, but exploiting those flaws is really difficult which is why he makes the UU meta so centralizing. I fully support the UU council with this test ban based on unhealthiness and I really hope for the best.

 

Sorry for the bad grammar, I'm tired XD

[Noad]

I personally do not see the issue with this test ban for six tournaments. There have been issues in the past where the council has been criticised for being quick to jump to a decision. Banning Chansey for 6 tournaments gives council members a chance to make sure they are completely sure a ban is the right thing to do. In my opinion I would rather bans happened in this way to avoid what happened last time where all banned Pokemon were moved back down to the UU tier. 

 

As for the reason why it was test banned, you can see from posts (even from council members) that they are unsure if Chansey is even ban worthy at all. For me this was even more reason to give the go ahead on a test ban instead of a permanent one. This gives players and council members a chance to illustrate their point that Chansey perhaps should not be banned. 

 

If Chansey is as deserving of a ban as a lot of you say then we will surely see evidence of this over the 6 tournaments in the form of usage and also the perspective and opinions of players and it will remain banned. 

 

I for one am in support of test banning Pokemon for 6 tournaments in the future before we issue a permanent ban, for me it makes sense to experience a meta in the absence of that Pokemon first before making a final call. Arguments have been made that if a Pokemon fits the uber characteristic then it should be banned without a test, however a 6 tournament test ban is not going to take away any uber characteristics that it possesses. What it will do is allow for us to be very sure that we are doing the right thing, something I fully support in light of recent back-peddling. 

[Barrage]

I personally do not see the issue with this test ban for six tournaments. There have been issues in the past where the council has been criticised for being quick to jump to a decision. Banning Chansey for 6 tournaments gives council members a chance to make sure they are completely sure a ban is the right thing to do. In my opinion I would rather bans happened in this way to avoid what happened last time where all banned Pokemon were moved back down to the UU tier. 

 

As for the reason why it was test banned, you can see from posts (even from council members) that they are unsure if Chansey is even ban worthy at all. For me this was even more reason to give the go ahead on a test ban instead of a permanent one. This gives players and council members a chance to illustrate their point that Chansey perhaps should not be banned. 

 

If Chansey is as deserving of a ban as a lot of you say then we will surely see evidence of this over the 6 tournaments in the form of usage and also the perspective and opinions of players and it will remain banned. 

 

I for one am in support of test banning Pokemon for 6 tournaments in the future before we issue a permanent ban, for me it makes sense to experience a meta in the absence of that Pokemon first before making a final call. Arguments have been made that if a Pokemon fits the uber characteristic then it should be banned without a test, however a 6 tournament test ban is not going to take away any uber characteristics that it possesses. What it will do is allow for us to be very sure that we are doing the right thing, something I fully support in light of recent back-peddling. 

I don't mind this at all. I think that assuming you are correct in identifying that a Pokemon fits an uber characteristic without the support of a developing meta without the Pokemon in question is highly egotistical, and I'm a little shocked that this is how the policies are supposed to function in the first place. So I have no objections to this basically. If there are ever any exceptions to be made, we can always make an executive decision to ban a Pokemon in a quick-ban style. As much as I think systematic policies are good, sometimes we simply have to rely on judgment. And in this case, especially with Chansey, I don't think we have enough information to do an insta-ban even if we thought it might fit uber characteristics. I'm kind of on the fence about it also. In a way, it does wall a significant portion of the meta, but it's more of an "unhealthy" thing the more I think about it. The thing that allows it to be so effective is Protect. Without that, it wouldn't have the pressure it does because choice banders would crush it. It's Chansey coupled with other defensive options that make it so powerful. I don't think any other Pokemon can do what it does. Umbreon comes close, but no access to seismic toss makes it a lot worse.

 

Edit: also, it seems like there is a lot of concern about the strength of Zam/Zard now that Chansey is test banned. If necessary, does anyone else think it would be reasonable to request a quickban on Chansey/Zam/Zard here? I know we're to use those sparingly, but the meta might be a little bit...unplayable in the circumstances I foresee. Of course, theorymon can only go so far.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Barrage

[Barrage]

So far, I have to say that the meta looks so much better right now. I don't think people have caught on to the new threats yet though.

[DrCraig]

I feel like people learned how to run Scizor and it's a wee bit too strong for me. I know Slowking and Zard exist but Scizor is very threatening otherwise.

(Yea it don't relate to chansey)

Edited July 21, 2015 by DrCraig

[DoubleJ]

*flexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Ok, so consensus says Chansey is getting the boot in a couple tournaments? Anything else jumping out at us right now? I'm thinking that the incoming update with the instant Hidden Power is going to push Alakazam over the edge of greatness. Right now it's pretty easily killed by Pursuit Scizor (God Bless Its Soul) and Swellow. Once HP Fire is introduced as being common, Swellow only true answer. 

[BurntZebra]

I assume fred stepped down?

[DoubleJ]

I assume fred stepped down?

 

Nah I just broke in =)

[gbwead]

*flexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Ok, so consensus says Chansey is getting the boot in a couple tournaments? Anything else jumping out at us right now? I'm thinking that the incoming update with the instant Hidden Power is going to push Alakazam over the edge of greatness. Right now it's pretty easily killed by Pursuit Scizor (God Bless Its Soul) and Swellow. Once HP Fire is introduced as being common, Swellow only true answer. 

I completly agree. The combination of HP fire + Signal Beam + Psychic is perfect coverage for UU.

 

I don't think agressive teams will have trouble dealing with Zam since he doesn't have any switch in options. He is also easily revenge killed by Swellow.

However, Zam makes stall completly unviable: once he get a calm mind boost, he is basically unstopabble. 

 

With 120 base speed, he outspeeds most of the tier which is why he can totally get away with playing with the modest nature. 

 

Nature modest | Ev spread: 84 hp / 252 spatk / 172 speed (outspeeds houndoom):

 

• +1 252+ SpA Alakazam Psychic vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Porygon2: 97-115 (50.5 - 59.8%) -- 85.2% chance to 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
   
• +1 252+ SpA Alakazam Hidden Power Fire vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Steelix: 126-150 (69.2 - 82.4%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
   
• +1 252+ SpA Alakazam Hidden Power Fire vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Scizor: 224-268 (126.5 - 151.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO
   
• +1 252+ SpA Alakazam Signal Beam vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Umbreon: 88-104 (43.5 - 51.4%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Leftovers recovery               0 Atk Umbreon Pursuit vs. 84 HP / 0 Def Alakazam: 62-74 (43.9 - 52.4%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Leftovers recovery 
   
• +1 252+ SpA Alakazam Psychic vs. 252 HP / 100+ SpD Kangaskhan: 127-150 (59.9 - 70.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery      156 Atk Kangaskhan Double-Edge vs. 84 HP / 0 Def Alakazam: 141-166 (100 - 117.7%) -- guaranteed OHKO                                                  [spoiler] Kangaskhan seems to be the only one  - of the wall I can think of  - that can endure a hit from Zam and kill him in one hit. Unfortunetly, with the recoil damage Kangaskhan will lose an additionnal 26%. He will then have between 14% and 4% hit points left which makes him easily killed by pretty much anything, since as a careful kangaskhan, he doesn't have the speed to rest up.[/spoiler]                                                                                
• As for Swellow and Houndoom pursuit trapping, if they do pursuit, Zam calls their bluff and doesn't switch out they are as good as dead.          Furthermore, if Zam is paired with something like Omastar, he has a an easy switch out option since both Swellow and Houndoom are harmless when they face omastar. It basically comes down to a 50/50 scenario. Pursuit Zam when he switches out and you kill him or Pursuit Zam when he doesn't switch and you die.          

I really feel that Zam is bad for the meta because he doesn't allow player to play defence similarly to Chansey that didn't allow player to play offence.