[OU Discussion] Gengar [Voted 6-1 in favor of banning]

[DoubleJ]

Prior to any input from the OU Council, I'd just like to share my thoughts. Initially I felt Gengar placed too much pressure on the tier and that it simply was going to force players to overcentralize. It's offensive characteristics are mind boggling, but it seems Gengar just can't "sweep through the tier with ease". It relies on dual STABS that hit very few pokemon super-effectively, which means it doesn't get those OHKO's you'd expect. Thunderbolt is an incredible coverage option, but players have found how to evade Gengar with pokemon that are OHKO'd by this attack. On top of this, Umbreon and Arcanine have proven to be able to handle Gengar, despite Gengar having sets that could beat them. Players aren't willing to sacrifice potential sweeping power just to counter a check, which in my opinion is reasonable. While unrelated to a potential ban based on uber offensive characteristics, Gengar also plays a crucial defensive role in this meta as well.

 

So with this in mind, I feel Gengar shouldn't be banned by uber offensive characteristics. If anything, it could get bumped for being unhealthy, but honestly, it hasn't appeared to be that centralizing. The most tormenting set I've seen is Defensively Bulky Gengar with Sludge Bomb / Shadow Ball / WoW / Pain Split. That thing just never seems to die and it can still deliver a major bomb with STAB Sludge Bomb.

 

Nevertheless, I'm eager to hear what the OU Council has to say. 

[Robofiend]

I really don't think there's a consensus on Gengar at this point, Noad. 

[Noad]

I really don't think there's a consensus on Gengar at this point, Noad. 

[gbwead]

I didn't really know where to talk about this. I have noticed 1 strange voter in the Gengar poll. 

DiscoloredPixels has voted Yes and his account has been created yesterday.

It is probably no big deal, but I just thought it could not hurt to mention it.

 

If we remove the 1 odd vote, the poll is right now at 32 for Yes and 31 for No. Is Gengar the most controversal suspect ban in the history of Pokemmo?

Edited August 14, 2015 by lamerb

[DrCraig]

I didn't really know where to talk about this. I have noticed 1 strange voter in the Gengar poll. 

DiscoloredPixels has voted Yes and his account has been created yesterday.

It is probably no big deal, but I just thought it could not hurt to mention it.

 

If we remove the 1 odd vote, the poll is right now at 32 for Yes and 31 for No. Is Gengar the most controversal suspect ban in the history of Pokemmo?

Snorlax/Blissey you noob

[gbwead]

My thoughts on the Gengar situation

 

From what I have seen on the « [OU Discussion] Gengar » thread, if Gengar gets banned, it would be following a suspect test that would determine whether or not he is unhealthy for the meta.

 

I believe banning Gengar because he is deemed unhealthy would be a mistake. By banning Lax/Bliss, the OU council were expecting an healthier metagame (the suspect test back then was supposed to prove that). Wouldn’t banning Gengar because he is unhealthy results in casting doubt on the Bliss/Lax test? Going from an unhealthy meta to another?

 

I strongly believe Bliss and Lax were toxic for the OU tier. Gengar is not as toxic and not as centralizing.

If Gengar gets banned, I hope it will be because he fits either the Uber Offensive characteristic or the Uber Support characteristic. However, with the current definition of the Uber Offensive characteristic, I don’t think we can say Gengar can “easily sweep” a large portion of the OU tier.

 

[hr]

 

Maybe - and only maybe – it would be possible to modify the current Uber Offensive definition to include Wall Breaking or a Constant Offensive Pressure element? I’m not sure it would be a good idea, but maybe something to consider.

Rhydon, for instance, will never be fit the Uber Offensive characteristic unless we include wallbreaking. The « [UU Discussion] Rhydon » was opened with the question “do you consider Rhydon to fit the Uber Offensive characteristic?” and yet he can wallbreak, but not sweep. 

[Robofiend]

My thoughts on the Gengar situation

 

From what I have seen on the « [OU Discussion] Gengar » thread, if Gengar gets banned, it would be following a suspect test that would determine whether or not he is unhealthy for the meta.

 

I believe banning Gengar because he is deemed unhealthy would be a mistake. By banning Lax/Bliss, the OU council were expecting an healthier metagame (the suspect test back then was supposed to prove that). Wouldn’t banning Gengar because he is unhealthy results in casting doubt on the Bliss/Lax test? Going from an unhealthy meta to another?

 

I strongly believe Bliss and Lax were toxic for the OU tier. Gengar is not as toxic and not as centralizing.

If Gengar gets banned, I hope it will be because he fits either the Uber Offensive characteristic or the Uber Support characteristic. However, with the current definition of the Uber Offensive characteristic, I don’t think we can say Gengar can “easily sweep” a large portion of the OU tier.

 

[hr]

 

Maybe - and only maybe – it would be possible to modify the current Uber Offensive definition to include Wall Breaking or a Constant Offensive Pressure element? I’m not sure it would be a good idea, but maybe something to consider.

Rhydon, for instance, will never be fit the Uber Offensive characteristic unless we include wallbreaking. The « [UU Discussion] Rhydon » was opened with the question “do you consider Rhydon to fit the Uber Offensive characteristic?” and yet he can wallbreak, but not sweep. 

 

This is why I don't think the "Uber" definitions are that helpful - they limit the discussion to a small set of facts about a pokemon.

 

And yeah, if you can name more than 3 OU pokemon that live 3 attacks from Gengar I'll like your post

[DoubleJ]

252 SpA Gengar Sludge Bomb vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Arcanine: 64-76 (32.4 - 38.5%) -- 3.1% chance to 3HKO after Leftovers recovery

 

252 SpA Gengar Sludge Bomb vs. 252 HP / 128+ SpD Umbreon: 51-61 (25.2 - 30.1%) -- 0.8% chance to 4HKO after Leftovers recovery

 

252 SpA Gengar Sludge Bomb vs. 252 HP / 216+ SpD Porygon2: 60-72 (31.2 - 37.5%) -- 0% chance to 3HKO after Leftovers recovery

 

252 SpA Gengar Sludge Bomb vs. 4 HP / 252 SpD Chansey: 58-70 (17.7 - 21.4%) -- possible 7HKO after Leftovers recovery

 

252 SpA Gengar Shadow Ball vs. 252 HP / 216+ SpD Swampert: 55-66 (26.5 - 31.8%) -- 37.5% chance to 4HKO after Leftovers recovery (barring the uncommon Giga Drain)

[gbwead]

This is why I don't think the "Uber" definitions are that helpful - they limit the discussion to a small set of facts about a pokemon.

 

And yeah, if you can name more than 3 OU pokemon that live 3 attacks from Gengar I'll like your post

Well, it is not really possible since there is a Gengar moveset, ev spread and specific nature that can handle any pokemon in the tier with 3 attacks. Modest Gengar can pretty much kill anything in 3 attacks and Focus Punch Gengar can kill the defiant walls. 

 

However, I don't think it changes anything in the perspective of a ban. I remember Zebra saying not long ago regarding Alakazam that it doesn't matter if Zam is unhealthy because prior to that he will be considered as a Uber.

 

It really doesn't matter if a pokemon can kill everything in 3 attacks: 

[spoiler]Can you name more than 3 UU pokemons that live 3 attacks from Alakazam? No. Why were you against the Alakazam ban then?[/spoiler]

 

Gengar is versatile, but his versatility is more Uber than unhealthy imo.

 

Edit: I just think it is weird to have 2 unhealthy bans following each other. Where will it end?

Edited August 18, 2015 by lamerb

[Robofiend]

 

Well, it is not really possible since there is a Gengar moveset, ev spread and specific nature that can handle any pokemon in the tier with 3 attacks. Modest Gengar can pretty much kill anything in 3 attacks and Focus Punch Gengar can kill the defiant walls. 

 

However, I don't think it changes anything in the perspective of a ban. I remember Zebra saying not long ago regarding Alakazam that it doesn't matter if Zam is unhealthy because prior to that he will be considered as a Uber.

 

It really doesn't matter if a pokemon can kill everything in 3 attacks: 

[spoiler]Can you name more than 3 UU pokemons that live 3 attacks from Alakazam? No. Why were you against the Alakazam ban then?[/spoiler]

 

Gengar is versatile, but his versatility is more Uber than unhealthy imo.

 

Edit: I just think it is weird to have 2 unhealthy bans following each other. Where will it end?

 

 

Well this is part of why I really disagreed with Senile/Think's phrasing of the "unhealthy" question. I see unhealthy=banworthy, but it can be hard to actually see if something's unhealthy or not without testing the meta without. Thus if the meta is healthier - ban. If it's not then that means there's another problem. What we saw is that the meta got healthier, but it's still not maximally healthy - in a lot of cases Gengar can be the deciding factor because it can kill just about anything with the right moveset. The problem with the way Senile/Think conceived of this (yes, I know Zebra was on TC but this was Think's idea-ish) is that they said "well either the meta's healthier or it isn't" which can change over time. So while the game can get healthier from banning Snorlax, there can still be unhealthy players in it.

 

Prime example: original Snorlax ban. I said "ban" because the game did get healthier - but the problems weren't totally fixed. Senile and Zebra, for some completely unknown reason, figured it made more sense to unban Snorlax and then reban Snorlax+Blissey - something that never happens in comp. tiering! Smogon would have lol'd at that.

 

The reason Zam is different is that it really struggles to switch in and Gengar doesn't - UU's not a totally offensive tier, but Zam can't really afford to take big hits from Slowking or Vileplume if it mispredicts or accidentally takes status. On top of that, one of the best offensive pokes in the tier (Scizor) is a crazy good check to it, as is Swellow, whose viability is being pushed down by the equally insane Rhydon. Ofc, once you factor in HP Fire, then things get a little crazier and it's pretty much run Swellow or die - which sucks.

 

Enough about UU tho.

 

The point is that "healthiness" is a weird concept and a lot of things influence how healthy a metagame is, and it's not always easy to see how a change will affect the tier - e.g. when we banned Sal/Hera/Dnite/Snorlax and OU went to shit and we had to reverse everything. I don't want to have to do that again, mostly, and test bans are a nice way to facilitate that.

[gbwead]

All that gud stuff

I get it now thanks to that godly post.

Edited August 18, 2015 by lamerb

[DoubleJ]

Cough cough... complex curselax cough...

[DrCraig]

Cough cough... complex curselax cough...

No. Snorlax was unhealthy, not curse.

[BurntZebra]

Well to be fair, banning snorlax alone wouldn't have done much, except make everyone run blissey instead. So even with snorlax out of the picture, blissey still prevented special attackers from being viable at all. An all or nothing situation. I regret nothing

[Barrage]

I don't think the fatty bans were wrong. The issue is not with the decisions but with the decision tree upon which we are basing the decisions. This process has become a bureaucratic nightmare and most of the discussion is not addressing the issues themselves but the approach with which it must be done to accommodate what I think is an absurd bureaucratic roadbloc . I agree that going forward it may be wise to revise some of the conditions used in the decision tree.

[Barrage]

I don't think the fatty bans were wrong. The issue is not with the decisions but with the decision tree upon which we are basing the decisions. This process has become a bureaucratic nightmare and most of the discussion is not addressing the issues themselves but the approach with which it must be done to accommodate what I think is an absurd bureaucratic roadbloc . I agree that going forward it may be wise to revise some of the conditions used in the decision tree.

[DoubleJ]

The Health of OU

 

Snorlax (bad) ---> banned ---> Blissey + Gengar (bad tier)

 

Snorlax + Blissey (bad) ---> banned ---> Gengar (no one really knows)

 

Blissey (bad) ---> Snorlax + Gengar (really bad tier)

 

 

 

So what the fuck do you do? In the above scenarios we banned Snorlax and found out that Blissey and Gengar clogged the tier up so heavily that it was absolute shit. Hypothesizing a ban on Blissey, we can see that Snorlax usage will probs increase and so will Gengar, as Gengar was one of the favorite counters/checks to Curselax with that fabled WoW. With Snorlax and Blissey banned we're seeing a stable meta, but one that is being viewed as "stale". Gengar holds the tier in check by preventing stall from becoming an overpowering playstyle. It also prevents physical offense from being too strong and can check Calm Mind users like Espeon, Gardevoir, and Slowbro. It does a lot of good for the tier, but in doing so it is being viewed as "too centralizing". I understand that, but what are we to do? Are we really going to make the tier worse by banning Gengar and watching a whole new set of problems arise?

 

Now don't give me that bs about assumptions. We all can see the risks of banning Gengar, so don't play dumb.  

 

So I'm going to make a proposal. 

 

We suspect ban Gengar for two months and investigate what the meta looks like without it. If after those two months we notice stall taking over the tier and us losing balance, then we back track. If a Gengar ban is a failure, then I propose we reset the OU tier. This means we bring back the Uber threats and figure out where we went wrong, because honestly we went wrong somewhere. That or we eat crow and simply complex ban Curse on Snorlax, which is something we are capable of and makes a load of sense tiering wise. 

 

So let me support my argument: Resetting the meta will give us a second, third, or whatever chance at looking at the tier as a whole with this unique situation. Having easy access to hidden powers might be a game changer as well (think HP Fighting on Gengar). We've also forced players to be very creative and introduced them to defensive pokes like Umbreon, Porygon2, and Venusaur, so maybe this experience will help to improve the tier. From that point we can begin eliminating the overpowered threats like Tyranitar. 

 

For my second argument, Curse Snorlax was the dominating force in OU. It was hands down the best wall in the game that could act as a sweeper as well. It forced players to run Rhydon, a WoW user, and a phaser just to stop it. Without Tyranitar it really had a lot of freedom to set-up. It was a major clot in OU. Banning Curse though on Snorlax offers players to develop teams that don't rely on countering Snorlax. A Snorlax without Curse also forces players to second guess using Blissey, considering Snorlax is her best counter, especially when thinking about SubPunch Lax. With Snorlax and Blissey present, Gengar usage would drop freeing up some clots in the tier. Stall would be viable, as well as offense. Dugtrio would be punished by Whirlwind Lax which would be more popular. The negatives to this would include the fact that Snorlax + Blissey would be the special walls in the tier just as they were before and that special sweepers would again drop a few percentage in use. Honestly though if we compare the numbers the only things that prospered by banning Snorlax and Blissey were Gengar (already highly used), Dugtrio (stops the new special walls even easier than Lax or Blissey), Jolteon (unusual considering Porygon2 is the best Jolt counter), and Gardevoir (seeing less and less usage with Gengar's popularity). If you compare numbers from previous usage statistics, special sweepers like Starmie and Slowbro had better usage in the Lax and Bliss meta. 

 

Anyhoos I'm rambling now. OU is fucked up. Tier Council wants to fix it. Banning Gengar might make it worse. So if that's true, we need to go back and find a better solution. 

[DrCraig]

Ah I'm on my phone and so did ready everything
We are talking ban, probably going to test, in our PM
Robo is just being a softy
I say we test because the meta afterwards is potentially shit-we

Regarding Curselax, if we complex ban it, it won't stop everybody from running Snorlax still. It won't stop it from hitting 70%. Might as well throw Blissey down there too.
Edit: oh yea, curse isn't the problem, it's not broken

Edited August 20, 2015 by DrCraig

[DoubleJ]

Regarding Curselax, if we complex ban it, it won't stop everybody from running Snorlax still. It won't stop it from hitting 70%. Might as well throw Blissey down there too.
Edit: oh yea, curse isn't the problem, it's not broken

 

Ya we'd back track to the point where Lax and Bliss were both in the meta. A meta without Blissey, but with Snorlax and Gengar, is likely very, very bad and probs the worst we've seen. I honestly believe a meta without Curselax is going to provide a lot of freedom and creativity, but this is not here nor there. Let's see what a Gengar suspect ban would look like. 

[BurntZebra]

I don't really think unbanning tyranitar or dragons would do much for the meta. I guess since hidden power is more accessible, stuff like gengar could run hp fighting for tyranitar, but it'd still be too much. Salamence and dragonite are probably still too much as well. Even though I really don't want test bans to be the norm, gengar is probably worthy of a test instead of a straight up ban, although since we don't really have a voting process like smogon, a test ban and a straight up ban are basically the same thing. I'm also convinced that the meta will be fine after gengar goes on vacation. I wouldn't really consider gengar a check to calm minders unless you run endure salac destiny bond to beat espeon 100% of the time. There are still physical walls that can handle normal attackers+fighting+ground. There are still answers to stall (I don't really think anyone runs full on stall anyways, moreso balanced or bulky offense). 

 

Let's not forget that gengar already beat snorlax and blissey, either with subpunch sets, taunt will o wisp, or perish trap, so its not like gengar is magically super balanced when 2 pokemon can kind of take on 4 sp atk set. 

 

Even though people have started to run umbreon, porygon2, and venusaur, I can't imagine people would ever run the first two with specially defensive sets (physically defensive pory has a nice niche but w/e) when there's fucking snorlax and blissey. Umbreon is so much more bait than blissey even, aside from a pretty slow taunt, and porygon2 doesn't really handle calm minders on any level near snorlax. 

 

Complex bans are most likely not happening, unless craig and robofiend undermine me, which is pretty unlikely.

[DoubleJ]

 

 

Complex bans are most likely not happening, unless craig and robofiend undermine me, which is pretty unlikely.

 

You sound like you run OU. Even saw you post in normal chat that you were responsible for Snorlax/Blissey ban. Should probs tone back the "me" stuff. 

 

Nevertheless, we're just going to have to wait and see what this meta will be like with Gengar gone since that's the only way to prove to the three of you that this is a bad idea. 

[BurntZebra]

You sound like you run OU. Even saw you post in normal chat that you were responsible for Snorlax/Blissey ban. Should probs tone back the "me" stuff. 

 

Nevertheless, we're just going to have to wait and see what this meta will be like with Gengar gone since that's the only way to prove to the three of you that this is a bad idea. 

Well there is an I in tier council, actually two but that's besides the point. Its not like I would say "I had no part in banning snorlax and blissey" because that's pretty false any way you think about it. I'm in no way "in charge" of the OU council, but I don't want to have tier council members undermine previous tiering rules just because senile isn't here to make you feel bad about yourself for suggesting a complex ban. 
 

[DoubleJ]

Well there is an I in tier council, actually two but that's besides the point. Its not like I would say "I had no part in banning snorlax and blissey" because that's pretty false any way you think about it. I'm in no way "in charge" of the OU council, but I don't want to have tier council members undermine previous tiering rules just because senile isn't here to make you feel bad about yourself for suggesting a complex ban. 
 

 

And again, it's not against the rules and it never was. It's even in the tiering policy if you ever care to read it. The only argument against a complex ban was "if we make one complex ban, we have to consider others". Which is basically saying, we have no common sense and have to consider every possible complex ban under the sun. For example Dragon Claw on Salamence or Dragon Dance on Tyranitar. 

[BurntZebra]

And again, it's not against the rules and it never was. It's even in the tiering policy if you ever care to read it. The only argument against a complex ban was "if we make one complex ban, we have to consider others". Which is basically saying, we have no common sense and have to consider every possible complex ban under the sun. For example Dragon Claw on Salamence or Dragon Dance on Tyranitar. 

But there's no reason to complex ban curse, which is akin to banning dragon claw on salamence or dragon dance on tyranitar. If you list why snorlax should be allowed in OU without curse, I will write an elaborate paragraph on how dragonite and salamence would make the meta better if we put them back in OU with a complex ban on dragon claw. 

 

edit: it would be a sarcastic paragraph mocking you

Edited August 20, 2015 by BurntZebra

[DoubleJ]

But there's no reason to complex ban curse, which is akin to banning dragon claw on salamence or dragon dance on tyranitar. If you list why snorlax should be allowed in OU without curse, I will write an elaborate paragraph on how dragonite and salamence would make the meta better if we put them back in OU with a complex ban on dragon claw. 

 

edit: it would be a sarcastic paragraph mocking you

 

And this is the nonsensical lack of common sense kind of stuff that led us down this road in the first place. It's also an unnecessary attempt at belittling a fellow tier council member and an attempt at intimidation through potential bullying. For shame zebra.

 

A complex ban on Curselax is reasonable, possible, and healthy for the meta. It is also an alternative to banning Snorlax, Blissey, Gengar, and potentially more, which is what we're facing now. 

 

Another interesting point is that the overseeing council makes decisions on Complex and Flat bans, not the individual councils. So the responsibility isn't even in Zebra's hands, or mine. 

 

 

"The Overseeing Council is lead by Darkshade, LeTyrone and Noad, members of this council are Artemiseta and OrangeManiac. The overseeing council's purpose is:

- Overseeing and maintaining the tierlist policies.

- Reviewing every proposed change from the councils. 

- Handling broader aspects of tiering such as; complex bans and flat bans on moves and abilities. "