[OU Discussion] Chansey (Remains OU)

[BurntZebra]

I think you are missing that most of these pokes (with the exception of Umbreon) are being used alongside Chansey, not instead of. Also, I don't see the comparison between Shuckle and Chansey in this instance. Tox+Toss can put out a pretty reasonable amount of damage, and shuckle does not have access to instant recovery like Chansey does. Lastly, Shuckle is susceptible to status, and rest is great and all, but forces it to switch or makes it set-up bait. 

Shuckle is not a direct comparison to chansey, although they both take attacks very well from specific types. They both lack offense, is where the similarity is. 

 

If they're being used alongside chansey, then I don't see what your argument is even.

[KaynineXL]

Ludicolo is a pretty nice special wall considering nothing runs special bug moves and special poison moves aren't all that common, only from weezing and venusaur, and not even weezing sometimes. 

Nothing runs special bug moves, so nobody uses Signal beam Espy & Alakazam?

[BenGorgon]

Shuckle is not a direct comparison to chansey, although they both take attacks very well from specific types. They both lack offense, is where the similarity is. 

 

If they're being used alongside chansey, then I don't see what your argument is even.

 

That Chansey, like Gengar, is being used as a catch-all. While all the other specially defensive Pokes have clear weaknesses or shortcomings that can be skilfully played around or outright exploited, Chansey is too versatile and good at its' job not to use. I can see the pursuit trap argument to a certain extent, but I just don't think that is a compelling enough argument, or enough of a widely available move to use it as a primary argumentative stance.  

 

 

Nothing runs special bug moves, so nobody uses Signal beam Espy & Alakazam?

 

Or Signal Beam Jolt for that matter. 

Edited October 1, 2015 by BenGorgon

[BurntZebra]

 

 

TL;DR - while Chansey might not be as highly used as Blissey, I think it's going to start seeing more usage in light of how effective it is. Furthermore, being used isn't the only criterion for the health of anything (not sure how people STILL don't understand this) and you have to look at suspects holistically to see what makes them healthy/unhealthy. I'm not 100% on Chansey, but I have yet to hear a really compelling argument for how it's good for OU: most people opposing Chansey ban just seem to be posting some variation of "YEAH BUT IF YOU USE THIS UNVIABLE/UNCOMMON STRATEGY THEN CHANSEY IS USELESS LOL" @Kanzo smh, suggesting Sub/Flail when Arc is top 5 most used, @K9 suggesting Blaziken who is terminally NU in the OU metagame, for now.

Well I don't really have a great explanation on how chansey is good for the meta, but that argument can be used for anything really. Why is metagross good for the meta? Why is porygon2 good for the meta? Why is ludicolo good for the meta? Any statement you can come up for these questions can easily be countered just like if I tried to explain why chansey is fine for the meta. (You can answer any of those questions and I will counter it gladly)

 

edit:

 

Nothing runs special bug moves, so nobody uses Signal beam Espy & Alakazam?

Alakazam is 2.99% usage, so not really. Espeon usually goes for hp fire coverage over signal beam so it beats metagross/skarmory better.

 

 

 

Or Signal Beam Jolt for that matter. 

who would run signal beam on jolteon? It provides no coverage for anything and thunderbolt hits ludicolo about the same.

Edited October 1, 2015 by BurntZebra

[KaynineXL]

 

Alakazam is 2.99% usage, so not really. Espeon usually goes for hp fire coverage over signal beam so it beats metagross/skarmory better.

 

who would run signal beam on jolteon? It provides no coverage for anything and thunderbolt hits ludicolo about the same.

I see a load of the espy taking signal to win cm wars with slowbro and other espy. Not only that, if ludi was more popular.. people would run signal beam more often.

[BurntZebra]

I see a load of the espy taking signal to win cm wars with slowbro and other espy. Not only that, if ludi was more popular.. people would run signal beam more often.

Signal beam would never be specifically for ludicolo, is what I'm getting at. And >implying ludi should be more popular. It's already 25% usage. I don't know how much you want these pokemon to be used

[BenGorgon]

who would run signal beam on jolteon? It provides no coverage for anything and thunderbolt hits ludicolo about the same.

 

Some of us are poverty.But Signal Beam also lets you fish for the Special Defense drops, lets you at least hit Garde on the switch instead of it healing, and is an okay neutral damage choice if you can't afford them fancy HP Ice/Grass jolts. It certainly is not as viable, but it is there. 

[KaynineXL]

Signal beam would never be specifically for ludicolo, is what I'm getting at. And >implying ludi should be more popular. It's already 25% usage. I don't know how much you want these pokemon to be used

It's used often as a bold bulky meta counter rather than a sp wall. When it's used more as a sp wall.. Then you go signal.

Edited October 1, 2015 by KaynineXL

[BurntZebra]

Some of us are poverty.But Signal Beam also lets you fish for the Special Defense drops, lets you at least hit Garde on the switch instead of it healing, and is an okay neutral damage choice if you can't afford them fancy HP Ice/Grass jolts. It certainly is not as viable, but it is there. 

From a competitive standpoint, you should assume that we aren't peasants and we have hp grass/ice on our jolteons. Signal beam can't hit ground types for much damage. Shadow ball would hit gardevoir harder and have special defense drops (pretty sure signal beam doesn't sp def drop, only confuse)

 

edit: 

It's used often as a bulky meta counter rather than a sp wall. When it's used more as a sp wall.. Then you go signal.

Signal beam wouldn't be that helpful vs ludicolo though. Its only 10% more powerful than stab psychic, without the special defense drop chance. Damage difference isn't too noticeable. 

Edited October 1, 2015 by BurntZebra

[BenGorgon]

(pretty sure signal beam doesn't sp def drop, only confuse)

 

You are quite right, my mistake.

[KaynineXL]

 

Signal beam wouldn't be that helpful vs ludicolo though. Its only 10% more powerful than stab psychic, without the special defense drop chance. Damage difference isn't too noticeable. 

 

10% increase in damage is pretty good. Sure it don't have the sp def drop, but it does have the chance to confuse. Sure having a whole move taken just for 10% increase dmg doesn't seem much, but when you factor in its uses for espy+slowbro, it's not bad at all.

 

edit: think we derailed... quite a bit.

Edited October 1, 2015 by KaynineXL

[zteban]

chansey deserve at least a test ban, there is no skill in come in any special attacker to just wish pass without cost

[bl0nde]

Toxic stall is good offense against just about anything not named Metagross (or Skarmory/Forretress)

what I see a lot of people doing is just running Chansey to prevent the opponent's Chansey from ever using Toxic or Seismic Toss too effectively.

:huh: toxic OP offensively. First time I see it, but okay if it is your opinion.

Wish/Protect scouting trick, can pretty easily rack up residual damage on Choice Banders and setup attackers alike

:huh: other special walls can do the same trick with the protect move to scout the choice band move, I don't understand why it is a reason to call a certain special wall out over the others for it.

 

Wish/Protect scouting trick, can pretty easily rack up residual damage on Choice Banders

Also, you must be talking about spikes being out - "residual damage". I don't know how to explain wish and protect damaging the opponent?

 

Chansey is the supreme ruler of special walls right now

Here is mine:

[spoiler]

[/spoiler]

I calc'd it out of curiosity:

252 SpA Starmie Surf vs. 248 HP / 248+ SpD Umbreon: 42-49 (20.8 - 24.3%)
252 SpA Starmie Surf vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Chansey: 66-78 (18.4 - 21.8%)
 

As far as walling capability there is only a very small difference. Actually, umbreon is better at defending against pursuit users (1/2 damage). It's true that natural cure is useful and prefered by most. Synchronize is also useful though. Many of you (like myself) I imagine have predicted a W-o-W from weezing then switched in umbreon for weezing to burn itself then you can heal bell the W-o-W off, then protect on the incoming choice band just the same as you do with chansey.

 

The only big difference defensively is that umbreon takes the signal beam hits. They still often don't do a great deal of damage since they usually arn't stab.

 

So I can see there is a bunch of reasons being proposed for this ban to pass but I don't see anything stand out in particular. All it is a bunch of collective things trying to make this chansey sound like the bane of OU. For me, I just can't see it. But I know how the system works once robo has said it. I've already seen chansey in trade chat before this thread was even made because robo said one thing on it in the gengar thread. I will put my chansey in the trash as well and begin on my HP fire umbreon. Hopefully things will work out okay and the meta will be fun without the chansey.

[Robofiend]

stuff

 

Sorry but you need to reread my post, you majorly missed the following points:

 

1. NC is a big deal and other Clerics have to run Heal Bell to be as effective at stopping status

2. Wish/Toxic/Protect isn't the problem, Chansey is the problem

3. Other special walls have special weaknesses or can't heal themselves/prevent Toxic from running them over

 

Stuff I should have been more clear about:

 

1. Protect can be used to rack up extra Toxic damage on CB Heracross or Ursa as can spikes (which I didn't explicitly point out)

2. Toxic isn't "OP" it's just good for offensive and bulky offensive teams: it lets you wear down walls who can otherwise abuse instant recovery and makes faster sweepers more effective against tanks like Slowbro and Arcanine, who otherwise give sweeper-ish teams a hard time.

 

Last bit:

 

So I can see there is a bunch of reasons being proposed for this ban to pass but I don't see anything stand out in particular. All it is a bunch of collective things trying to make this chansey sound like the bane of OU. For me, I just can't see it. But I know how the system works once robo has said it. I've already seen chansey in trade chat before this thread was even made because robo said one thing on it in the gengar thread. I will put my chansey in the trash as well and begin on my HP fire umbreon. Hopefully things will work out okay and the meta will be fun without the chansey.

 

Yeah that's the whole point: it's not about one aspect of the pokemon ever, it's about looking at pokemon holistically. I'm not like 100% for banning Chansey (or quickbanning it, rather) but I do feel like there's a multitude of reasons that Chansey should be banned, starting with it just being inconsistent to keep Chansey around when it's almost as effective as Blissey and ending with it just being useful as hell in the current game.

 

I don't know if people are selling their Chanseys because of my comment but lol ok.

 

I am always open for people to point out ways that Chansey is in fact healthy for the game, but no one ever really does that. Why does the game need Chansey? I'm not seeing quality responses to that question enough.

 

edit: good point @Zebra, i'll address "why is it good for the meta" later

Edited October 2, 2015 by Robofiend

[DoubleJ]

 

I am always open for people to point out ways that Chansey is in fact healthy for the game, but no one ever really does that. Why does the game need Chansey? I'm not seeing quality responses to that question enough.

 

 

This, this, and more of this. In a debate of health, we have to compare the qualities by which this single pokemon effects the metagame. Chansey is sure one hell of a defensive wall and pivot, but what does it bring to the table that is healthy for the tier?

 

Is having an additional antagonist of Toxic-spam useful, outside of our common steel-types Metagross and Forretress? Is Chansey's lack of an offensive presence creating diversity by promoting pokemon that can take advantage of this? Are these things that should be considered?

 

So please, for the pro-Chansey folks out there... speak up =)

[lVlusay]

Maybe some of you didn't know, but the reason Chansey is called a special wall is because it can take special attacks lol That's a point of a special wall. Like physical attackers destroy pokemons with low def or special attackers destroy pokemons with low sp.def. And they are really good at it, so what? If you don't like it, don't use it, simple. There are so many ways to deal with it. It's even risky to run Chansey as a special wall because you can easily lose it. If wish passing to weezing is a problem, ban weezing. Stop banning all special walls.

[BenGorgon]

Maybe some of you didn't know, but the reason Chansey is called a special wall is because it can take special attacks lol That's a point of a special wall. Like physical attackers destroy pokemons with low def or special attackers destroy pokemons with low sp.def. And they are really good at it, so what? If you don't like it, don't use it, simple. There are so many ways to deal with it. It's even risky to run Chansey as a special wall because you can easily lose it. If wish passing to weezing is a problem, ban weezing. Stop banning all special walls.

 

This is the kind of argument that is truly irrelevant. There are plenty of other special walls available and viable in OU with Chansey gone. Chansey requires no skill to use, and that causes a disparity in the competitiveness of team building.

 

In a perfect meta, there would be a rock, paper, scizors, cycle of Special Attackers that could be hard countered by X Special Wall, but not necessarily by Y. Weezing is not the problem in the core. Weezing can be worn down, checked by physical attackers, and outplayed. Chansey really can not on the special side, and has options to make those few special options useless. 

Edited October 2, 2015 by BenGorgon

[bl0nde]

Can you the council member who are for the ban explain how the tier becomes significantly more healthy if the ban goes through to us please. In terms of [url=http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/characteristics-of-a-desirable-pokemon-metagame.66515/]balance, variety, etc.[/url] ty.

[Robofiend]

This, this, and more of this. In a debate of health, we have to compare the qualities by which this single pokemon effects the metagame. Chansey is sure one hell of a defensive wall and pivot, but what does it bring to the table that is healthy for the tier?

 

Is having an additional antagonist of Toxic-spam useful, outside of our common steel-types Metagross and Forretress? Is Chansey's lack of an offensive presence creating diversity by promoting pokemon that can take advantage of this? Are these things that should be considered?

 

So please, for the pro-Chansey folks out there... speak up =)

 

A thought on Toxic/status stall and health: Toxic is annoying and it makes sense people want the cure-all protection that Chansey gives (there are no words for the rage I feel when my P2 gets Toxic'd and loses its Stall power) but I think that Toxic is only scary in metas where walls are too common (e.g. current meta, old UU, etc.). If offense were more viable Toxic wouldn't be so central to this debate.

 

Well I don't really have a great explanation on how chansey is good for the meta, but that argument can be used for anything really. Why is metagross good for the meta? Why is porygon2 good for the meta? Why is ludicolo good for the meta? Any statement you can come up for these questions can easily be countered just like if I tried to explain why chansey is fine for the meta. (You can answer any of those questions and I will counter it gladly)

 

This is actually one of the best points anyone's brought up in this discussion, so props, but I think there's a resolution to it. Bear with me on this, but people could make loads of arguments about "unhealthy" pokemon in the current metagame, e.g:

 

"Magneton's unhealthy because it traps Skarmory"

"Skarmory's unhealthy because it is so good at spiking"

"Metagross is unhealthy because it's on 40% of teams, can sweep well with a Meteor Mash boost and can 2HKO any wall in the tier with CB (except Swampert)"

"Arcanine is unhealthy because it punishes you for running Heracross or other Endure/Sub/Rev users"

 

On the face of it, you could entertain beliefs like these - they aren't totally bullshit. But when you consider the pokemon in question overall and how it works in the game, it becomes harder to argue for these kinds of things. These pokemon all have strengths and people use them - but it's not like they provide a ton of value against 75% of the metagame. They all have checks and downsides to using them: Metagross and Magneton are revenge killed by Dugtrio (assuming no Sub). Arcanine has to worry about Gyarados and random EQ's from Heracross or other physical sweepers. Skarmory is trapped by Magneton and hit hard by common physical attackers (not to mention that we have spinners who check spikes well).

 

And, unlike Chansey (to some degree), I can give some justification for why they should exist: Arcanine prevents End/Rev from getting too powerful, Magneton prevents other steel types from running amok unchecked and Metagross provides offensive players with a bulky pivot that can patch up weaknesses against Starmie or Choice Band Aerodactyl with Pursuit. I could probably make arguments like this for a lot of pokemon in the tier (Ludicolo helps against Rain on non-Chansey teams, Swampert stops Aerodactyl, Metagross and non HP Grass Jolteon, Slowbro runs over teams that don't have Toxic support, a special wall or a Heracross) but that would just be excessive - no one's even arguing that they're unhealthy. This kind of thing gets said a lot but: if you think any of the pokemon in OU is unhealthy/broken/etc. you can request it and make your argument. Chances are, you'll be proven wrong if you're wrong: like when people said "hey Dugtrio should be banned" despite the fact that it was on 9% of teams (far less than Chansey's 30%, mind you) and had a lot of trouble against other top-used pokemon. There's literally no point in arguing that Ludicolo is unhealthy in this particular thread, you can create a new thread for that if you really want to look like a fool.

 

A pokemon's health/unhealth should never just be assumed or not debated - it should be looked at as a whole based on all of its relevant characteristics, and that's what we're doing. Of course, opinions can differ here and there but on the whole, there's a reason we have a TC with a majority rule structure.

 

Hopefully that reasoning is at least acceptable as for how to justify a pokemon from being healthy for the game. 

 

TL;DR - health partly relies on a balance of being viable with having weaknesses: no unhealthy pokemon is moderately viable and has a lot of weaknesses, that's almost a contradiction in terms. 

 

Edit: @bl0nde - can someone else do this whole variety/balance/etc. thing. I'm tired of typing walls of text for tonight.

Edited October 2, 2015 by Robofiend

[bl0nde]

I typed my question because I read zebra's post on page one and his argument was basically the exact opposite of yours. I wanted to know what your answer was on how the metagame would be different and better. How is banning chansey and replacing it with umbreon/ pory2/ and ludicolo going to create viability or better balance. Can you give me like a "it makes X things more viable and opens up the opportunities for these things, and these kinds of teams and etc."

 

For some part of me is imagining I get this response "we don't consider the meta we only evaluate the pokemon in itself" or something like this philosophical nature of knowledge, but that "I'm too lazy" is almost as good. hugs

[lVlusay]

This is the kind of argument that is truly irrelevant. There are plenty of other special walls available and viable in OU with Chansey gone. Chansey requires no skill to use, and that causes a disparity in the competitiveness of team building.

 

In a perfect meta, there would be a rock, paper, scizors, cycle of Special Attackers that could be hard countered by X Special Wall, but not necessarily by Y. Weezing is not the problem in the core. Weezing can be worn down, checked by physical attackers, and outplayed. Chansey really can not on the special side, and has options to make those few special options useless. 

 

Why is it irrelevant? Your argument "Chansey requires no skill to use" is even more irrelevant. So I am only supposed to use pokemons that require a skill to use? What kind of logic is that. Skill or no skill, let people use the pokemons they want to use. I understand that there is a tiering council that do what they "think" is right for the game, but the game was created long ago and Chansey was never banned in OU and shouldn't be banned in this meta. This is some kind of new way to develop the game by trying to make every pokemon have under 30% usage. If not = ban. The question is why? Useful pokemons are used more, simple.

[BenGorgon]

So I am only supposed to use pokemons that require a skill to use? 

 

Yes, exactly this. That is the nature of a competitive game, my friend. The people with the most skill, knowledge, and practice should have the absolute greatest odds to win any given match. Chansey does not promote this type of play. I believe it creates a stagnate environment, because it does not require any of these listed attributes that make a competitive game such. It requires no skill or thought to look at Chansey and know that it is the best choice in almost any situation. 

 

"It was never banned in X, Y, or Z Metas" is an argument that also holds no water. PokeMMO has a whole slew of varied mechanics and moves that were not present, or were present in those metas. It is an entirely different ballgame. 

Edited October 2, 2015 by BenGorgon

[lVlusay]

Yes, exactly this. That is the nature of a competitive game, my friend. The people with the most skill, knowledge, and practice should have the absolute greatest odds to win any given match. Chansey does not promote this type of play. I believe it creates a stagnate environment, because it does not require any of these listed attributes that make a competitive game such. It requires no skill or thought to look at Chansey and know that it is the best choice in almost any situation. 

 

"It was never banned in X, Y, or Z Metas" is an argument that also holds no water. PokeMMO has a whole slew of varied mechanics and moves that were not present, or were present in those metas. It is an entirely different ballgame. 

If you want to use pokemon with skill, go ahead, but you shouldn't force everyone to use them. Most pokemons are easy to use anyways, should we ban them all? The mechanics you mentioned that are present here just suggest that all pokemons that have a usage higher than a certain number should be banned. Or that if pokemon very good at something, it should be banned... Every pokemon is good at something.

 

Snorlax and Blisseygot banned making Gengar too strong. Now Gengar is banned making Chansey too strong? How long that can continue? This is my last post in this discussion, so you can sleep well. But before that I want to say something. For the past year or more I haven't been too involved in the game due to the changes. Everytime I would log in, something got banned. I thought maybe it's just me who doesn't like it. But in fact everyone knows that OU sucks. It's has been getting worse and worse and the tiering council keeps banning things trying to make it better and as they say bring "balance". I doubt you will ever understand is that the more you ban the worse it will get. If you remember the best days if OU (which I remember very well) there were no walls other than Snorlax and Blissey, there were much less pokemons than now. I talk about times even before breeding or even the times breeding was just implemented. OU was great and it's hard to argue with that and more people played than UU, it was for a reason. Nothing was banned. It's off topic, but it's true.

 

You can run an experiment, for a month bring Snorlax, Blissey, Gengar (possibly even Tyranitar and Dragonite) run a tourney every week and see if people like it. You will be surprised.

[BenGorgon]

 The mechanics you mentioned that are present here just suggest that all pokemons that have a usage higher than a certain number should be banned. Or that if pokemon very good at something, it should be banned... Every pokemon is good at something.

 

 

If you want to argue based on different or past metas, I can give you a fantastic example that this is exactly why we should be banning Pokemon for the above two reasons: 

 

 

 

Tiers are Smogon's way of categorizing Pokémon based on usage. Pokémon can be banned from the tier or move up to higher tier from their usage. Typically, they are updated after three months of usage statistics. 

 

*Snip From Smogon's Policy Review Section* 

There are many topics to discuss here...probability management, switching and preventing switching, team match up factor and centralization come up as potential starters. 

[BenGorgon]

How the F is the rock, paper and scizor effect skilful and then the chain break of trappers? pls explain. 

 

Chansey might be an easy answer to most stuff but it's certainly not that easy to use in this meta. We have tons of answers for it. Having the ability and creativity to make things to completely take down for example "a chansey arcanine ludicolo forretress core"  is the real skill that have been used and proved it can be done multiply times at officials.

 

[spoiler]incase u go like "HUH"
Raaidns Slowbro set!
Nikhils Machamp pressure!

 

[spoiler]Londars Medicham[/spoiler]

[/spoiler]

 

You are just proving the primary point even more. If you have to run otherwise nonviable sets, or Pokemon that would otherwise be nonviable to take on a high usage threat, it is a centralizing factor that should be removed. That is not how a meta evolves or allows for a wide variety of team building options. That is how it stagnates in a series of gimmicks to check a centralizing force.