[OU Discussion] Snorlax [Test banned]

[Murcielago]

On 10/27/2016 at 2:58 PM, gbwead said:

.Ban Snorlax as Uber Support:

 

Snorlax fits Uber Support characteristics for two reasons.

 

1. Snorlax is capable of reliably and consistently spread status without giving away momentum to the opponent and by pressuring clerics to be unviable.
2. Snorlax puts in jeopardy the viability of several special attackers susceptible to be Pursuit trapped.

These two supportive characteristics of Snorlax have a decisive impact on nearly all duels. Very subtly, Snorlax can “guarantee” a win to whoever uses it.

 

Ban Snorlax as uncompetitive:

There is an uncompetitive luck-based aspect to Snorlax. Since Snorlax has a lot of switch ins – especially against defensive teams – it can pressure/force any opponent to take the risk of getting paralysed. Considering clerics are unviable mainly because of Snorlax' presence in the tier (Pursuit + Body Slam), getting paralysed can be a big detriment to one’s game. The outcome of a duel is very often determined by the RNG of Body Slam which has made our OU meta more luck oriented than skill oriented.

 

 

Ban Snorlax as unhealthy:

A lot of people have mentioned how OU has become stale and it could not be more true. Nearly all experienced players run Snorlax and the one that don’t straight up lose since they are at an enormous disadvantage. This is a case of “too good not to use” to the unhealthiest degree possible.  We keep seeing the same team archetypes over and over. There is no place for creativity in this overly centralized meta where, if you dare to deviate in any way from standard cores, you lose. Yesterday’s tournament clearly shows all of this.

 

 

^The above quote from gbwead has been the only post I have seen that actually attempts to formulate a logic based argument as to why snorlax should be banned.  The majority of posters here are simply throwing around buzzwords "toxic" "cancer" "uncompetitive" "skilless" etc... all baseless arguments that suggest the poster simply doesn't like snorlax and wants it banned.  Hell, many of the supporters of a snorlax ban simply don't like snorlax and their arguments clearly demonstrate they don't understand the current OU meta, since they don't understand it, they fear it and want snorlax banned.

 

Re: Uber Support

Gbwead suggests that snorlax can "reliably and consistently spread status" - to suggest a move with a 30% chance of paralysis is "consistent" or "reliable" is a stretch to say the least... it is mathematically proven that it is unreliable, every time you use bodyslam, it is over twice as likely to not cause paralysis than it is to cause paralysis.  Now you could argue that if you get into the switching back and forth that almost always is involved with competitive play, and if snorlax gets a body-slam off every time eventually it will paralyze something...  true, but any player with thier salt will see this coming and predict and play the game appropriately, additionally, with solid team building, this whole issue is avoided.

 

gbwead also suggests that "pressuring clerics to be unviable" - Once again, I disagree with this.  simply switch in any of the available snorlax counters force momentum back into your favor and switch in a cleric to heal when you get a chance.... If you even need to do so...

 

Milotec

Dusclops

Ludicolo

Rhydon

 

^All hard snorlax counters.  All of them beat snorlax regardless of paralysis or not and even in the case of rhydon, while most pokemon don't want to be paralyzed, at least now he cannot be wil-o-wisped... a silver lining to the statistically unlikely event (30%) that you actually get paralyzed.  And I already see the argument coming "but but but... snorlax has a movepool and it can counter any of its counters!!!" sure... you can put toxic on lax to beat milo... or surf to beat rhydon... I get it... hell even crunch + sub + 252 attack EV has a good chance of beating dusclops... but you only get 4 moves on any given pokemon, and if lax is being configured to counter its counters... you better bring the right lax for the right counter... and you also sacrifice offensive/defensive presence... Once again, proper team building counters this... if your opponent thinks your bringing milo so he uses toxic lax... and you bring dusclops... that toxic lax isn't doing shit.  If he puts surf on his lax but you bring milotec... that snorlax isnt doing shit...  I think you get what I am saying here...

 

^I know this went a bit off topic regarding the "clarics are unviable" option, however, I have successfuly used clerics against teams with lax manytimes... force momentum in your favor and work the cleric in when you get a chance... It can be done, it is viable, snorlax isnt as bad as you think it is.

 

I also didn't even mention the fact you can WW lax away with skarm, burn it with any wil-o-wisp user or trick it with any of the many viable trick users.  There are so many ways to take lax down, too many to mention.

 

"Snorlax puts in jeopardy the viability of several special attackers susceptible to be Pursuit trapped."

 

^This is true, however once again, with proper gameplay and teambuilding this can be avoided.  Dont bring out starmie until you have scouted the game out a bit, or hell, even bait lax out with starmie and switch in a trapinch or diglett (I'm sure pachima would love this idea).  The fact that lax gets pursuit doesn't make it banworthy by any stretch o

 

Re: Ban Snorlax as uncompetitive:

 

I have already addressed the  fallacy of clerics being unvialble, which seems to be the linchpin of this argument.  I have also addressed the fact that gbweads argument relies on the fact that "Snorlax is capable of reliably and consistently spread status" which once again, I have already addressed, body slam spreading status is by mathematical definition unreliable.  To suggest that duels are being determined only because of luck and RNG due to snorlaxes presence is a bit  absurd, and that is putting it lightly.  If your building a team that allows a snorlax to switch in and bodyslam away... your doing it wrong.  Simply because an individual relies on poor team building techniques does not make snorlax banworthy.  And yes, we always remember the statistical anomalies where snorlax parahaxes the shit out of your team and you cannot move for 5+ turns in a row.  That happens what though?... once every 100 matches or so?  We are playing pokemon here guys... not chess... RNG is by definition part of the game.  If a player is relying on snorlax to parahax his opponents team... he is not using a constantly viable strategy.  Simply because a poor strategy with a low chance of success exists (relying on parahax) doesn't make it banworthy.  If anything, talented players should hope his/her opponent relies on such strategies because in that case, you are favored to with the match before it even starts.

 

Re Ban Snorlax as unhealthy:

 

This one is so wrong on so many levels.  There is more variety and more viable team building strategies available now then ever before.  To argue that snorlax is centralizing is like calling the sky green... its just not the case, and there is no way to cut it.  I have been playing this game for well over a year and we have a more even distribution in usage stats then ever.   I really wish all past and present usage stats where made publicly available because then we could avoid this whole "he said she said" argument.  If I remember correctly during the snorlax ban we had metagross, arcanine, chansey, gyrados, weezing, skarmory all at over 40% usage... how is that more balanced and less centralized than what we have now?  IF anything snorlax fosters diversity and makes the tier more interesting.

 

 

Conclusion:

 

I know we are going to have more complaints from individuals who don't understand the tier, using buzzwords and making baseless statements as to why lax should be banned.  I really hope the tier council can see through this and do the right thing for the meta.  If snorlax does get banned the tier council will have failed thier job.  We will have no viable special walls, the meta will be devolved to a [Chansey w/ shedhull] + [trapinch] +[Trapinch counter]+[3 special sweepers] stale, boring, repetative meta.  I would like to think that the future of the game is kept in mind, and that we want to foster diversity and keep the game mentally stimulating, as opposed to stale, with no viable special walls.

 

[pachima]

2 hours ago, Spaintakula said:

I don't know you enough to realize when you're joking and when not man, idk :(

But yeah, do get it :]

np, Im weird like that. 

[soyhector]

The people who are defending Snorlax from being banned is because they use it and they like winning easier than in the past...I have a competitive Snorlax too, but i dont use it because i consider it an uber, and i dont want to play in that way...

[pachima]

1 hour ago, Murcielago said:

Conclusion:

 

I know we are going to have more complaints from individuals who don't understand the tier, using buzzwords and making baseless statements as to why lax should be banned.  I really hope the tier council can see through this and do the right thing for the meta.  If snorlax does get banned the tier council will have failed thier job.  We will have no viable special walls, the meta will be devolved to a [Chansey w/ shedhull] + [trapinch] +[Trapinch counter]+[3 special sweepers] stale, boring, repetative meta.  I would like to think that the future of the game is kept in mind, and that we want to foster diversity and keep the game mentally stimulating, as opposed to stale, with no viable special walls.

 

Let me see, as a special walls we have:

Venusaur... Oh, and porygon2... Wait, I know one more, that´s right, Kangaskhan. Oh, and specially defensive Houndoom is actually viable.

Want more?

Here I go, there is

Umbreon... Gardevoir...and to some extent, swampert.

Wait, let´s not forget, there is one more

CHANSEY!!!

So please, unless you come at me with some core that beats all those special walls, I consider you a god. Until then, nah, we are good.

[Gunthug]

Lol never thought I would read the words "trapinch counter"

[Murcielago]

@Gunthing - lol glad you picked up on the humor there.

 

@Pachima - your posts never cease to... amaze isnt the right word... I don't even know the word... its like someone talking about something they have no clue about

[Draekyn]

Just now, Murcielago said:

@Gunthing

roasted

[Murcielago]

That was a typo, I actually like the thug

[Gunthug]

3 minutes ago, Draekyn said:

roasted

It was an accident, and yet it's still more clever than "softhug"

[fredrichnietze]

Just now, Gunthug said:

It was an accident, and yet it's still more clever than "softhug"

gunthings'n'stuff

[pachima]

21 minutes ago, Gunthug said:

Lol never thought I would read the words "trapinch counter"

Trapinch decimates whole teams with his awfully bad speed.

His best move, earthquake, brings jolteon and magneton to his knees.

 

This, of course, if they don´t move first

But there is more. This tiny little bug can outspeed slowbro and 2hko it with earthquake if 3 spikes on the field are down.

 

And again, in order to perform this, slowbro must be either psyless and surfless.

And to the top of the cake, Trapinch sheds tears on the opponent side by unleashing poweful superpowers that can badly damage porygon2 and umbreons, providing they dont have either an attacking move or a healing move, or even pp to do them.

Now, on the defensive side, trapinch is so sturdy it can survives a choice banded tackle from tauros with ease. Yeah, its true!  A banded one!

But wait, there is more than the eye can see. With his amazing ground typing, Trapinch is one of the blessed mons to laugh before random tbolts from jolteons and magnetons. Also, he is immune to thunderwave which makes it literally impossible to kill with electricity attacks.

All in all, there are few counters to trapinch, and they must possess:

 

 

A damaging move.

A better speed.

A name not chansey.

And a brain.

 

You still think trapinch doesnt need counters?

 

EDIT: for @Murcielago

Don´t think Im being rude, Im not, I just found your quote to be funny and tried to do something with it, dont take it serious plz.

Edited October 29, 2016 by pachima

[Murcielago]

it was supposed to be funny man, Im glad you like it.  The rest of the post was serious though.

[pachima]

3 minutes ago, Murcielago said:

it was supposed to be funny man, Im glad you like it.  The rest of the post was serious though.

Yup, Up to the point where you said snorlax isnt overcentralizing and when I got to battle you and  you had rhydon, heracross, metagross, medicham and another snorlax. Toatally not overcentralyzing.

Edited October 29, 2016 by pachima

[Murcielago]

Well... I'm kind of getting sick of people referencing battles with me in this thread... that other dude who was shit posting was blatently making shit up... and your memory is a bit off here on what I was using in that battle... regardless, the special walls you listed earlier.... most of them get two shot by various special sweepers, aside from chansey.

[pachima]

3 minutes ago, Murcielago said:

Well... I'm kind of getting sick of people referencing battles with me in this thread... that other dude who was shit posting was blatently making shit up... and your memory is a bit off here on what I was using in that battle... regardless, the special walls you listed earlier.... most of them get two shot by various special sweepers, aside from chansey.

First nah, I remember those pokemons, aside from medicham which Im not 100% sure. Second, most of them get two shot? Examples plz.

[Murcielago]

I didnt have lax on the team either...

[Murcielago]

swampert, venu, umbreon, porygon2, gard all get two shot by zam

 

Houndoom - Starmie says hello

 

Kanga I dont know but I would bet zam two shots that as well.

 

 

[pachima]

11 minutes ago, Murcielago said:

swampert, venu, umbreon, porygon2, gard all get two shot by zam

 

Houndoom - Starmie says hello

 

Kanga I dont know but I would bet zam two shots that as well.

 

 

You know, people with half a brain tend to use walls on something they can wall. For instance I would bring doom against zam and umbreon/ porygon2/garde against starmie.

Moreover, alakazam needs specs to even get a chance to 2hko some of the walls u said it definitely 2hkoed. 

If you want a special wall that just blocks every single special offensive mon it shows how wrong your definition of defensive balanced tier goes and how limited teambuilding is atm.

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2016 by pachima

[Murcielago]

^Your really twisting my words and resorting to personal attacks to counter my points... at this point your not even worth responding too...

[Spaintakula]

1 hour ago, soyhector said:

The people who are defending Snorlax from being banned is because they use it and they like winning easier than in the past...I have a competitive Snorlax too, but i dont use it because i consider it an uber, and i dont want to play in that way...

yeah that's totally it. give this man a medal

[suigin]

4 hours ago, soyhector said:

The people who are defending Snorlax from being banned is because they use it and they like winning easier than in the past...I have a competitive Snorlax too, but i dont use it because i consider it an uber, and i dont want to play in that way...

you know good players will remain good even if snorlax is banned right

it's not very likely that there's a good player whose only decent team relies on snorlax and whose winrate would plummet the moment it gets banned

[Hotarubi]

9 hours ago, Murcielago said:

^Your really twisting my words and resorting to personal attacks to counter my points... at this point your not even worth responding too... ," I have already addressed, body slam spreading status is by mathematical definition unreliable." 

Look you don't have to lie and say you don't use Snorlax.

3/5 battles with you include you depending on this pokemon.

Next time it happens i will just screenshot it.

Furthermore, Snorlax is overcentralizing, the usage blatantly shows that.

The fact is that personal attacks don't matter here you are right about that.

Another fact, Snorlax needs atleast a test ban to see the difference in the meta now without it.

Considered new items are implemented.

Snorlax temp ban when? 

2 months?

Regarding that quote about unreliable status that comes to a probability which is better explained as RNG

 

observed value vs expected value usually don't deviate too much from one another

however 

30% chance is still pretty high if you will consider that this spam will happen several times.

This percentage sums the chance of expected status 30%

Now add that to every body slam in a battle and you have a para. Just hope it doesn't land in the wrong spot or RIP.

The expected or predicted numbers for this case of 30 percent probability even with 30 trials is often vastly different but generally there is para going on in each battle without risk or to snorlax in its attempt to spam this. Once it is swapped in on a special sweeper etc its given the opportunity to spam this probability chance of 30%

Damaging status moves with added affect  are usually random which explains the RNG explanation of non competitive play involving snorlax.

however 3/10 doesn't rightly explain it as snorlax is offered multiple opportunities to attempt the spread of this status especially on a swap as it pressures those special sweepers to do just that.

 In this case, it is somewhat tedious to outline and then calculate all the possible combinations because the number of independent events has increased beyond three or four often times in a battle.

What determines the numbers that are selected in the lottery or whether heads or tails results after a coin flip?

We can ask similar questions about biological events. What determines whether chromosome 14 will be pulled to the left side of the cell or the right side during anaphase I of meiosis?

What determines if snorlax will stop your team from being effective in the long term of a battle begin to end via bodyslam?

The answer is chance... chance is not competitive and in-fact involves no skill.

Its a strategy that is completely not related to skill what so ever.

GG though GG

 

Edited October 30, 2016 by Hotarubi

[Murcielago]

^Dude, I honestly have no idea what your trying to say... the only thing I have picked up so far is that you claim to have battled me 30 times and won, but in reality it was one battle something like 3 weeks ago in unranked...  I also noticed you suggest that snorlax needs a test ban and its a fact.... thats not a fact, its your opinion.  I also know you went out of your way to create a poll thread and undermine the TC, the majority vote on that poll was to keep snorlax btw...

 

 

16 hours ago, suigin said:

you know good players will remain good even if snorlax is banned right

it's not very likely that there's a good player whose only decent team relies on snorlax and whose winrate would plummet the moment it gets banned

^this guy gets it.  Snorlax is a good pokemon, and something that defines the meta to a certain degree, but it isn't broken by any stretch.   There are clear guidelines as to what qualifies as uber and looking at the situation objectively, snorlax just isnt uber... its presence brings more variety as proven by usage statitics.  I defend snorlax because it isn't broken.  Banning snorlax will not improve the quality of the meta, and simply result in a lot more grindmmo to build new pokes to fit a new meta where something as pathetic as trapinch will be OU... I cannot be the only person who sees how absurd that is.

[Hotarubi]

12 minutes ago, Murcielago said:

^Dude, I honestly have no idea what your trying to say... the only thing I have picked up so far is that you claim to have battled me 30 times and won, but in reality it was one battle something like 3 weeks ago in unranked...  I also noticed you suggest that snorlax needs a test ban and its a fact.... thats not a fact, its your opinion.  I also know you went out of your way to create a poll thread and undermine the TC, the majority vote on that poll was to keep snorlax btw...

The reason that the poll was treated as void is sincerely because there is no way to moderate it or stop someone to multi vote on poll through alts.

On the other hand after viewing it If you added the percentages up you would see the majority actually wants a ban some want a complex others want full ban.

You failed to add both those values.

Whats more I told the truth and its pretty obvious both myself and Pachima aren't lying about what pokemon you use.

I don't really understand what you get out of trying to lie about something so trivial.

 

Edited October 30, 2016 by Hotarubi

[Murcielago]

^WTF is wrong with you? now your calling me a lier? GTFO with this shit