Jump to content

pachima

Tier Council
  • Content Count

    2407
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • IGN
    pachima

Recent Profile Visitors

9647 profile views
  1. 1 - Do you realize how controversial this is? You are saying u don't need matchup to win, but then you outright imply you need to use a counterteam for whoever your opponent may be. If you want to counterteam the enemy, then you necessarily want to win via matchup, disregarding all skill put into the game. However, building a solid team around stuff that are good versus the few different opponents you may find, like nikhilr said, makes you able to beat all those enemies most of the time without relying on matchup alone. 2- No one is saying you are not good at playing. All I am saying, and this is not directed to anyone in particular, is that people who want to win via counterteams (and I've seen a lot of hard counterteams that are inherently bad) don't want to put effort into the actual game to win.
  2. If you put effort in all your teams and your opponent doesn't then your teams are more solid than theirs, and thus giving you better odds. Now if you ask: b-but what if they only have 1 solid team? And I reply: Then in the long term they are more prone to lose eventually. If you don't believe go check how many tournament high round players actually reached there without switching teams, and how many reached there switching teams. Also, just for the sake of it, go check how many players didnt switch teams in old system, cause I guarantee you the number is about the same.
  3. That's what more low speed means in darylese :)
  4. Why is it so relevant to have good matchups? You can't win if you have a bad matchup? You cant actually put skill into the game itself to win a game with bad matchup? Because sadly this is what everyone thinks, and as a result we have a very poor community mentality where everyone thinks copying teams >>>>, ignoring the fact they are completely clueless how to play said teams. Yes, it's nice to have good matchups, but a solid team never has awful matchups (that are common) and that are 6-0d by literally everything, and thus allow their players to actually turn their odds in their favor by actually playing their game skillfully. If you don't want to actually play your game, outplaying the enemy, but rather winning the game turn 1 on teampreview with a cool matchup, then this shouldn't be the game for you.
  5. 1 - Being versatile is also a skill, but everyone in here is ignoring the fact players actually have to play well to win. It's not the single team that makes them win, its how they play it that does, otherwise everyone would get tournament wins easily, but they don't. Out of every player that uses the same playstyle, only a very few can actually advance through the rounds, because they are able to actually play it effectively, and that is also a skill. Besides, since no team is perfect, using the same team actually hinders your odds of winning, scouting or not, in the long term. 2 - The bold part makes me think you don't want to explain your points but rather throw out a sentence in the hopes the readers dont fully understand and nod along. (Its a joke btw) 3- System doesn't punish multiple well round teams at all? If you have more well round teams than the opponent does, then you have more odds of winning, and this is the exact opposite of a punishment. That last sentence of yours isn't also an issue of our current system because the exact same argument can be used in the older system. If you know exactly what your opp is weak to, random.org will also trigger the chances of them switching it and thus, making all this argument irrelevant. 4 - This is simply false, and I can actually confirm it for myself along with other people. Bonus points, not directed to you in specific: The sole fact people claiming teams singlehandedly win games, not how they play it, proves to me how uncompetitive this community mentality has become. It's a fact that solid teambuilding is a skill, but honestly, there are more solid teambuilds with this system than with the old one, and don't get me started with examples cause I can provide a plethora of them. And sadly, its amazing how no one considers that a player has to actually play a team to win lol.
  6. On the contrary. System doesn't promote copying teambuilds, community does. People have been copying teambuilds since 1956, and not joking, they have been copying them way before tour system changed. You cannot copy one team and win at all. You need to outplay the several enemies you face in order to win, unless their teams are just worse than yours, in which case you deserve to win. The problem is that people always tried to win the game before actually playing it. Most mentalities right now are: if I have bad matchup I lose, and not: if I have bad matchup, I have to outplay the guy more to win, as it should. I could list plenty of examples of successful /unsuccessful counterteams that ultimately don't matter because their used team was pretty much garbage and the whole game was decided on pure matchup. For spectators this is even worse, because they outright know who is more prone to win in the first turn. I understand that if you play in a tournament, you want to win, but if you keep outplaying your opponents, then you'll have more chances to win, as it should, and this sytem doesn't take that away at all. Is it perfect? No, but imo better than what we had before.
  7. That just means the guy copied a good team but is unable to use it effectively. With heavy scouting players don't need/want to be the better player, they want to be the player with better matchup and grab the easy wins that contribute nothing for their overall skill.
  8. Porygon still needs psychic to deal with Timburr that raised to 46% as well as being able to beat Onix if it chooses hp fire tri attack + recover/trick/agility whatever.
  9. Or maybe, just maybe, the guy who spammed said team actually built a good team and deserves to be rewarded. It's not boring at all. I'd rather face an opponent with the same advantages and win the game based on skill than fishing for good matchup and get 6-0d or 6-0 back just because I got the matchup. And trust me, most teambuildings in the past fished for this type of matchup and because of that, they were inherently bad. I really can't tell how many times I saw semifinals or finals finishing in a couple of turns just because the matchup fish was so real that one of teams got completely vaporized by the other. Was the finalist winner the better player overall? No, he simply was the guy who got lucky the most with the matchup fishing. As Xela pointed out, there is some skill regarding counterteaming, but its little compared to actually build a solid team overall and actually playing it effectively.
  10. You missed my point. Porygon MAY be broken now, I don't disagree with that. However, if that is the case, then its also broken with mienfoo in the tier( especially since Mienfoo isn't a counter, and totally can't check agility versions). So IF porygon is broken, we ban Porygon, we don't unban Mienfoo. That is the first reason why unbanning Mienfoo to balance Porygon makes little sense. The second is that unbanning a Pokemon to balance others is a dangerous argument and opens unwanted cans of possibilities like misdreavus with scraggy or scraggy with murkrow, etc, etc.
  11. This is interesting because most mienfoos chose to run drain over close combat, and drain doesn't pressure Porygon at all, at least not more than plenty of other pokes can. (ex: munchlax, cranidos, pawniard, ... ). Actually Porygon offensive was so not considered a threat that I had actually seen plenty of mienfoos that sacrificed offense for more bulk. And I pretty much doubt this would be the case if Porygon was the monster you all claiming it to be. Of course Mienfoo is an amazing mon, and while this is not enough to justify a ban, your argument actually solidifies what I stated earlier, that the issue seems to lie elsewhere, and offensive Porygon actually was amazing against most past teams, but only now that weakness became glaringly obvious, as with some other stuff.
  12. The problem is that Mienfoo can't switch against +1 porygon as well. So if Porygon offensive is a big deal currently, it would be a big deal before. And if we agree offensive porygon wasn't even used much prior to Mienfoo ban, and if we agree Mienfoo can't switch on Porygon, then we have to agree Porygon offensive has other switch-ins within the tier, otherwise no matter if mienfoo is in the tier, porygon would be broken offensively, which was not, or at least no one complained about it. Now, my personal input regarding current LC is that mienfoo singlehandedly fixed most flaws any LC team had in the past. This alone doesn't make it Mienfoo banworthy, no. However, based on my experience, Mienfoo successfully hid all those flaws simply by being fit in a team. It is not a coincidence that Mienfoo takes ages to be removed, and once it does, everything else follows rather quickly, unless we're talking about heavy stall matches. Now here's the thing. Mienfoo's replacement, Timburr, isn't able to fix all those weaknesses at once, and only now people are realizing that maybe, just maybe, their other 5 fillers are utterly garbage as a team, and maybe, just maybe, their other 5 fillers have way too many exploitable weaknesses, and therefore should be changed. Of course its much easier to just go on forums and say: b-but porygon broken. tldr; if +1 offensive Porygon is so goddamn broken and has no switches in LC, then +1 offensive porygon was also so goddamn broken and had no switches in LC prior to Mienfoo ban, simply because Mienfoo doesn't safely switch against +1 offensive Porygon at all. Therefore, the issue lies elsewhere, and my personal input says its connected to how Mienfoo allowed bad teams and therefore bad teambuilds to exist without a big risk. PS1: Sorry if I sounded repetitive. PS2: This post wasn't made to justify a Mienfoo ban. It was made to explain how Porygon being "supposedly" broken now doesn't matter towards unbanning Mienfoo.
  13. This makes 0 sense cause mienfoo isn't switching on +1 +porygon either. If Porygon is broken (which I don't think it is), we ban Porygon, we don't unban a Pokemon that has nothing to do with it for the sake of it.
  14. from memes. I suggest you to ignore those asap.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.