Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Munya

September-Movement Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, gbwead said:

there are more pressing matters to deal with (OU) 

I understand that this is through no fault of your own, but this is outrageous. The fact that lower tiers are left to fester whilst OU is endlessly argued over just highlights how inefficient this tiering setup is. The idea of discrete, tier-specific councils been bandied around a few times recently but I honestly think it needs serious consideration as the amount of time it takes for action to be taken regarding bans in lower tiers is just insane

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, LifeStyleNORE said:

Nothing changed after Sinnoh.

False.

 

3 minutes ago, LifeStyleNORE said:

That's why every month people ask for a Roserade ban.

Probably not every month, but even if that was the case, it doesn't mean much if they don't explain their reasoning.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Zymogen said:

I understand that this is through no fault of your own, but this is outrageous. The fact that lower tiers are left to fester whilst OU is endlessly argued over just highlights how inefficient this tiering setup is. The idea of discrete, tier-specific councils been bandied around a few times recently but I honestly think it needs serious consideration as the amount of time it takes for action to be taken regarding bans in lower tiers is just insane

And yet nothing is done lmao.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Zymogen said:

I understand that this is through no fault of your own, but this is outrageous. The fact that lower tiers are left to fester whilst OU is endlessly argued over just highlights how inefficient this tiering setup is. The idea of discrete, tier-specific councils been bandied around a few times recently but I honestly think it needs serious consideration as the amount of time it takes for action to be taken regarding bans in lower tiers is just insane

Every month, OU hardly ever changes, UU gets affected by a few usage movements and NU gets affected by a lot of usage movements. This is why OU is the most stable metagame and NU is the most unstable metagame, changing constantly and forcing player to adapt non stop. From a tiering perspective, when you try to determine if a mon is broken or not, it's much easier to do so in OU for that reason. Whatever gets decided now has a higher chance of being true later when we are talking about OU and lower chance of being true later when talking about NU.

 

I didn't mean that NU should be left out. The way I see it, given NU instability, for a pokemon to get banned, it needs to be outrageously more broken than what it would need to be in OU because it needs to be more clear that the pokemon is indeed broken. If the pokemon is not outrageously broken, it will just take a shit ton of time to get to that ban worthy point.

Share this post


Link to post

Either way, can we go to more pressing matters and instaban rhyperior from NU? Please.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Aerun said:

I'm genuinely wondering what can even switch in on a Rhyperior in NU

Not to mention the amazing synergy it has with Roserade. Yup, gonna be fun seeing these 2 in every team. 

Edited by LifeStyleNORE

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, gbwead said:

Every month, OU hardly ever changes, UU gets affected by a few usage movements and NU gets affected by a lot of usage movements. This is why OU is the most stable metagame and NU is the most unstable metagame, changing constantly and forcing player to adapt non stop. From a tiering perspective, when you try to determine if a mon is broken or not, it's much easier to do so in OU for that reason. Whatever gets decided now has a higher chance of being true later when we are talking about OU and lower chance of being true later when talking about NU.

 

I didn't mean that NU should be left out. The way I see it, given NU instability, for a pokemon to get banned, it needs to be outrageously more broken than what it would need to be in OU because it needs to be more clear that the pokemon is indeed broken. If the pokemon is not outrageously broken, it will just take a shit ton of time to get to that ban worthy point.

I agree with what you say about NU being inherently unstable, but within that instability there is (or was, before the movepool update) a central meta that stays roughly the same despite usage movements; there are Pokemon that you can bet your bottom dollar on staying in the tier providing there are no significant meta-changing updates. E.g. Steelix, Golbat, Clefable, Manectric, etc.

 

My problem lies in the idea that "there is no point banning Pokemon because things are always moving" because it is a blanket statement that doesn't take into account that, with usage movements and broken Pokemon, there are two different scenarios that need to be considered in different ways:

  • Firstly, when a Pokemon gets shifted down to a lower tier through usage. Here, there is often a lot of theorising done as to whether or not a new Pokemon (e.g. Rhyperior) will be immediately problematic. In this scenario I think your philosophy applies, because we need to be patient and allow an opportunity for the meta to shift and adapt to the new Pokemon coming in, before we can solidly cast judgement as to its overall viability.
  • The second scenario is when a Pokemon is well-established within its respective tier, and is already widely considered to be bannable (for argument's sake let's take Roserade and Drapion). In this case, we need to consider whether or not the usage movements each month are likely to have any impact whatsoever on the viability of the Pokemon in question. And I think that it's fair to say that the usage movements down from UU to NU for the last several months have had absolutely no impact on the viability of either Roserade or Drapion. Additionally, we need to consider whether the movements up from NU to UU are likely to buff these Pokemon. In Roserade's case I think not, but with Gligar moving up we are losing Drapion's primary check, and it is obvious that none of the 3 mons moving down into NU will be able to patch the hole that is being left. In this scenario I don't think your philosophy applies because it is obvious that not every usage movement will directly impact the viability of every Pokemon in the meta, and therefore there is not always a need to wait for a substantial amount of time before doing anything about it.

Having said all this, if we wait for months to label something as ban-worthy because "it may not be true later", where do we draw the line? At what point do we say that enough is enough and commit to banning something?

Edited by Zymogen

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Zymogen said:

I agree with what you say about NU being inherently unstable, but within that instability there is (or was, before the movepool update) a central meta that stays roughly the same despite usage movements; there are Pokemon that you can bet your bottom dollar on staying in the tier providing there are no significant meta-changing updates. E.g. Steelix, Golbat, Clefable, Manectric, etc.

 

My problem lies in the idea that "there is no point banning Pokemon because things are always moving" because it is a blanket statement that doesn't take into account that, with usage movements and broken Pokemon, there are two different scenarios that need to be considered in different ways:

  • Firstly, when a Pokemon gets shifted down to a lower tier through usage. Here, there is often a lot of theorising done as to whether or not a new Pokemon (e.g. Rhyperior) will be immediately problematic. In this scenario I think your philosophy applies, because we need to be patient and allow an opportunity for the meta to shift and adapt to the new Pokemon coming in, before we can solidly cast judgement as to its overall viability.
  • The second scenario is when a Pokemon is well-established within its respective tier, and is already widely considered to be bannable (for argument's sake let's take Roserade and Drapion). In this case, we need to consider whether or not the usage movements each month are likely to have any impact whatsoever on the viability of the Pokemon in question. And I think that it's fair to say that the usage movements down from UU to NU for the last several months have had absolutely no impact on the viability of either Roserade or Drapion. Additionally, we need to consider whether the movements up from NU to UU are likely to buff these Pokemon. In Roserade's case I think not, but with Gligar moving up we are losing Drapion's primary check, and it is obvious that none of the 3 mons moving down into NU will be able to patch the hole that is being left. In this scenario I don't think your philosophy applies because it is obvious that not every usage movement will directly impact the viability of every Pokemon in the meta, and therefore there is not always a need to wait for a substantial amount of time before doing anything about it.

Having said all this, if we wait for months to label something as ban-worthy something because "it may not be true later", where do we draw the line? At what point do we say that enough is enough and commit to banning something?

I realise that "there is no point banning Pokemon because things are always moving" can be a blanket statement. However, here, we are not talking about a few changes, we are talking about a shit ton of changes. NU will be affected by 9 usage movements this month; that's a lot. One of those mons is also Blastoise which was for a long time the biggest Roserade bait, so it's a big deal if Roserade can't switch in as freely as it could before. Drapion is also pretty good check against Roserade, so if Drapion like you pointed out loses Gligar as a counter, this indirectly means that Roserade's checks are more viable. Losing Blastoise as a bait and having Drapion being more viable could possibly hurt Roserade viability. Maybe it won't change much. In all cases, Roserade will still be amazing, but these usage movements are far from insignificant at first glance.

 

Furthermore, usage movements are cycled based. The first and second months, the cut-off point for things moving up is 6.7% and the cut-off is 1.7%. The third month, the cut-off point for things moving up and down is 4.36%. This means that NU is more stable in the first and second months and really unstable in the third month. That's why it makes no sense imo to ban anything right when NU, the most unstable tier, is even more unstable than usual.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, gbwead said:

 Drapion is also pretty good check against Roserade, so if Drapion like you pointed out loses Gligar as a counter, this indirectly means that Roserade's checks are more viable. Losing Blastoise as a bait and having Drapion being more viable could possibly hurt Roserade viability. Maybe it won't change much. In all cases, Roserade will still be amazing, but these usage movements are far from insignificant at first glance.

But, considering this isn’t OU and therefore the weird “no Ubers” policy doesn’t apply, is it not a questionable tiering decision to keep an unhealthy Pokemon in a tier just to check another unhealthy Pokemon?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Zymogen said:

But, considering this isn’t OU and therefore the weird “no Ubers” policy doesn’t apply, is it not a questionable tiering decision to keep an unhealthy Pokemon in a tier just to check another unhealthy Pokemon?

indeed, but that's a discussion for next month though because all we got right now is theorymon and assumptions

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, gbwead said:

Other tiers are changing, so no real point in banning anything. OU is not going to change at all unless we do something about it. Since every lower tier is affected by OU, OU should always be the main tiering priority imo.

10 hours ago, Zymogen said:

 

You are not giving priority to a main tier, you are giving priority Just to ban chomp in ou... Cmon

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, gbwead said:

Every month, OU hardly ever changes, UU gets affected by a few usage movements and NU gets affected by a lot of usage movements. This is why OU is the most stable metagame and NU is the most unstable metagame, changing constantly and forcing player to adapt non stop. From a tiering perspective, when you try to determine if a mon is broken or not, it's much easier to do so in OU for that reason. Whatever gets decided now has a higher chance of being true later when we are talking about OU and lower chance of being true later when talking about NU.

 

I didn't mean that NU should be left out. The way I see it, given NU instability, for a pokemon to get banned, it needs to be outrageously more broken than what it would need to be in OU because it needs to be more clear that the pokemon is indeed broken. If the pokemon is not outrageously broken, it will just take a shit ton of time to get to that ban worthy point.

if I knew that NU was like this it hadn't even started, I'm tired it seems that after sinno it turned into chaos

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, mateusvictor said:

if I knew that NU was like this it hadn't even started, I'm tired it seems that after sinno it turned into chaos

Theyre Just keep trashing it, thats all.

Share this post


Link to post

So, let me get this straight:

 

OU is fucked up because of Chomp, Hydrei, Conk

UU is okay-ish, probably the healthiest tier in MMO meta

NU is fucked up because of Roserade, Rhyperior

 

(correct me if I missed something)

 

And all that we're getting this month are usage moves...?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, RysPicz said:

So, let me get this straight:

 

OU is fucked up because of Chomp, Hydrei, Conk

UU is okay-ish, probably the healthiest tier in MMO meta

NU is fucked up because of Roserade, Rhyperior

 

(correct me if I missed something)

 

And all that we're getting this month are usage moves...?

U missed ludicolo, that One gonna be a issue

Edited by DarylDixon

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, ykh9108 said:

Gligar should not UU 

It will be broken NU BALANCE

Honchkrow, Drapion :))))

Rhyperiro, rhydon and escavalier can deal with em, unless now without gligar drapion gonna run fire fang

Edited by DarylDixon

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, DarylDixon said:

U missed ludicolo, that One gonna be a issue

I think Ludi was NU already and it wasn't really that good but that was a while ago. I think that special walls that were walling Ludi are still in place (Licky probably being the most potent one).

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, RysPicz said:

I think Ludi was NU already and it wasn't really that good but that was a while ago. I think that special walls that were walling Ludi are still in place (Licky probably being the most potent one).

Dunno if It can rank 2 focus Blast, but only One id see its mantine as Wall for It, if l'uso was nu before that probab before the gen 8 stuff update..

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, DarylDixon said:

Rhyperiro, rhydon and escavalier can deal with em, unless now without gligar drapion gonna run fire fang

rhydon, escavalier is not safety

they have no recovery

 

Honchkrow superpower, brave bird crit ㅇ.ㅇ

 

Rhyperiro nu -> It's funny decision

 

 

Edited by ykh9108

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, ykh9108 said:

rhydon, escavalier is not safety

they have no recovery

 

Honchkrow superpower, brave bird crit ㅇ.ㅇ

 

Rhyperiro nu -> It's funny decision

 

 

Superpowrr and brave Arent guarenteed kill, eviolite rhydon laugh to honchkrow

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, ykh9108 said:

rhydon, escavalier is not safety

they have no recovery

 

Honchkrow superpower, brave bird crit ㅇ.ㅇ

 

Rhyperiro nu -> It's funny decision

 

 

Escavalier doesnt care for crits, ability

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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