Jump to content
  • 32

Ban king's rock from PvP


JorgeFirebolt

Question

There's no need to explain why, it's frustrating to play a PvP, be about to win, you still got a counter vs Cloyster, and then, from nowhere, when cloyster just sets up Shell smash, tada, you get flinched!

 

It's literally one of the most unhealthy PvP items. For those who say that "King's rock is ok 'cause paraflinch exist eksdee", paraflinch can be stopped by lots of things like natural cure users, electric types, or heal bell cleric users, while king's rock cloyster is just a spammy unhealthy mon with no solid counter if boosted and flinch is done to it's counter.

 

It's not healthy to have a broken wallbreaker such as Cloyster with a 41% to flinch it's enemy and a 10% on each move. I bet I'm not the only one who was having a good match, close to win, then king's rock cloyster comes from nowhere and flinches the pokemon that can stop him. (Example: Magnezone, reuniclus, metagross, chansey/blissey at full health, cofagrigus, etc...)

 

Just ban it, it's the most unhealthy thing you can see on this PvP metagame. I'm open to any against argument and to answer them.

Edited by JorgeFirebolt
Link to comment

204 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Posted (edited)

hahahaha, you seem like you don't read, when I said don't ban king's rock? I am always in agreement, And that of "crying", I explain to you huargensy, if you like to play games of 1000 turns, good for you, but I think that the vast majority do not like it. Of course there are many ways to stop the walls, I never said no, but a well structured team with 6 walls is very difficult to stop, but look at several "" high level "" players in pokemmo who use that type of game. . I REPEAT so that you understand it well, since it seems that you lack a little reading comprehension, I AM IN FAVOR OF THEY BLOCKING OBJECTS THAT DEPEND ON LUCK, 2 statement: I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF PLAYERS WITH 6 WALLS AND OF THE GAMES OF 100 +.

 

Edit. I add something else

If it hurts so much, let me get involved with players like that, it will be for something, right?
I don't mean that you are one of them, because I know your gameplay, but ... what is the reason for that? Many competitive players that I respect and know that they have a high level of play, all of them are against this method of play, it seems strange to me that I see you supporting and defending these "players", I would say that A large part of the community is against those who abuse that method of play, and I repeat it once again I AM IN FAVOR OF YOU BLOCKING OBJECTS THAT INVOLVE RNG ABSURD AND LUCK. But did they support those people? Seriously man?

Edited by CREELAST
Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CREELAST said:

hahahaha, you seem like you don't read, when I said don't ban king's rock? I am always in agreement, And that of "crying", I explain to you huargensy, if you like to play games of 1000 turns, good for you, but I think that the vast majority do not like it. Of course there are many ways to stop the walls, I never said no, but a well structured team with 6 walls is very difficult to stop, but look at several "" high level "" players in pokemmo who use that type of game. . I REPEAT so that you understand it well, since it seems that you lack a little reading comprehension, I AM IN FAVOR OF THEY BLOCKING OBJECTS THAT DEPEND ON LUCK, 2 statement: I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF PLAYERS WITH 6 WALLS AND OF THE GAMES OF 100 +.

 

On 7/2/2021 at 4:55 PM, caioxlive13 said:

i don't think is healty win RNG, but use walls combos to win is too unhealty

Here we are don't talking about walls or whatever walls do here, and shutdown-ing completely the walls will never happen because IT IS A PLAYSTYLE.image.png.10f917cd72a02380d8b4ff875ed98e2d.png

If you think that is with no doubts unfair, you should watch the best players are using HO or Balanced, and the minority, Stall, and if you see a player who is winning using Stall, it is simply because his opponents doesn't have anything to stop them. simply as that.

King's Rock is not supposed to trigger more flinch effect in attacks that already have Flinch effect, and cloyster's x5 attack and no previous flinch effect almost guarantee it will unfair win because of this reason and that's why this thread was created. 

image.png.f9f1a622e8feafc0672dc9324901b41f.png

image.png.573163e0e451a264a041490aa074625b.png

I saw a lot of games past season, and played a lot of games too, and I can say that Stall or any variant of stall is not overpowered it is just a playstyle, in fact, his brothers Balanced and HO are WAY BETTER in the actual meta.

players who wins with Stall you can count them with your hands and players who wins with balanced of HO you can't count.

if stall would be better in this meta, the majority of players will run stall obviously, or copying a famous stall team if they like the playstyle, but its nothing compared who the teams who actually win the majority of games.

On 7/2/2021 at 5:06 PM, caioxlive13 said:

Reduce Eviolite defense buffing from 1,5x to 1,3x

?

image.png

image.png.7d4dc2492bb7a110e7fb94ecd01bdc64.png

Edited by ZeknShooter
Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)

 

It is complicated to know that part of your post is directed to what I said, since you put 3 posts from different people in yours, I recommend that you separate your comments post by post, but, I understand your point of view, I know it is a " style of play "I have said it several times in my previous posts, but what I never said is that they ban the walls and that's it, that's stupid, what I said was to put a limit on walls in ranked games (see everything the thread), 3 or 4 walls per team I see it balanced, simply my opinion is: set a limit on walls, reach 100+ turns, and make the opponent get fed up, it is not a healthy game, not even for you nor for the rival, there is simply no reason to be, ok. I do not understand what to put your statistics, as if that gives more truth to what you say, just that you say I have played many games in the previous season is enough, but hey, I also put mine to give "truth" or feel that what I say is worth more than what the other says, I do not have the win rate that you have, but I have one that I think is quite decent, well let's continue, it seems correct that you say that it is a game method, that I put screenshots of the use of chansey and blissey, ok, but chansey and blissey are not the only walls of OU bro, my point is, not to lengthen this post, most players think, believe me, most, and you know it , that the "method of play" distressing the opponent, boring him, is bad for the game.

 

And with the "game method" I mean ((exclusively)) the players who use 6 walls, those whose games usually reach more than 100 turns. 4, neither ((IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECALL)) have I mentioned the stall, for me the stall and the "walleo" are very different methods. I do not have any problem with stall, in fact I have a stall team, I emphasize, my problem is with the "players" who use 6 walls, who do not necessarily use stall, there are many "players" with 6 walls than their method. The game is literal, boring the opponent and letting him press the surrender button, THAT is what I get involved with, that's what I mean, the stall no, the stall I see perfectly respectable, I have no problems with it, you wear a defoger and that's it .
I hope you have understood my point of view and what I mean.

 

Edit. I need to add something else


What I say, I say it with experience like you, I have almost 900 games played in the previous season, 878 games to be exact, they are not few, ehh? hahaha, and with those games I have realized that the previous method mentioned ((remember exclusively I refer to players with 6 walls)) is not healthy.

img.jpg

Edited by CREELAST
I needed to add some more information
Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, CREELAST said:

 

It is complicated to know that part of your post is directed to what I said, since you put 3 posts from different people in yours, I recommend that you separate your comments post by post, but, I understand your point of view, I know it is a " style of play "I have said it several times in my previous posts, but what I never said is that they ban the walls and that's it, that's stupid, what I said was to put a limit on walls in ranked games (see everything the thread), 3 or 4 walls per team I see it balanced, simply my opinion is: set a limit on walls, reach 100+ turns, and make the opponent get fed up, it is not a healthy game, not even for you nor for the rival, there is simply no reason to be, ok. I do not understand what to put your statistics, as if that gives more truth to what you say, just that you say I have played many games in the previous season is enough, but hey, I also put mine to give "truth" or feel that what I say is worth more than what the other says, I do not have the win rate that you have, but I have one that I think is quite decent, well let's continue, it seems correct that you say that it is a game method, that I put screenshots of the use of chansey and blissey, ok, but chansey and blissey are not the only walls of OU bro, my point is, not to lengthen this post, most players think, believe me, most, and you know it , that the "method of play" distressing the opponent, boring him, is bad for the game.

 

And with the "game method" I mean ((exclusively)) the players who use 6 walls, those whose games usually reach more than 100 turns. 4, neither ((IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECALL)) have I mentioned the stall, for me the stall and the "walleo" are very different methods. I do not have any problem with stall, in fact I have a stall team, I emphasize, my problem is with the "players" who use 6 walls, who do not necessarily use stall, there are many "players" with 6 walls than their method. The game is literal, boring the opponent and letting him press the surrender button, THAT is what I get involved with, that's what I mean, the stall no, the stall I see perfectly respectable, I have no problems with it, you wear a defoger and that's it .
I hope you have understood my point of view and what I mean.

 

Edit. I need to add something else


What I say, I say it with experience like you, I have almost 900 games played in the previous season, 878 games to be exact, they are not few, ehh? hahaha, and with those games I have realized that the previous method mentioned ((remember exclusively I refer to players with 6 walls)) is not healthy.

img.jpg

So your argument is "it's unhealthy 'cause the amout of time wasted".

 

The question is what you take as unhealthy on PvP, i'll list you some reasons why stall ain't unhealthy:

 

1. Stall is a way to play, you can hate it or like it, but it's a teambuilding strategy.

 

2. There's no way to avoid walls inside a metage, it's like so dumb to ask a wall limit, how you ensure a mon is a wall, because of their usage? Excuse me sir, there's also Pokemons which are sweepers and walls at the same time, here's some fast examples:

 

Salamence (mixed sweeper, physical wall)

Dragonite (Mixed, band, rain abuser, dragon dance, wall, etc...)

Garchomp (same as dnite but spdef wall with toxic and stealth rock)

Gliscor (SD Acrobatics, Taunt rock setter physical wall)

Blissey (Calm mind, Cleric user spdef wall)

Pelipper (Scarf user, physical wall rain setter)

Rotom-wash (has millions of sweeper sets as nasty plot rotom, or scarf/specs, also it's a physical/spdef wall, most viable mon out there to play OU)

Rotom-mow (same as rotom-wash but less viable by it's typing, still a good sweeper and also a good physical wall as a secondary wall mon)

Tyranitar (Spdef rock setter or even any kind of sweeper set)

 

Said this and proved that, you can see there's literally no way to prove noone of those can be a wall or a sweeper, it's literally limitating everyone's imagination to just play what the meta usage says, and that's not how good players are born my friend, good players get born by using surprising and new sets which actually are here to break the metagame, this doesn't mean you need to use a shitty mon in OU which has 0 viability when there's a better option for that role you're searching for inside your team lol.

 

3. Stall has counters, the problem is players are closed to think about stall is posible to appear inside a duel, but I always have some stall counters on my teams as taunt users or setup sweepers who can stop some stalls, even good wallbreakers, thing is some players ain't used to think about the possibility stall is something that exist and you need to stop it.

 

and IG that's it, to summarize, adding a wall limit (which is impossible in any kind of way) ain't healthy, that would limitate player creativity and criteria at teambuilding and limitate them to 2 kinds of ways to build, Hyperoffensive and balance, and let's be honest, in most of cases, Hyperoffensive vs a good balance can be stopped, still, Hyperoffensive teams are made to end with stalls with hazard setting and wallbreakers/stallbreakers/sweepers.

 

So @CREELAST rethink your petition about adding a limit of walls and you will see you're wrong, let this game have creativity freedom as any kind of competitive scheme, showdown players ain't crying about the fact of having 1000 turns duels, and they play on higher levels than the average of this game, trust me. Anyways, wish this helped you to see Zekns, Huargensy and my point of view, or every person who answered to this post about stall not being unhealthy (mentioned the phew I read).

Edited by JorgeFirebolt
Link to comment
  • 0

I understand your point of view, I respect it, you want to give the possibility for anyone to take the team they want, freedom in summarized ways.
My point was to be able to make a faster goal, fun for the great majority, that's why I gave the idea of putting a wall limit in the qualifying games, and you are right almost any poke you can turn into a wall, putting ev in defense and ps, I've seen it in a lot of pokes, infernape wall and weird things like that hahaha, but my point was to leave 3 or 4 walls per game, and you told me there is no way to limit that, which is partially false and Now I explain to you why, it is true that you cannot limit the walls completely, that is not the point of my idea, the point of my idea is to limit the strongest walls of the meta, the pokes that when you see them 80% are walls , such as milotic, chansey, blissey, hippodown, skarmory, cofagrigus, etc. I mean "true walls" that kind of pokes, I don't want them to limit a salamence wall, that doesn't make sense, since you wouldn't know when it is wall, so my idea was, let the players only carry 3 or 4 of those "real walls" mentioned above, and that if you can limit it, and you know what you would achieve with that? A more friendly goal for everyone, more frenetic, more focused on the rare predits and moves that the rival can carry (a better goal). And I REPEAT once again that I think there are problems with this "stall", the truth is I don't know that I understand the others with the "stall", for me the "stall" is to put spikes, toxic spikes, or stealth Rock into the field and make the opponent change and wear out little by little, ((I repeat)) that method of play seems healthy to me, I have no problem with stall, I use stall with 2 walls, and this is great, it is a mode of A game that is enjoyed, another thing is the stall with 6 walls, or take 6 walls and not play the "stall" necessarily only make the rival bored since you stop everything, THAT is what I am against.
And the "healthy" thing, for me it is not healthy for a player to spend every game with 100+, it is like an hour that, what do you see as didactic?
I give you an example so that you better understand what I am saying.
Suppose, a relatively new player, who has his 500 hours played approx. He goes into pvp, and he runs into one of these "players" who has 6 walls and does not necessarily play with "stall" ((please, get that out of your head, stall is not only viable with many walls)), What I told you below happens, the game reaches 100+ turns, the player gets fed up and presses the surrender button, that "relative new player" is going to get frustrated that maybe he no longer plays that day or maybe He doesn't even want to play that week anymore, he leaves and comes back in a while, after a few games he gets another one with the same "Game Method", he becomes frustrated again, and no longer stops playing for 1 day or one week, stop playing for a month, and so on, which ends up leaving the game, I have friends who have stopped playing this explicitly for that, ((obviously these are few cases, I am aware)) but what I am going to is that It is frustrating for the players, I think it's good that you, huargensy, zekn can deal with the walleros easily, maybe it doesn't seem like a problem to you ema, but to another part of the community, in which I include myself, if it seems like a problem to us, and I'm not telling you that sometimes I also dominate games against players with 6 walls, but it's frustrating to have such an annoying mechanics, that method of play does not attract new players, with a faster goal, and faster games that are defined to predits would be healthier for the game, that's my point of view. ((And I repeat once again, I am not against stall))
I wait your answer ❤️

Link to comment
  • 0

Despite the trolling, this was fun to read. Pokemon is a heavily invested RNG game, how enjoyable is it and to what degree luck is a healthy factor to the metagame is up for debate, I'll keep reading everyone's comments.

Link to comment
  • 0

Well, I think King's Rock is anoying, but should we really ban it?

 

Today I was watching a NU match and I saw something super eh... idk how to describe that. A Feraligatr (that was the last pokemon) facing a 80% HP Venusaur, and Fera just flinched it 2 times with waterfall and killed it. So yeah, flinch is something really annoying.

 

Should we ban flinch in general then?

I don't think it is the solution, in Pokemon all moves has a good and a bad side, for example Air Slash, it can flinch but has a low base power or Hydro Pump that has a high base power but misses more often and even Waterfall that can flinch but has a "low" base power.

 

Can we apply that for items too?

Well, I think so. For example use no item to avoid Poltergeist has a good and a bad side or use items like blackglasses instead of Life Orb and It's here where King's Rocks enters. King's Rock gives  the pokemon flinch chances but makes the pokemon has no damage boost which is bad in some calcs and situations.

 

In sum I think ban King's Rock isn't the solution, maybe a complex ban in cloyster.

 

Well that's my toughts, I think there are more broken things in game (paralyze) but let's not enter this subject.

 

I RESPECT and TOTALLY understands who thinks the item should be banned, but I think diferently, feel to free to reply and discuss

 

Link to comment
  • 0
On 7/3/2021 at 1:54 PM, CREELAST said:

hahahaha, you seem like you don't read, when I said don't ban king's rock? I am always in agreement, And that of "crying", I explain to you huargensy, if you like to play games of 1000 turns, good for you, but I think that the vast majority do not like it. Of course there are many ways to stop the walls, I never said no, but a well structured team with 6 walls is very difficult to stop, but look at several "" high level "" players in pokemmo who use that type of game. . I REPEAT so that you understand it well, since it seems that you lack a little reading comprehension, I AM IN FAVOR OF THEY BLOCKING OBJECTS THAT DEPEND ON LUCK, 2 statement: I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF PLAYERS WITH 6 WALLS AND OF THE GAMES OF 100 +.

 

Edit. I add something else

If it hurts so much, let me get involved with players like that, it will be for something, right?
I don't mean that you are one of them, because I know your gameplay, but ... what is the reason for that? Many competitive players that I respect and know that they have a high level of play, all of them are against this method of play, it seems strange to me that I see you supporting and defending these "players", I would say that A large part of the community is against those who abuse that method of play, and I repeat it once again I AM IN FAVOR OF YOU BLOCKING OBJECTS THAT INVOLVE RNG ABSURD AND LUCK. But did they support those people? Seriously man?

I didn't say you were in favor of kings rock, but you mentioned the "If they ban this they should ban this too (6walls)" and it's like comparing 2 totally different things, if playing defensive teams depended a lot on random play, I would also be asking for their ban, But it is not the case, it is a form of game, some of them bother, some like, imagine, what if they dislike that they play offensive mons? Do you see them asking to be banned or complaining about it? No, it is a form of game that always existed and it will, there is nothing wrong with one liking to play it, I also hated defensive teams when I first started, but then I started to build better my teams, and at least not I suffer a lot with the walls, but it is something that one must discover and not ask for it to be eliminated just because you could not cope with something that you built yourself, all this depends on you and your ability, kings rock no, no you can have an answer, because everything that this item entails is random.

 

On 7/3/2021 at 8:07 PM, PedroLindoUnico said:

Well, I think King's Rock is anoying, but should we really ban it?

 

Today I was watching a NU match and I saw something super eh... idk how to describe that. A Feraligatr (that was the last pokemon) facing a 80% HP Venusaur, and Fera just flinched it 2 times with waterfall and killed it. So yeah, flinch is something really annoying.

 

Should we ban flinch in general then?

I don't think it is the solution, in Pokemon all moves has a good and a bad side, for example Air Slash, it can flinch but has a low base power or Hydro Pump that has a high base power but misses more often and even Waterfall that can flinch but has a "low" base power.

 

Can we apply that for items too?

Well, I think so. For example use no item to avoid Poltergeist has a good and a bad side or use items like blackglasses instead of Life Orb and It's here where King's Rocks enters. King's Rock gives  the pokemon flinch chances but makes the pokemon has no damage boost which is bad in some calcs and situations.

 

In sum I think ban King's Rock isn't the solution, maybe a complex ban in cloyster.

 

Well that's my toughts, I think there are more broken things in game (paralyze) but let's not enter this subject.

 

I RESPECT and TOTALLY understands who thinks the item should be banned, but I think diferently, feel to free to reply and discuss

 

Lol no, the problem is not cloyster, the problem is the item, you can play other levels and that some character x uses it and backs you up the same way, Pokémon has always been a game that depends on the rng, but you should try to return it as little as possible, something that items like kings rock, quick claw and things like that encourage

Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)

No man, I never said "If they ban this they should ban this too (6walls)" , I don't know where you read that, what I put was "but hey since we are banning the players with 6 walls ehhh ❤️", in the form of sarcastics obviously by the "ehhh" and the "<3", you misread bro xd

 

And if Edit. Again to add something else, it's already a meme hahahaha


It is very different to tell you, if you ban king's rock, you must also ban the players with 6 walls((thing I didn't say)), a "I agree, everything that depends on the RNG is harmful in my opinion, but not only the king's rock, also the quick claw, that item is absurd sometimes hahaha, but hey since we are banning the players with 6 walls ehhh ❤️ ", what I said is baneen rock of the king, and since we are banning rock of the king we take advantage and ban the players with 6 walls, of sacchastic way obviously, I never compare "king's rock" with walleros, don't mix that up.

Edited by CREELAST
To add something else
Link to comment
  • 0
3 hours ago, CREELAST said:

It is very different to tell you, if you ban king's rock, you must also ban the players with 6 walls((thing I didn't say)), a "I agree, everything that depends on the RNG is harmful in my opinion, but not only the king's rock, also the quick claw, that item is absurd sometimes hahaha, but hey since we are banning the players with 6 walls ehhh ❤️ ", what I said is baneen rock of the king, and since we are banning rock of the king we take advantage and ban the players with 6 walls, of sacchastic way obviously, I never compare "king's rock" with walleros, don't mix that up.

so, you are telling us, in a thread that is king's rock related, that we should ban the worst of the three main game styles of playing and also the less used of the three, just because the newbies and you doesn't know how to build a team including wall-breakers and because is "boring" to you?... are you serious ?, sorry i can't understand your way of thinking or the way of thinking of your probably friend upthere, i'm not replying to this again.

Link to comment
  • 0

Guys, let's start from one thing- King's Rock IS NOT GOING to get banned and Kyu has voiced this out himself in one of our threads where we keep rioting. Getting rid of King's Rock as OP item unfort is out of question here.

 

My suggestion is to keep it in game, but change it's mechanic: make King's Rock activate only once in multi-hit moves. This should effectively discourage people who prefer to bet their game on RNG rather than their teambuilding/ prediction skills.

 

 

And if you think that you need King's Rock to beat walls, then a big shame on you. Taunt effectively stops 90% of stall teams and every tier has an incredibly powerful wallbreaker which is capable of shredding every stall team apart. If you want to rely on a RNG factor rather than your teambuilding and predicting skills then this thread isn't for you. The argument about King's Rock being the necessary evil to deal with stall is probably one of the stupidest things I read on this forum during my 8-year career on it.

 

 

Once again, a healthy metagame is where players can use every playstyle, from stall, through hyper offense. If anything, your claim that King's Rock invalidates a team with 6 walls, thus, effectively disabling stall as an entire playstyle, is just another argument to modify the item as soon as possible.

Link to comment
  • 0

Yes in short it is what you said, but there are some errors.

Those of us who think about this, it's not just me and the "newbies" as you call it, what happens is that you have to get out of your buddy bubble, if the players with 6 walls don't make a problem for you, and all the players of your level (70% - 80%) of win rate they do not have a problem with this, ok, I understand, but you have to understand something, most are the one who commands and most do not play at those levels, the " rookies "as you call us, which I see a bit derogatory, but well that's not the point, the point is that to the vast majority of players, not only does it seem boring ((method is played with 6 walls)), but annoying excuse me for the word, but it's SICK to deal with that kind of game for us, come out of your bubble for a while and ask the "novice" players what we feel when we play with one of these guys, come out of your world for a while, and ask them what they think of those people, and maybe that's how you understand, how disgusting it is to play with "6 walls style of play, I'll take you to the hour starting, yes 100+, that didactic, hilarious, and I REPEAT the "newbies" who think this to put a limit of walls like 3 or 4, as I mentioned above, WE ARE NOT THE MINORITY.

Link to comment
  • 0
13 minutes ago, CREELAST said:

Yes in short it is what you said, but there are some errors.

Those of us who think about this, it's not just me and the "newbies" as you call it, what happens is that you have to get out of your buddy bubble, if the players with 6 walls don't make a problem for you, and all the players of your level (70% - 80%) of win rate they do not have a problem with this, ok, I understand, but you have to understand something, most are the one who commands and most do not play at those levels, the " rookies "as you call us, which I see a bit derogatory, but well that's not the point, the point is that to the vast majority of players, not only does it seem boring ((method is played with 6 walls)), but annoying excuse me for the word, but it's SICK to deal with that kind of game for us, come out of your bubble for a while and ask the "novice" players what we feel when we play with one of these guys, come out of your world for a while, and ask them what they think of those people, and maybe that's how you understand, how disgusting it is to play with "6 walls style of play, I'll take you to the hour starting, yes 100+, that didactic, hilarious, and I REPEAT the "newbies" who think this to put a limit of walls like 3 or 4, as I mentioned above, WE ARE NOT THE MINORITY.

I need to agree, 50% Flinch chance is a chance that f*** walls, and "experient" players, but for "Novices", if with 50% flinch, he don't flinch, they will lose. the "newbies" is the most part of players, and try to start competitive. It is fair he can't make anything against wall supremacy? 

 

Like i suggest, is for reduce king's rock 's chance flinch, but reduce some buffs of OP itens, like Eviolite, the wall's best friend

 

 

Link to comment
  • 0
4 minutes ago, CREELAST said:

Yes in short it is what you said, but there are some errors.

Those of us who think about this, it's not just me and the "newbies" as you call it, what happens is that you have to get out of your buddy bubble, if the players with 6 walls don't make a problem for you, and all the players of your level (70% - 80%) of win rate they do not have a problem with this, ok, I understand, but you have to understand something, most are the one who commands and most do not play at those levels, the " rookies "as you call us, which I see a bit derogatory, but well that's not the point, the point is that to the vast majority of players, not only does it seem boring ((method is played with 6 walls)), but annoying excuse me for the word, but it's SICK to deal with that kind of game for us, come out of your bubble for a while and ask the "novice" players what we feel when we play with one of these guys, come out of your world for a while, and ask them what they think of those people, and maybe that's how you understand, how disgusting it is to play with "6 walls style of play, I'll take you to the hour starting, yes 100+, that didactic, hilarious, and I REPEAT the "newbies" who think this to put a limit of walls like 3 or 4, as I mentioned above, WE ARE NOT THE MINORITY.

You bring a valid point about newer players struggling more against more defensive teams. However, just like any game, the competitive meta is, and should be, decided solely by competitive aspects, and not knowing the game isn't one of them. 

Examples:

if I start play Yu-gi-oh and struggle against OTK decks that summon 560 monsters in half a turn, but the top players don't, it is a ME problem and the meta shouldn't, in any case, change because of it. 

If I start playing League, and my ADC is always rekt by the bulky bruisers with some sort of CC because I cannot successfully poke or engage at a perfect time, that is a newbie problem and shouldn't reflect the meta.

I get that it may be annoying for you. It was annoying for me and for many others. But luckily you don't need to be a pro. Most of top 100 nowadays aren't even that good and if they are there, it is because they succeed. All you need to understand, for now, is that some matchups are inherently easy/hard for others. If you struggle with Wall teams, nothing prevents you from picking a taunt Hydreigon or a Banded Darmanitan, or even a mixed Dragonite or a Sheer Force Conkeldurr and destroy them left and right. 

 

Now I will try to explain why your logic is flawed with a bit of bias. I am mostly an offensive player. Most of my teams, the moment I build them, are inherently weak to Rain teams, and they make me have to go through outrageously cycles of outplays to even have a chance of winning. Does this make Rain broken? No, this means Rain has a superior matchup against my teams. So what do I have to do? Adapt, and change the team in order to be slightly more resilient to said Rain. In other words, Rain isn't problematic because it shutdowns Hyper offense, the same way full Stall isn't problematic just because it shutdowns specific balanced builds that do not pack an wallbreaker. So, all you need is to adapt.

 

In sum, I believe anyone is entitled to their opinion, even newer guys, but I also believe newer guys should try to learn from what more experienced people say. If successful people claim Walls aren't problematic then most likely they are not and there are plenty of ways to deal with those (skillfully). The problem I see is that some (not all) newer people are just incredibly stubborn and believe Pokemon is a game where everything should work equally, and therefore their teams and their style should equally work against everything. (Trust me I used to be like this), where in reality Pokemon is simply an adapting process, where some styles are inherently weaker than others, and as such anyone, new or old, should and try to use teams that succeed against the given meta.

 

There are also plenty of guides in these forums to check out and learn from.

I hope I could send the message I wanted.

Link to comment
  • 0
On 7/4/2021 at 1:15 PM, CREELAST said:

Yes in short it is what you said, but there are some errors.

Those of us who think about this, it's not just me and the "newbies" as you call it, what happens is that you have to get out of your buddy bubble, if the players with 6 walls don't make a problem for you, and all the players of your level (70% - 80%) of win rate they do not have a problem with this, ok, I understand, but you have to understand something, most are the one who commands and most do not play at those levels, the " rookies "as you call us, which I see a bit derogatory, but well that's not the point, the point is that to the vast majority of players, not only does it seem boring ((method is played with 6 walls)), but annoying excuse me for the word, but it's SICK to deal with that kind of game for us, come out of your bubble for a while and ask the "novice" players what we feel when we play with one of these guys, come out of your world for a while, and ask them what they think of those people, and maybe that's how you understand, how disgusting it is to play with "6 walls style of play, I'll take you to the hour starting, yes 100+, that didactic, hilarious, and I REPEAT the "newbies" who think this to put a limit of walls like 3 or 4, as I mentioned above, WE ARE NOT THE MINORITY.

I have experience of boring match too many times, lose 164 matchs for this, and win 104, the most part due to "novice" players and teams that i'm capable of counter, shows the walls supremacy in pokemmo meta. And only offense strategys have been nerfed, defensive strategy, like chansey and blissey winning matchs only tanking, doesn't change nothing.

 

On 7/4/2021 at 1:36 PM, pachima said:

You bring a valid point about newer players struggling more against more defensive teams. However, just like any game, the competitive meta is, and should be, decided solely by competitive aspects, and not knowing the game isn't one of them. 

Examples:

if I start play Yu-gi-oh and struggle against OTK decks that summon 560 monsters in half a turn, but the top players don't, it is a ME problem and the meta shouldn't, in any case, change because of it. 

If I start playing League, and my ADC is always rekt by the bulky bruisers with some sort of CC because I cannot successfully poke or engage at a perfect time, that is a newbie problem and shouldn't reflect the meta.

I get that it may be annoying for you. It was annoying for me and for many others. But luckily you don't need to be a pro. Most of top 100 nowadays aren't even that good and if they are there, it is because they succeed. All you need to understand, for now, is that some matchups are inherently easy/hard for others. If you struggle with Wall teams, nothing prevents you from picking a taunt Hydreigon or a Banded Darmanitan, or even a mixed Dragonite or a Sheer Force Conkeldurr and destroy them left and right. 

 

Now I will try to explain why your logic is flawed with a bit of bias. I am mostly an offensive player. Most of my teams, the moment I build them, are inherently weak to Rain teams, and they make me have to go through outrageously cycles of outplays to even have a chance of winning. Does this make Rain broken? No, this means Rain has a superior matchup against my teams. So what do I have to do? Adapt, and change the team in order to be slightly more resilient to said Rain. In other words, Rain isn't problematic because it shutdowns Hyper offense, the same way full Stall isn't problematic just because it shutdowns specific balanced builds that do not pack an wallbreaker. So, all you need is to adapt.

 

In sum, I believe anyone is entitled to their opinion, even newer guys, but I also believe newer guys should try to learn from what more experienced people say. If successful people claim Walls aren't problematic then most likely they are not and there are plenty of ways to deal with those (skillfully). The problem I see is that some (not all) newer people are just incredibly stubborn and believe Pokemon is a game where everything should work equally, and therefore their teams and their style should equally work against everything. (Trust me I used to be like this), where in reality Pokemon is simply an adapting process, where some styles are inherently weaker than others, and as such anyone, new or old, should and try to use teams that succeed against the given meta.

 

There are also plenty of guides in these forums to check out and learn from.

I hope I could send the message I wanted.

If want to "equilibrate", make players only face oponents that are in same rank that you, one rank above or below you, example: Professional Players: Can only face veteran players rank, professional trainer rank or trainer rank. Novice trainer Rank: Can only face trainer rank or novice trainer rank.

 

On 7/4/2021 at 1:42 PM, caioxlive13 said:

If want to "equilibrate", make players only face oponents that are in same rank that you, one rank above or below you, example: Professional Players: Can only face veteran players rank, professional trainer rank or trainer rank. Novice trainer Rank: Can only face trainer rank or novice trainer rank.

This end wall problem, once time that 6-wall team always have in high rank players, making the high rank match boring and low rank match more emocionant and relevant to assist.

people likes to assist 5-15 match minutes that 45-90 minutes match.
and people that play don't kept boring in matchmaking, to only face walls.

 

Link to comment
  • 0
3 minutes ago, caioxlive13 said:

This end wall problem, once time that 6-wall team always have in high rank players, making the high rank match boring and low rank match more emocionant and relevant to assist.

people likes to assist 5-15 match minutes that 45-90 minutes match.
and people that play don't kept boring in matchmaking, to only face walls.

 

This is Wrong and you should try to listen. 6-Wall team doesn't necessarily drag the game for long. What it does is exhaust the enemy team's resources until they are unable to keep going with momento and therefore crumble. This also mean that while a Wall team against a Wall team will most likely drag, a wall team against an offensive team will not. In this latter case, either the wall team exhausts the offensive team quickly enough and wins, or the offensive team punches through the defensive team quickly enough and wins. As an offensive player, pretty much all all my games are within the 10 min mark, no matter if I face offense or defense. 

 

The problem here is not the wall teams. It is you failed to adapt your team to deal with those, and therefore lack an way to punch through the defense system, thus dragging the game. Do not ever forget a Pokemon game is played by 2 players. If your games drag for needlessly long, opposing wall teams are just part of the problem, the other part is your own team. My advice is actually try to learn and gather information, and pick wallbreakers that destroy stall. I have seen players with less than 2 months actually succeed and reach top 100, so there is no reason for you, or anyone else for that matter, to struggle where they did not. As long as you learn how to adapt, I promise you will have a much greater time playing this game. It is not easy, and you will not learn everything in 1 day or 1 week, but with some effort and adaptation anyone can do it. 

Link to comment
  • 0

I understand what you are saying, believe me I have more than 2000 hours played on this, I have a win rate between 61% - 64%, I have played more than 2000 qualifying games in all the history that I have been playing, and it is true that pokemon is a to adapt, we all do it, I did it at the beginning, and even so there are times when you can't simply with the team that you take to those games, it's something like the rain that sweeps teams of players with (70% - 80% of win rate) and those players simply cannot counteract the rain because their team does not allow them to do so, that same team that led them to have that win rate (which is supposed to be a good team), well the same thing happens with these "players" , only that what happens is that rain is generally offensive, which means that the game would not last so many turns, which is what happens, the games vs rain are decided in the early game, BUT the games with this type of players do not They are short, they are absurdly long, which in the opinion of many hos is boring.
Be honest please, you would not like to have a more offensive goal and that the games are defined by the predits of the players, or by the surprise moves, or by the ev training that makes the poke ready for a situation in specific, or by the use of damage reducers, etc. ((All this demonstrating the skill and experience of the player in combat)). I was also like you before my friend, I thought that the problem is the players and the style of play of those guys with 6 walls was fine, but over time I realized that it is not like that, it is a boring style of play for which He has been playing for 2 hours and also for the one who has been playing for 3000 hours, if a limit would be set like the idea you mentioned in previous posts, the game would not only be friendlier for new players, more frenzied, etc. But for all of us who enjoy this game, those of 40% - 50% - 60% and even those of 70% - 80% would enjoy it more, since they would not find these games, think about it friend

Link to comment
  • 0

If you cannot beat an entire playstyle, then something is wrong with your teambuild or/and your skills. Not the item which perverts the competitive scene for everyone, regardless of the playstyle they use.

Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, CREELAST said:

I understand what you are saying, believe me I have more than 2000 hours played on this, I have a win rate between 61% - 64%, I have played more than 2000 qualifying games in all the history that I have been playing, and it is true that pokemon is a to adapt, we all do it, I did it at the beginning, and even so there are times when you can't simply with the team that you take to those games, it's something like the rain that sweeps teams of players with (70% - 80% of win rate) and those players simply cannot counteract the rain because their team does not allow them to do so, that same team that led them to have that win rate (which is supposed to be a good team), well the same thing happens with these "players" , only that what happens is that rain is generally offensive, which means that the game would not last so many turns, which is what happens, the games vs rain are decided in the early game, BUT the games with this type of players do not They are short, they are absurdly long, which in the opinion of many hos is boring.
Be honest please, you would not like to have a more offensive goal and that the games are defined by the predits of the players, or by the surprise moves, or by the ev training that makes the poke ready for a situation in specific, or by the use of damage reducers, etc. ((All this demonstrating the skill and experience of the player in combat)). I was also like you before my friend, I thought that the problem is the players and the style of play of those guys with 6 walls was fine, but over time I realized that it is not like that, it is a boring style of play for which He has been playing for 2 hours and also for the one who has been playing for 3000 hours, if a limit would be set like the idea you mentioned in previous posts, the game would not only be friendlier for new players, more frenzied, etc. But for all of us who enjoy this game, those of 40% - 50% - 60% and even those of 70% - 80% would enjoy it more, since they would not find these games, think about it friend

I will try to clarify something here. It is not the experience of a player in a battle that makes the games much longer/shorter (Yes, it has some impact, but imo, almost irrelevant). On the same note, winrate also doesn't necessarily correlate to the length of the games. What does correlate is the way teams are built. 

 

Let me give you an example. My games are usually around 10 mins, even against stall teams. If I gave my teams to you your games would be short, and since you aren't experienced with them, they could be slightly shorter or longer, but never long because my teams are unable to drag the game without already breaking through the enemy. Nothing changes except a more experienced player has higher success with any team than a less experienced one.

By the same logic, I am sure that if I was to use your teams, my games would be long, because those teams, as you claim, are unable to break Stall and there is no amount of skill (Unless one player is a God and the other a potato) that changes this fact. 

Winrate should show how experience /successful a player is with any given team in a given meta. Game length is ultimately decided not by the skill put into the actual match but in the teambuilding. If you claim your team is unable to get short games, that isn't a YOU problem nor a STALL problem, it is an YOUR TEAM problem, and as such, since you dislike lengthy battles, it only means that team isn't fit for you.

 

If you wish I can give you some teams I use. They take time to get used to it, but you'll soon realize your battles won't and can't be long. You either beat them or get beaten shortly. The only difference is the amount of success I, you or anyone can have with these teams.

 

Hope I could clarify it.

Edited by pachima
Link to comment
  • 0
5 hours ago, RysPicz said:

Guys, let's start from one thing- King's Rock IS NOT GOING to get banned and Kyu has voiced this out himself in one of our threads where we keep rioting. Getting rid of King's Rock as OP item unfort is out of question here.

 

My suggestion is to keep it in game, but change it's mechanic: make King's Rock activate only once in multi-hit moves. This should effectively discourage people who prefer to bet their game on RNG rather than their teambuilding/ prediction skills.

 

 

And if you think that you need King's Rock to beat walls, then a big shame on you. Taunt effectively stops 90% of stall teams and every tier has an incredibly powerful wallbreaker which is capable of shredding every stall team apart. If you want to rely on a RNG factor rather than your teambuilding and predicting skills then this thread isn't for you. The argument about King's Rock being the necessary evil to deal with stall is probably one of the stupidest things I read on this forum during my 8-year career on it.

 

 

Once again, a healthy metagame is where players can use every playstyle, from stall, through hyper offense. If anything, your claim that King's Rock invalidates a team with 6 walls, thus, effectively disabling stall as an entire playstyle, is just another argument to modify the item as soon as possible.

I don't know if I agree with that, but it would be a multi-hit nerf instead of a really king's rock nerf which reinforce my tought that Cloyster with this item is the problem.

As I said for me the solution is make a complex ban around cloyster with king's rock or even banning screens (or light clay), since 70% of the time cloyster is used with screens. Banning screens (or light clay) would make people use this item way less than it is used right now.

But I think the first solution I showed is the best

Link to comment
  • 0
Posted (edited)

"On the same note, winrate also doesn't necessarily correlate to the length of the games. What does correlate is the way teams are built."
This is very true, but I think we knew it xdd

 

Well, I understand what you are saying, but I never said that my games are long, is not it, what I hate the most are the games of 100+ turns. My games are usually short, like yours, I usually use offensive or "offensive / balanced" teams (with about 2 walls), I use several teams since playing with one would bore me, like anyone else, I use 2 offensive rain teams ( (with which I really enjoy because the game is defined in the first turns, at full predits)), I also have a stall team (with 2 walls) ((it is not necessary to carry 6 walls for the stall to be effective)), a "" balanced "" team with 3 walls ((which gives me good results)). You understand what I'm about, my games do not last long, generally less than 10 or 15 minutes, the problem is when I find one of these with 6 walls, there is the dilemma, as I said in a previous post, this is not It usually happens often, but when it happens it is annoying, it is that simple, I need to clarify, that it is not in the plan "I have one with 6 walls and I automatically say in my thoughts, I already lost" that does not happen, I try to win, Like everyone else, and when trying to win against one of those guys, the game usually lengthens, ONLY IN THESE CASES THE GAME IS LONGERED, but as I said, little happens to me, but that does not remove how annoying it can be.
And you didn't answer what I asked you before, would you like a more frenzied goal? a meta based on predits, specific ev training, surprising mov sets, use of objects for specific situations, such as berries, etc. ((In my opinion it shows the experience and skill of player and when I refer to the "skill" I mean the predits ((that is pure skills)) Would you like a goal like that? Or maybe you would like more to be with your chansey in front of another wall on turn 128, and both of you spending the pp to see who wins the game. Ehhh? xD

 

Edit. ((I don't know how many times I've said this but hey XDD))


I add something important, when one of these players is my turn ((and when I say "me" I do not only mean me but also the other players who are bothered by this)), I do not always lose obviously, it is difficult, but to Sometimes I win and sometimes I lose against these players, BUT I don't mind losing or it doesn't matter much to me winning, it bothers me that the other boy lengthens the game to 100+, having finished my sporify playlist and I'm still on that duel) THAT IS WHAT ANNOIES ME AND WHAT ANNOIES MOST OF THE PLAYERS, IT IS NOT THE FACT OF LOSING OR WINNING, when I win someone and the game I feel that it has been good, I tell him that it was a good game , the same when I lose, if the other completely dominated me in the game, hey I tell him GG, the same if the game was even, the point is I like healthy games ((for me it is not healthy to be 100 turns in a only game)), your life is going away in a game, this is not a battlefield game, there I do go in waiting that each game lasts 30 - 40 minutes, you understand me, right?

Edited by CREELAST
Link to comment
  • 0
3 hours ago, PedroLindoUnico said:

I don't know if I agree with that, but it would be a multi-hit nerf instead of a really king's rock nerf which reinforce my tought that Cloyster with this item is the problem.

As I said for me the solution is make a complex ban around cloyster with king's rock or even banning screens (or light clay), since 70% of the time cloyster is used with screens. Banning screens (or light clay) would make people use this item way less than it is used right now.

But I think the first solution I showed is the best

How would it be a multi-hit nerf? I'm a little confused. Multi-hit moves such as Icicle Spear, Rock Blast, Tail fap or Bullet weed will remain just the way they were, nothing is being changed with them. Just king's rock will activate only on the first hit (or at least I wish it would).

 

Regarding screens, again- banning an entire playstyle is not the way to go. Defog removes screens, Brick break destroys them (works even if a ghost type comes in), Taunt prevents setting them up. I didn't play against screens in OU- mainly because OU is the most disgusting metagame I have ever faced- but I did play a lot against screens in UU. Using screens is a very risky strategy as it only takes a Brick Break user to completely invalidate them.

 

It is almost as if you would ask for a nerf on rain or damp rock because water spam would be too strong for a certain tier. Unfortunately, disabling an entire archetype or playstyle is out of question unless a certain pokemon would start becoming centralizing/ uncompetitive/ unhealthy but in situations like the one which we have at hand it's tough to figure out what is the main culprit (and in here I would rather try discussing Electrode as uber support but I already see so many counter-arguments that I do not think it would be productive to even begin).

10 minutes ago, CREELAST said:

"On the same note, winrate also doesn't necessarily correlate to the length of the games. What does correlate is the way teams are built."
This is very true, but I think we knew it xdd

 

Well, I understand what you are saying, but I never said that my games are long, is not it, what I hate the most are the games of 100+ turns. My games are usually short, like yours, I usually use offensive or "offensive / balanced" teams (with about 2 walls), I use several teams since playing with one would bore me, like anyone else, I use 2 offensive rain teams ( (with which I really enjoy because the game is defined in the first turns, at full predits)), I also have a stall team (with 2 walls) ((it is not necessary to carry 6 walls for the stall to be effective)), a "" balanced "" team with 3 walls ((which gives me good results)). You understand what I'm about, my games do not last long, generally less than 10 or 15 minutes, the problem is when I find one of these with 6 walls, there is the dilemma, as I said in a previous post, this is not It usually happens often, but when it happens it is annoying, it is that simple, I need to clarify, that it is not in the plan "I have one with 6 walls and I automatically say in my thoughts, I already lost" that does not happen, I try to win, Like everyone else, and when trying to win against one of those guys, the game usually lengthens, ONLY IN THESE CASES THE GAME IS LONGERED, but as I said, little happens to me, but that does not remove how annoying it can be.
And you didn't answer what I asked you before, would you like a more frenzied goal? a meta based on predits, specific ev training, surprising mov sets, use of objects for specific situations, such as berries, etc. ((In my opinion it shows the experience and skill of player and when I refer to the "skill" I mean the predits ((that is pure skills)) Would you like a goal like that? Or maybe you would like more to be with your chansey in front of another wall on turn 128, and both of you spending the pp to see who wins the game. Ehhh? xD

I totally understand your point of view, as I'm a person who absolutely loves taking down walls and it also annoys me greatly when a fight or a tournament gets prolonged because some person brainlessly stalls for eternity while having abysmal chances of winning (hoping for a disconnect I guess lul). But unfortunately the fact that we are annoyed is not enough to limit walls/ ban them and attempt to ban an entire playstyle 😛

Link to comment
  • 0

What bothers a lot ehhh? XD, Exactly they want the other to disconnect or something like that, it is absurd, it is literally very annoying, if you also see that in tournaments, especially in the final instances. That is exactly why, that is why I say that we put a limit, your opinion is not to limit them even though you know that it is a sick thing, I understand it, I respect your opinion, but if you said it as it is, that is the problem XD

Link to comment
  • 0
2 hours ago, CREELAST said:

What bothers a lot ehhh? XD, Exactly they want the other to disconnect or something like that, it is absurd, it is literally very annoying, if you also see that in tournaments, especially in the final instances. That is exactly why, that is why I say that we put a limit, your opinion is not to limit them even though you know that it is a sick thing, I understand it, I respect your opinion, but if you said it as it is, that is the problem XD

haven't read the whole threat of comments since it's pretty much just that clown commenting, but I don't understand your problem with what 4f is saying. His suggestion has been discussed in the past and iirc Orange brought that suggestion on some tournament discord a while ago aswell, instead of it 'flinch checking' on every hit, make the 5 moves as a whole count as a single 'flinch check' which would therefor nerf the hit considerably making it while still gamebreaking, at least a lot more rng heavy for the user.

Link to comment
  • 0

I do not understand why you quote my comment and mention things about the king's rock, which I have not touched on in that post, I honestly find the sense there, I never talked about the flich, or anything like that, maybe you got confused at the time of citing the comment, mine talks about how annoying it is the games with 6 walls, no king's rock XD

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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