[Discussion] Snorlax (OU)

[DrCraig]

Or people were breeding them anyways . The only one that has an effect on snorlax is espeon and that's about it. And even now it can still lead with screens if you choose to. But your argument that people were adjusting to laxless meta could also be used to the fact that people were breeding them and using them regardless of snorlax. Aero blaziken and ursaring all still have their specific traits at what they are good at.

People don't use pokemon just because they have them, they use them to try to win. Hence why the usage statistics matter. Edited May 14, 2015 by DrCraig

[DoubleJ]

I was using an Alakazam post-Lax ban and even won an official with it. I was also able to un-choice band a few of my pokes that needed to banded when Lax was around with Curse. A mixed Flygon became viable as well as a few other random ideas I had that were otherwise at risk of becoming set-up bait for Curselax. Cloyster became a bit more viable in my opinion as well. 

 

I loved that post-snorlax meta and in my teambuilding allowed for a lot more freedom. OU was fun again. 

 

In my estimation I think Cody hit it right on the mark, "the meta was still evolving". 

[Excelimpulse]

One can say it's still evolving now. If the usage pokes now go back to where they were u can say it's because of snorlax. But if they don't then snorkaz has nothing to do with it.

[Robofiend]

I mean, in a literal sense of the word, sure the meta "changed" - snorlax, the highest used pokemon, was removed. That's a massive change. Other than that, nothing much else happened - blissey took lax's place atop the usage charts and viable pokemon remained viable, unviable pokemon remained unviable for the most part. You know as well as I do that in order to prove a pokemon is unhealthy, a noticable change for the better would have to occur when that pokemon is removed.

 

I think what was really overlooked in the discussion was that Blissey did take lax's spot in usage but lacked all of the characteristics that make Snorlax unhealthy. It doesn't parahax your checks to death, it doesn't set up in 1-2 turns to become nearly unbreakable by 75% of the tier, and it has a reasonable number of counters that are useful for team dynamics outside of stopping it (i.e. Flygon on non-ice beam variants, Ursaring, Heracross, Metagross, Ludicholo for stallers, Forretress for spikes, etc.). Snorlax, on the other hand, is only surely stopped by sacking something to it and sending in Heracross (or whatever), otherwise you risk taking a game losing Body Slam to the face. Even the best counter, Rhydon, becomes relatively useless in the standard meta when it gets para'd on the switch and can't successfully set up a Sub/SD to prevent getting murked by the switch in.

 

Curselax in particular often just results in stall outs or "gogogogo crit" strategies that just rely on RNG factors like getting a lucky para against your opponent's Heracross or Curselax, or your opponent getting the crit to break you and win. All of these are essentially 50/50's that everyone the the TC usually agrees are negative - and they can't be quantified. Similar to how Baton Pass was ruled "cancerous" because of its ability to rob opponents of autonomy, a strategy that revolves mostly around para-ing your opponents and hoping they don't crit you should be looked at with a skeptical eye. It's beyond me why everyone just threw out their usual opposition to a strategy that revolves largely around luck and instead decided to point at the usage stats and say "look, nothing changed so we're bringing it back!"

 

75% in favor of bringing lax back.

 

 

66.66% to be accurate, Tranzmaster doesn't get a vote lel

 

If usage stats aren't gonna be used to determine whether a positive change in the meta occured upon the removal of a pokemon, what the hell are we supposed to use? Arguments that look like "well I feel like the meta has cahnged, I can be more creative" are just so subjective, and they clash with arguments that go "nothing has cahnged, now the fat pink blob dominates and i hate it." Neither argument is inherently better than the other, so do you see the problem?

 

See my post on "subjectivity and healthiness" page 10 I think? Relying on usage stats is usually fine, and can be a great factor in arguments, but we all agreed at the onset of the test that we had to test subjective aspects of Snorlax (>not numerical) in order to see if it was actually unhealthy since it didn't clearly meet the Uber criteria. We weren't testing "will the usage stats change?" We were testing "Is it too good not to use? Does it limit teambuilding? Does it limit playstyle? etc." While usage stats are ok at answering whether it limits teambuilding or not, they don't do much to answer the other questions, because (like I've reiterated) we don't have numerical data that tracks the percent of stall teams or offense teams or what have you. I hate to say it, but there's little "fact of the matter" in this debate, most of what has happened is just people emoting all over each other about how they feel about Snorlax.

 

Remember when we banned Baton Pass? Did people come back afterwards and say "Look look look, Snorlax is still on 60% of teams, Jolteon is still used, Vaporeon is still everywhere, thus banning BP did nothing to make the metagame healthier! The usage stats didn't change, therefore Baton Pass is actually healthy!" I know this is a hyperbole (and maybe a category error) but it makes a point about healthiness, competitivity and usage that is pretty compelling imo.

[fredrichnietze]

66.66% to be accurate, Tranzmaster doesn't get a vote lel

wait does tyrone get a vote?

[BurntZebra]

wait does tyrone get a vote?

tyrone is uu tier council. if that was the case, would have stopped slowking+umbreon bans in uu 

[Senile]

wait does tyrone get a vote?

He shouldn't.

[DoubleJ]

Robofiend just made an excellent summary of why snorlax should not be in the ou tier. His most recent post should be pinned to the op.

Tier council needs to look back in on this and have another conversation to see if they made the right decision imo.

[Gunthug]

His most recent post should be pinned to the op.

Lmao don't be ridiculous

 

 

I think what was really overlooked in the discussion was that Blissey did take lax's spot in usage but lacked all of the characteristics that make Snorlax unhealthy. It doesn't parahax your checks to death, it doesn't set up in 1-2 turns to become nearly unbreakable by 75% of the tier, and it has a reasonable number of counters that are useful for team dynamics outside of stopping it (i.e. Flygon on non-ice beam variants, Ursaring, Heracross, Metagross, Ludicholo for stallers, Forretress for spikes, etc.). Snorlax, on the other hand, is only surely stopped by sacking something to it and sending in Heracross (or whatever), otherwise you risk taking a game losing Body Slam to the face. Even the best counter, Rhydon, becomes relatively useless in the standard meta when it gets para'd on the switch and can't successfully set up a Sub/SD to prevent getting murked by the switch in.

 

Based on this analysis of snorlax, it really sounds like you think he's offensively or defensively uber. It doesn't sound like an unhealthy argument at all. Yes, snorlax and blissey are different pokemon, that's not ground breaking news and it's certainly not something we learned from the suspect test. A body slam from snorlax can render its checks hampered - unless they're carrying a lum berry or their team has aroma/possibly wish support. But lax has horrible recovery in rest, can't come in on strong physical attacks, and gets worn down by special attackers. Blissey on the other hand cannot be broken by the vast majority of special attackers, and threatens physical attackers too with crippling paralysis on the switch in, the threat of counter, and a variety of coverage moves that lax lacks (lel).

 

So what did we learn from the suspect test with regards to blissey and lax? Nothing we didn't already know. I'm not sure why you're grandstanding about it as if we did

 

Curselax in particular often just results in stall outs or "gogogogo crit" strategies that just rely on RNG factors like getting a lucky para against your opponent's Heracross or Curselax, or your opponent getting the crit to break you and win. All of these are essentially 50/50's that everyone the the TC usually agrees are negative - and they can't be quantified. Similar to how Baton Pass was ruled "cancerous" because of its ability to rob opponents of autonomy, a strategy that revolves mostly around para-ing your opponents and hoping they don't crit you should be looked at with a skeptical eye. It's beyond me why everyone just threw out their usual opposition to a strategy that revolves largely around luck and instead decided to point at the usage stats and say "look, nothing changed so we're bringing it back!"

 

A bodyslam para is literally not "essentially a 50/50," though I can understand why it seems like that sometimes. Also, it's a bit of a massive stretch to label the use of snorlax as "a strategy that revolves largely around luck" - so because the standard curselax set carries a move with a 30% para chance, that set is now largely revolving around luck? Is a crit the only way to break curselax now? What happened to phazers and strong stab fighting moves? Your complete mischaracterization here completely deflates this entire argument, imo - curselax is not baton pass, and it should not be compared to baton pass in any way. It doesn't remove autonomy from the opponent, it just doesnt.

 

66.66% to be accurate, Tranzmaster doesn't get a vote lel

 

For some reason I thought the OU council had 4 - senile you think and zebra. But I guess I'm wrong about one of those. Still, 2/3 is all the council needs for a decision, and it's no coincidence that the one who didn't get their way is now pleading their case passionately to the community. I think the lax discussion should certainly stay open, though, as it remains one of the top tier threats in the meta. But that doesn't excuse arguments made of fluff

 

See my post on "subjectivity and healthiness" page 10 I think? Relying on usage stats is usually fine, and can be a great factor in arguments, but we all agreed at the onset of the test that we had to test subjective aspects of Snorlax (>not numerical) in order to see if it was actually unhealthy since it didn't clearly meet the Uber criteria. We weren't testing "will the usage stats change?" We were testing "Is it too good not to use? Does it limit teambuilding? Does it limit playstyle? etc." While usage stats are ok at answering whether it limits teambuilding or not, they don't do much to answer the other questions, because (like I've reiterated) we don't have numerical data that tracks the percent of stall teams or offense teams or what have you. I hate to say it, but there's little "fact of the matter" in this debate, most of what has happened is just people emoting all over each other about how they feel about Snorlax.

 

Usage stats are numerical proof of changes in the meta. They simply reflect the pokemon people are using at the highest stages of competition - all of the factors you mentioned are reflected to a degree in the usage stats. I mean, just look at the factors. Does snorlax limit teambuilding? does it limit playstyle? If that was the case, lifting lax from the meta should have resulted in an increase in teambuilding options and playstyle options. The usage statistics showed very little change in the amount of viable pokemon, as most viable pokes remained viable and unviable pokes remained unviable.

 

Now, I know there's inherently gonna be a degree of subjectivity in tests of unhealthiness. But I've been thus far completely uncompelled by any of the arguments that the meta changed for the better without lax. Maybe when I see one, I'll change my view on this. But until then, the usage stats are more compelling to me

 

Remember when we banned Baton Pass? Did people come back afterwards and say "Look look look, Snorlax is still on 60% of teams, Jolteon is still used, Vaporeon is still everywhere, thus banning BP did nothing to make the metagame healthier! The usage stats didn't change, therefore Baton Pass is actually healthy!" I know this is a hyperbole (and maybe a category error) but it makes a point about healthiness, competitivity and usage that is pretty compelling imo.

 

I mean, I think you said it best here. "I know this is a hyperbole (and maybe a category error)" Yeah, this has absolutely nothing to do with the situation at hand. So no, this isn't pretty compelling, I fail to see what point it makes about unhealthiness, competitivity (not a word surprisingly, actually a word), and usage. Didn't jolteon go way down in usage during and after the BP test and ban? Also how would lax staying at 60% usage have anything to do with the health of BP? Vaporeon was the only thing contianing the dragons at the time, so again, wot?

Edited May 15, 2015 by Gunthug

[bl0nde]

Blissey did take lax's spot in usage... It doesn't parahax your checks to death, it doesn't set up in 1-2 turns to become nearly unbreakable by 75% of the tier, and it has a reasonable number of counters that are useful for team dynamics outside of stopping it (i.e. Flygon on non-ice beam variants, Ursaring, Heracross, Metagross, Ludicholo for stallers, Forretress for spikes, etc.).

 

Snorlax, on the other hand, is only surely stopped by sacking something to it and sending in Heracross (or whatever), otherwise you risk taking a game losing Body Slam to the face. Even the best counter, Rhydon, becomes relatively useless in the standard meta when it gets para'd on the switch and can't successfully set up a Sub/SD to prevent getting murked by the switch in.

 

I hate to say it, but there's little "fact of the matter" in this debate, most of what has happened is just people emoting all over each other about how they feel about Snorlax.

 

Remember when we banned Baton Pass? The usage stats didn't change, therefore Baton Pass is actually healthy!"

 

You made that point in the suspect test thread that you like the pokemon on the opponents team that is dedicated to special defense to be a wall (umbreon/blissey) rather than a tank (snorlax) so you can switch stuff in on it. In this way, you feel it bring more variety. It is a valid point point, but in the end all of the conversations seem subjective to me.

 

However, Dugtrio does force the meta to adapt to its presence. Any good pokemon does that. Ever notice that you pretty much have to have checks for Metagross, Heracross, Weezing, Gengar, Gyarados and Blissey in order to win matches? Ever notice that you basically can't run Sludge Bomb Weezing because Heracross, Gyarados and Metagross can respectively abuse its limited coverage? The truth is that anything that's worth using will be centralizing to some degree because you need to have a way to deal with it if you want to be successful. It's only when there are too few ways of dealing with a pokemon that it becomes overcentralizing and unhealthy.

 

For example, here you say this to me above on April 24th. So you feel it's okay for dugger to trap something and kill it because you can pursuit with an aero or something and it therefore has enough counters to be fit for OU. However in snorlax's case it can body slam something and possibly kill it so it should therefore not be viable in OU. Also you want to have that special defense moveslot to be able to set up on. You want to play a meta game where you play set up on and/or trap the opponents special wall is basically what it seem like to me?

 

If I was trying to not appear subjective in your case I would have wrote something about the variety snorlax brings to the table. Then state that you don't feel the variety snorlax brings is worth the cost of its centralization. Snorlax brings variety because it lets the special defense slot play an offensive role. This could give more synergy to offensive teams. It also lets special attackers have more of chance than blissey does. My adamant 252 hp 252 atk snorlax only takes 4 hits from starmie. If you add in spike damage or damage from other encounters, that spread and nature it is not really a dependable special wall. It has lost me many duels that way. Like thinkie said in the other thread, this opens up the door for something other than espeon... this is all information that should be considered as a whole for any decision making. You have to consider everything I think.

 

Tiny thing: if you banned curse on snorlax it would still have high usage just like vaporeon has high usage without baton pass.

[YagamiNoir]

And the riots go on.

 

The council decided to bring Snorlax back under the premise that "it did not made the metagame significantly healthy as a result of it's departure to be worthy of being banned, oh let's add some text walls about stats to top it up." Well, ok. Throughout the past sass the day before/during the ban revolving around ThinkNice and a few guys including me I think that we'd all at least agree to some point that each respective metas have their flaws, or in more blunt terms, "each meta is shit, whatever."

 

With this decision, though, what exactly is the council expecting, or at least trying to decide in response to this in an effort to construct a better metagame -- adaption of the competitive community to it? Oh right, I'm sorry but you should adapt to the worse bit rather than the better bit, because having players adapt to Snorlax is better than having players adapting to a meta without it. "One month is enough to shape and determine the line of a meta without Snorlax (which is a pretty big and significant move, and we all know how long it takes for things to catch on sometimes.)" Dismayingly and apparently a month of suspect tests in a slowly evolving metagame seemed sufficient in determining that regard, which I find pretty ridiculous, if anything. Even then, if "both metas are gonna be bad anyway", why not just stick with the one that's the least problematic instead of only displaying nonchalance about it? Contradictory for me to ask this, but what exactly justifies the Snorlax meta would be better than the one without it, or is the argument of "no significant change, you can't ban it, whatever" only going to be thrown stalely and repetitively? 

 

EDIT: Well, the discussion has become more of a subjective exchange than an argument about relevant facts, like Robo had stated. Unless something breaks that line soon. 

Edited May 15, 2015 by YagamiNoir

[SpartacusGD]

The meta didnt get better with just bliss. All you guys have to do is open your eyes and you'll see all of you can deal with snorlax. In fact its presence is what gives the tier more depth like, with just bliss, it will be close to imposible to sweap with rd ludi, rd kingdra, starmie, jolt but with lax it is very possible. With 3 spikes ludi 2hko lax in rain, so its very good that we can play sp sweapers now more effectively than with just bliss.

[DrCraig]

Mah boy Robo getting nit picked.

The meta didnt get better with just bliss. All you guys have to do is open your eyes and you'll see all of you can deal with snorlax. In fact its presence is what gives the tier more depth like, with just bliss, it will be close to imposible to sweap with rd ludi, rd kingdra, starmie, jolt but with lax it is very possible. With 3 spikes ludi 2hko lax in rain, so its very good that we can play sp sweapers now more effectively than with just bliss.

Having particular pokemon to deal with Snorlax does not create depth. Its hard to run, for example, heavy rain offense, when you need particular counters to take spots in your team for lax, generally 2 spots.

[Excelimpulse]

Mah boy Robo getting nit picked.

Having particular pokemon to deal with Snorlax does not create depth. Its hard to run, for example, heavy rain offense, when you need particular counters to take spots in your team for lax, generally 2 spots.

Or just pokes that can run superpower. Doesn't even have to but it's enough to scare your opponent out. You can say that about blissey also. I can argue that I need at least two physical attackers because if one dies and I only have one I'll end in a stall war. There is more then just snorlax you need more then one counter on your team to.

[DrCraig]

Or just pokes that can run superpower. Doesn't even have to but it's enough to scare your opponent out. You can say that about blissey also. I can argue that I need at least two physical attackers because if one dies and I only have one I'll end in a stall war. There is more then just snorlax you need more then one counter on your team to.

If only this made sense Excel
Name pokemon that can come in and superpower without worrying about slam spam. I'll give you Rhydon.

[Vaeldras]

If only this made sense Excel
Name pokemon that can come in and superpower without worrying about slam spam. I'll give you Rhydon.

 

Aggron, AYY

 

Edit: Wait, hear this one: Scizor!  (I heard someone is using it effectively in ou right now, hue)

Edited May 15, 2015 by Vaeldras

[DrCraig]

Aggron, AYY
 
Edit: Wait, hear this one: Scizor!  (I heard someone is using it effectively in ou right now, hue)

Aggron is bad
How about Scizor tho, barely viable
252+ Atk Scizor Superpower vs. 36 HP / 36 Def Snorlax: 202-238 (84.1 - 99.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
Nice try Scizor, now you are dead from -DEF and a fire punch to the noggin

hmmmm

[Vaeldras]

Aggron is bad
How about Scizor tho, barely viable
252+ Atk Scizor Superpower vs. 36 HP / 36 Def Snorlax: 202-238 (84.1 - 99.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery
Nice try Scizor, now you are dead from -DEF and a fire punch to the noggin

hmmmm

 

I heard you don't like choice bands.

They're bad i know but it's not like rhydon is much more viable.

[DrCraig]

I heard you don't like choice bands.
They're bad i know but it's not like rhydon is much more viable.

The thing is, Scizor is pretty shit offensively now so unless u run SD ur prolly walled to shit Edited May 15, 2015 by DrCraig

[Vaeldras]

Besides golem which is even worse...armaldo and kabutops?

 

252+ Atk Snorlax Body Slam vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Kabutops: 65-77 (24.9 - 29.5%) -- 100% chance to 4HKO

 

 

I don't uu so i don't really know what to expect from them

[Excelimpulse]

Besides golem which is even worse...armaldo and kabutops?

252+ Atk Snorlax Body Slam vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Kabutops: 65-77 (24.9 - 29.5%) -- 100% chance to 4HKO


I don't uu so i don't really know what to expect from them

Flygon,defensive breloom

And Craig u still never answered me about blissey too. I have to run the same amount of physical attackers to take out Blissey as I do snorlax other then I have to worry about counter. So I can argue blissey becomes more of a pain and my physical attackers are going to get para hax on the switch in for sure.

[KaynineXL]

It's gonna feel weird going from a very fun meta, with lots of different Pokemon each fight to a meta revolving around Snorlax. But HEY at least it's healthy!

 

Sigh.

Edited May 15, 2015 by KaynineXL

[SpartacusGD]

Very fun meta with DIFFERENT pokemon and yet usage stats didnt change much even if the 65% part was free.

[Kizhaz]

Flygon,defensive breloom

And Craig u still never answered me about blissey too. I have to run the same amount of physical attackers to take out Blissey as I do snorlax other then I have to worry about counter. So I can argue blissey becomes more of a pain and my physical attackers are going to get para hax on the switch in for sure.

 

Flygon cannot come in on body slams, a para'd Flygon is death fodder at that point. As for bulky loom, sure it can take the hits better than others, and with access to priority para isn't as much of a problem, although still problematic, but what does Breloom then do to lax? Are you running max Hp and Def with superpower... cos that's just bad, not to mention doesn't even ohko lax w/out the investment. Rhydon is the best counter, Aggron is a quicker Rhydon with less HP and Atk but more def's, so I wouldn't call it bad @Craig and possibly Armaldo and Kabutops but they aren't very effective in OU. That's not many options imo

Edited May 15, 2015 by Kizhaz

[codylramey]

It's gonna feel weird going from a very fun meta, with lots of different Pokemon each fight to a meta revolving around Snorlax. But HEY at least it's healthy!
 
Sigh.

Thats the thing, they dont think the meta is any healthier with snorlax than without. They just dont think its healthier without snorlax than with. Which it seems common opinion seems to say otherwise.