Hey if you want to ban Sand Veil Garchomp in Sandstorm, then fucking nominate Garchomp AS A WHOLE and stop being a pussy about it. Garchomp is the sum of its parts. Sand Veil makes Garchomp who he is just like Levitate makes Latias who she is or Speed Boost makes Blaziken who he is. Taking off Sand Veil from Garchomp is like taking the Ice Cream out of the Sundae. It. Just. Doesn't. Work.
As I have said repeatedly before, even with Sand Veil, Garchomp is not broken, and therefore there is no justification for banning Garchomp. Garchomp is not the point here any more than Cacturne or Froslass is the point here. The abilities they all share are the point here.
Do you realize that complex bans are a LAST RESORT and are only made if the element being banned is absolutely vital for the stability of the metagame? Who are you to say that they don't make a metagame any less desirable? You definitely have no right to state that as fact, as it is anything but fact. I know it is not explicitly stated, but that's because the people at PR [mistakenly] assumed that the people on Smogon are mildly intelligent and wouldn't abuse it. Garchomp is not the only column keeping this metagame afloat by far. In contrast, drizzle was one of the only things keeping sun and sand in check, so accommodations had to be made for it. All of your arguments are circular. Actually, I don't think your arguments have enough substance TO BE circular. They're more like a puddle. Stop polluting this thread with your puddles, Thorhammer and company. You have made no convincing arguments at all as to why Garchomp should not be banned by itself. It is the only thing that effectively uses Sand Veil, so why not just ban that? Instead of banning every single pokemon that uses sandstorm, how about just ban ONE. We want a meta with the fewest bans possible, after all. There; I just used one of your fucking horrible arguments against you.
Complex bans have not been decided by PR to be a last resort. As a result, we are forced to use logic for ourselves to determine what is and is not the truth, and there is no logical reason to withhold useful complex bans except when they are a last resort. If PR would make a decision, as it's clear that they need to, we would have that decision to go off of, but we don't. And that is why we need PR to make a decision, to sort through this insanity.
As I've been saying, the problem here is Evasion, and that Evasion is equal among all Pokemon with the Sand Veil or Snow Cloak abilities. Therefore, there is no reason for any of them to get any different treatment from one another.
Yeah, I know my argument might be a bit rash, but I don't think this thread deserves my civility. These arguments that are being made out to seem more convoluted than they really are are getting on my last nerve.
That does not give you the excuse to substitute anger for logic.
Uh... get off their asses? Do you realize how PR works? They aren't obligated to do anything for the sake of you or anyone else for that matter. Just because they won't let you post in PR doesn't mean you have to take jabs at them. They have better things to do than contemplate on things that shouldn't even matter. Seriously, this shouldn't even need to be contemplated on. People should know when to stop abusing precedent. You should know when to stop abusing precedent.
They have an obligation to decide and
review the
policy that keeps Smogon functioning as a competitive community. Look at all of the chaos and needless unproductive disputes that arose in the past three months because no one can agree on what complex bans are okay. PR needs to define the policy towards complex bans in order for Smogon to function at all, and yet no one has even taken the first step towards doing so.
Just to make this clear, I would have never replied to your arguments if it weren't for you being so pompous and acting like you were the smartest guy in the thread. It takes a lot for me to post here.
If that's how you take using logic to analyse a situation, okay.
Trust me... you don't need help for that.
You've given little cause for concern as to your own views on the subject.
Alright, I know I can't be bothered reading through 100 pages of waffle, but you really need to define what you mean by "uncompetitive" and differentiate between it and the word "broken". To me, the two words are virtually synonymous, and my definition is a Pokemon/ability/item/thing is uncompetitive/broken if when used, it creates an unfair advantage that usually is the deciding factor between two people of similar skill. Usually can be loosely defined as a simple majority, ie 50% of the time or more. Before we keep arguing, I would like you to define your own version, otherwise we argue on my terms (Garchomp in Sand is uncompetitive/broken, therefore it should be banned).
Uncompetitive is an element of the game that only serves to increase the luck element of the game rather than increasing strategy. The existing examples of bans based on uncompetitiveness are the OHKO and Evasion Clauses that have been a part of Smogon through past generations, and the recent bans on Brightpowder and Lax Incense. None of these things are broken, but they have all been agreed upon by voters to be undesirable.
And how are you deciding what is and isn't undesirable, Thorhammer? To me it seems like you're making these conditions up as it suits your argument. What standards am I supposed to presume you're using to coming to such a conclusion.
In lieu of a decision from PR, I use my own logic to determine what is and is not undesirable. If you wish to challenge this determination, you have two ways of doing so. One, you can use logic of your own to show why it
would be undesirable. Two, you can start a thread in PR to begin the process of making an official determination as to the status of what complex bans, if any, are to be permitted, and when. I suggest the latter, as it would be the most productive in settling this dispute once and for all once a decision is reached.
