-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Control; How do they work?
- Thread starter vonFiedler
- Start date
I think that Control, in OU, is forcing the opponent into certain situations that can easily be taken advantage of. Breloom is a good control pokemon, and as Obi noted, BP teams are entirely control. Additionally, "Control" seems like a mix of Stall and Toolbox (which I infer is anti-metagame); Spike-Stacking (but not heavy offense) seems to fit into this nicely, in which Spikes and Stealth Rock are set up. Afterwards,
1) defensive bricks such as Blissey are used to rack up damage on switches as well as inflicting even more light damage via attacks
2) psychologically switch-inducing moves (Yawn + U-Turn / direct sleep moves / leech seed)
3) pHazing (Taunt, see 1 / Roar or Whirlwind)
Seems pretty controlish, no?
1) defensive bricks such as Blissey are used to rack up damage on switches as well as inflicting even more light damage via attacks
2) psychologically switch-inducing moves (Yawn + U-Turn / direct sleep moves / leech seed)
3) pHazing (Taunt, see 1 / Roar or Whirlwind)
Seems pretty controlish, no?
Magic is the most important hidden information game where you choose from a pool of choices before starting to play.
The terms you mention also appeared first in that game so it makes sense using them and not in a different way.
Also, please explain the relationship between a toolbox and "When your win strategy lacks complexity, but you have the tools to dismantle the opponents complex strategy." because I don't see it at all.
Even using your own definitions the difference is really small, it doesn't make sense to use other terms.
If you prevent them from winning you are reducing their capabilities. It is redundat because they apply to the same thing.
Synergy =/= combo. A combo puts you in a very advantageous situation (Wins you the game). Otherwise using the word combo to define a kind of strategy is meaningless as everything is a combo including Big Guy + Big Guy.
No combo I can think of in the History of Magic was created by Wizards. They test the cards they create, of course, and try to achieve balance but they are not made to specifically work with other cards outside of mechanics like "All dogs get bigger" and that makes the game more interesting.
No it isn't. It was the first, it's the most popular and best selling card game. But it's been twenty years now, and these concepts have evolved and changed. I asked how these archetypes apply to Pokemon because they don't apply exactly the same way to every game. If you look at a wide variety of games instead of just the one you play, you find that these archetypes are recurring.
I don't see what toolbox has to do with tutoring either, though it helps. The more complex your strategy, the easier it is for something to go wrong. You take up deck space protecting your strategy. Toolbox uses a minimalistic strategy that allows that deck space to be used with anti-meta cards and general boons instead.
Honestly you've just never played a card game if you think that Control and Stall are the same thing. I know they both exist in Magic, it's a different feeling playing both archetypes and playing against good Stall and Control decks. I've been to world tournaments where Control reigned supreme, but you wanted to get paired against a Stall player even less because even if you could beat them, you might not be able to beat them before the clock runs out.
No, that's called having a strategy. That's important in any archetype, it's why toolbox decks rarely win tournaments. Combo is a very very old idea in the Magic metagame, but it's not a real distinct playstyle. I haven't seen a Control deck in over 10 years that wasn't "combo", and I've seen plenty of aggro decks that utilize absurd combinations.
Off topic, but it's just lazy game design. Exodia is one idea that gets turned into five cards, which unburdens the designer's work load. Do you know what it's like to make several hundred unique cards? But it's still not my style to do that sort of thing.
It's also has, by far, the biggest competitive community of any game of such caracteristics I can think of and is quite similar to Pokémon. If you think other game is more important for a discussion about game theory and competitive gaming, tell us.
They are not the same thing. Fatty aggro is not the same thing as Little guy aggro but they follow the same conventions and they are both aggro decks.
I consider Stasis and Stax control decks. The control part is so hard they lock you and you can't really do much but it is not different from a hand of 10 counterspells preventing you from doing anything useful.
If you think that Prison/Stall and Control are intrinsically different that's fine but I think they work on the same principles. Just read your own definitions, they are almost the same because "preventing them from winning" and "reducing their capabilities" steem one from each other.
y toolbox decks rarely win tournaments.[/quote]
So your definition of "toolbox" is "anti-metagame"?
You lost me there. If you think that Combo is not a "distinct playstyle" there's no agreement possible.
For someone who has played "World tournaments" you seem to know little about how the game works. And for someone who has played for "over ten years" it surprises me you haven't heard of any control deck without a combo in it, it's like saying you have played Pokémon since RBY and you have yet to see a Gengar.
I don't want to throw decklists here so I won't. But you are wrong.
I think there are elements of control in a majority of Pokemon, but very few are obviously "Control", while some Pokemon like Salamence scream "Aggro".
I'd say lead Uxie is a great example of a "control" pokemon; it TrickScarfs, Paralyzes the switch, and sets up rocks for your team which keep your opponent's threats under Control so to speak.
On the other hand, Pokemon like Machamp who are are characteristically Aggro can fill certain roles to have more of a controlling presence during the match; SubChamp for one disrupts with Dynamic Punch and can protect itself with Substitute. It's extremely rare that this set doesn't get AT LEAST one kill per match, which seems like Aggro, but because it does so by threatening opponents with confusion and by easing prediction and blocking status and OHKOs with Substitute you could say that it fills a controller role as well.
I'd say lead Uxie is a great example of a "control" pokemon; it TrickScarfs, Paralyzes the switch, and sets up rocks for your team which keep your opponent's threats under Control so to speak.
On the other hand, Pokemon like Machamp who are are characteristically Aggro can fill certain roles to have more of a controlling presence during the match; SubChamp for one disrupts with Dynamic Punch and can protect itself with Substitute. It's extremely rare that this set doesn't get AT LEAST one kill per match, which seems like Aggro, but because it does so by threatening opponents with confusion and by easing prediction and blocking status and OHKOs with Substitute you could say that it fills a controller role as well.
Honestly, you're just being an elitist at this point. In addition to the big card games like Yu-Gi-Oh, we've seen hundreds of collectible cards over the past twenty years and some of the them that lasted a few years have been vary good, much better than Magic. Then you've got limited card games, board games with hidden customizable elements, and video games like Pokemon. If you think that everything should be defined exactly as it relates to Magic you're probably just some whiny little kid who has never played another game.
Stalling is walling. If your opponent can't kill you in one turn, they can't kill you, because you'll be able to put your life back up to maximum the next turn. This applies PERFECTLY to Pokemon, because if you can't 2HKO certain Pokemon they will just use Recover and be fine. Stall doesn't have to mess with the opponent at all to win, Stall decks have alot of control in Magic, that being the only language you are capable of speaking. Control is specifically hindering to the opponent's side of the field, discard, effects that send their monsters to the graveyard, etc.
Toolbox can be anti-meta game, it's probably most successful like that. It's the variety and general nature of cards that makes a toolbox deck.
With Combo, it sounds more like you're talking about decks made by Johnny players. But it doesn't matter how complex a combination of cards is, you'll always use a combination of cards to win. That's like saying that Skarmory and Blissey is a Combo team in Pokemon, when you always want synergy on your teams regardless of whether or not you have the big pairs.
I actually see it like this:
Aggro-------------|------------Anti-Aggro
With Aggro on one side of the spectrum and anti-aggro on the other with midrange in the middle. Additionally, I'd usually equate control with stall. It's not that they have any intrinsic qualities that differ them from each other, they're just two approaches to an anti-aggressive strategy.
I call the right hand side "anti-aggro" instead of calling the left hand side "anti-control" or "anti-stall" because the right hand strategies of control/stall are largely reactive, while aggro strategies are active.
Also, the basic right hand strategy is something along the lines of - 'disable and wear the opponent down until presented sufficient opportunity to win the game'.
I prefer the term "control" over "stall" because I also see stall as a subset of control strategies. Kind of like saying how "beatdown" or "haymaker" might be considered a subset of "aggro".
Aggro-------------|------------Anti-Aggro
With Aggro on one side of the spectrum and anti-aggro on the other with midrange in the middle. Additionally, I'd usually equate control with stall. It's not that they have any intrinsic qualities that differ them from each other, they're just two approaches to an anti-aggressive strategy.
I call the right hand side "anti-aggro" instead of calling the left hand side "anti-control" or "anti-stall" because the right hand strategies of control/stall are largely reactive, while aggro strategies are active.
Also, the basic right hand strategy is something along the lines of - 'disable and wear the opponent down until presented sufficient opportunity to win the game'.
I prefer the term "control" over "stall" because I also see stall as a subset of control strategies. Kind of like saying how "beatdown" or "haymaker" might be considered a subset of "aggro".
Well there's a false assumption then that Control and Stall are built to counter Aggro, usually not the case.
Tell you what I think of what you call "Control". It is just keeping the situation in your hands and stopping opponent's strategy while carrying out yours. Don't confuse it with stall: Stall is a play-style where you focus on slowly and gradually wearing your opponent out while you stop him from doing much to you. Control is stopping the opponent in different ways and posing a hard threat back. And example would be and good taunter, so let's take Crobat. Crobat's taunt is so fast that it can catch many set-up sweepers right before they get a chance to set up. At the same time, the poison typing and reasonable bulk with the availability of roost can potentially wreck part of a pure stall team. Prediction is also sharp in Control. If you think the opponent is going to pose a threat that you can't handle well, you will have to predict what he will do and act accordingly like doing a double switch or using a move the opponent wont expect.
Control teams tend to have a variety of Pokémon in them, some very fast and attacking and some very slow and hard hit taking. Pokémon with good typings are a trademark on Control teams. These include stuff like Zapdos (amazing roost PP staller and with good speed and sp.atk, can pose an offensive threat to the opponent too), Scarfed Jirachi (great bulk and very good at stopping stall teams, and also a top-notch revenger) and even a weather control sometimes like Tyranitar or TorrentialBronzong to keep the weather which menaces you at bay and take advantage of the weather you create to and extent that it doesn't compromise Controlling potential of your team (Bronzong can use Rain Dance to neutralise his only fire weakness and at the same time, having a Vaporeon in your team can benefit from the rain and the opposing pokémon who try to take advantage of it. Similarly, Tyranitar is good at stopping literally any weather team not named Sandstorm)
Control teams will, again, include a variety of pokémon, from all out attacking and good typing resists to healing status, keeping the team standing tall and controlling the weather in your favour against any weather team. Aggressive and Stall are on the opposite sides of the spectrum and Control tends to be in the middle and is pretty balanced to take many threats.
Summing up, Aggressive is attacking hard and making sure your opponent can't take the force, Stall is slowly wearing him down and Control is keeping the situation in your hands at various circumstances. I have experience with such teams. I just hope my way of looking at Control type teams is the right assumption.
Control teams tend to have a variety of Pokémon in them, some very fast and attacking and some very slow and hard hit taking. Pokémon with good typings are a trademark on Control teams. These include stuff like Zapdos (amazing roost PP staller and with good speed and sp.atk, can pose an offensive threat to the opponent too), Scarfed Jirachi (great bulk and very good at stopping stall teams, and also a top-notch revenger) and even a weather control sometimes like Tyranitar or TorrentialBronzong to keep the weather which menaces you at bay and take advantage of the weather you create to and extent that it doesn't compromise Controlling potential of your team (Bronzong can use Rain Dance to neutralise his only fire weakness and at the same time, having a Vaporeon in your team can benefit from the rain and the opposing pokémon who try to take advantage of it. Similarly, Tyranitar is good at stopping literally any weather team not named Sandstorm)
Control teams will, again, include a variety of pokémon, from all out attacking and good typing resists to healing status, keeping the team standing tall and controlling the weather in your favour against any weather team. Aggressive and Stall are on the opposite sides of the spectrum and Control tends to be in the middle and is pretty balanced to take many threats.
Summing up, Aggressive is attacking hard and making sure your opponent can't take the force, Stall is slowly wearing him down and Control is keeping the situation in your hands at various circumstances. I have experience with such teams. I just hope my way of looking at Control type teams is the right assumption.
Salamence is banned from OU, but when he was OU, Salamence was not just an aggressive pokémon since his typing gives awesome resistances and he has Intimidate and Roost to keep in there and stop many threats too, solely since he attains near-perfect coverage with just Dragon Claw and Earthquake. I had used a Salamence with Roost and Roar for many matches. He made a great shuffler for my team since intimidate makes opponents switch and Roar forces the opponent to switch again randomly, taking nice entry hazard damage while it was being done. I do understand what you say though: You can't use pokémon like Infernape to control much as he is pure aggression, just pointing out that you took a somewhat wrong example to suggest the idea.
Aggro is pure offensive, Stall racks up damage through residual damage, Balance has some hyper offense pokemon but a few dedicated catch-all walls, Control is screwy.
Answers to a SD Scizor:
Aggro: Switch to designated counter
Stall: Phaze
Balance: Switch to designated wall
Control: Trick (?)
Not sure if I get it right.
Answers to a SD Scizor:
Aggro: Switch to designated counter
Stall: Phaze
Balance: Switch to designated wall
Control: Trick (?)
Not sure if I get it right.
Perhaps a team focused on spreading paralysis and then sweeping would fit this description?
Teams that spread para aren't stallish as the final goal is a sweep, but aren't exactly aggro (at least under your definition) as they set up a sweep by crippling the opponent.
Control wants to control the actions of the opponent.
For example, as mentioned many times before, Breloom, is the prime example of a control pokemon. When it comes in on something that is slower than it, then its pretty much a guaranteed sleep. Then, by subbing on the switch, you ease prediction for yourself and create an even worse situation for your opponent. Where you can proceed to nail a focus punch or throw a leech seed.
Control is all about limiting your opponents options, if you put down a zapdos and manage to paralyze two of your opponents pokemon, then you burn the other guys lucario,then the moment you send out an offensive threat like DD Gyara, you have severely cut off the opponents options, because a burned lucario is trash, and paralyzed pokemon are unreliable. And by cutting off their options, you now know what you can expect.
Control is all about the ability to say yes or no to what your opponent can do.
By limiting their options to ones that you can manage. Control is all about lockdown and limitations.
For example, as mentioned many times before, Breloom, is the prime example of a control pokemon. When it comes in on something that is slower than it, then its pretty much a guaranteed sleep. Then, by subbing on the switch, you ease prediction for yourself and create an even worse situation for your opponent. Where you can proceed to nail a focus punch or throw a leech seed.
Control is all about limiting your opponents options, if you put down a zapdos and manage to paralyze two of your opponents pokemon, then you burn the other guys lucario,then the moment you send out an offensive threat like DD Gyara, you have severely cut off the opponents options, because a burned lucario is trash, and paralyzed pokemon are unreliable. And by cutting off their options, you now know what you can expect.
Control is all about the ability to say yes or no to what your opponent can do.
By limiting their options to ones that you can manage. Control is all about lockdown and limitations.
Status spreading seems like control, phazing and statusing would seem like a staple of control for Pokemon. However I feel that control and stall go hand in hand in Pokemon, and any instance of 'control' on an offensive team seems more like toolbox.
To me Semistall is the closest thing to control. You are removing their answers (limiting their options) to an eventual late-game extension.