So I've gotten reqs and have also been laddering past the required amount of games necessary to vote, which has provided me with additional exposure to Mega Venusaur and the trends it's forcing. I'm of the opinion that it's unhealthy for the tier, and not for the reasons you may think or assume based on previous pro-ban Mega Venusaur posts. Sure, one can make the argument that Mega Venusaur has the bulk to withstand and check many of the tier's premier offensive threats, great defensive typing and a hand ability, and all of the necessary weapons in its arsenal to combat its usual checks, therefore making it broken. However, I'm not of the opinion that Mega Venusaur is specifically broken due to its commanding traits, and this definitely should not be the sole or even the main point of focus when considering it unhealthy for the tier. I'm more concerned with the negatively influential trends it is forcing, its effects on the current playstyles, and general teambuilding tendencies regarding Mega Venusaur.
Before I continue, I'd also like to share my perspective on this current suspect test. Below you'll see a list of all of the Pokemon UU has suspected publicly since the start of SM's tiering:
Notice a trend here? With the exception of Mega Slowbro, all of the above Pokemon were suspected due to their overwhelming offensive capabilities. It's obvious to say that if most of these Pokemon had less of an offensive ceiling, then they wouldn't have been suspected in the first place. I've read certain posts that claim Mega Venusaur's offensive abilities are underwhelming and therefore it isn't ban-worthy, and this seems backwards since it's following the same logic that should be used to consider any Pokemon being suspected for being too great of an offensive threat. This leads up perfectly to the perspective I would like to offer: consider Mega Venusaur's suspect test differently as you would for most of our previously suspected Pokemon. Even someone who's new to the game will agree that offensive and defensive Pokemon shouldn't be compared by using the same metrics. True, Mega Venusaur has an above average offensive presence for a strictly definitive wall, but I believe it's false to consider this facet out of context and as one would usually consider it if an offensive threat was being suspected.
After following the arguments and viewpoints presented in earlier posts, I've noticed that certain people, all of whom I respect and admire, of the anti-ban camp are offering other flawed justifications for their reasonings. I'd like to address four of these posts and why I believe the viewpoints presented in the following posts are either unrealistic or arguably false. Please note that some of these posts may have been addressed already, but that I'd also like to offer my own perspective on the material that's being presented.
Mega Venusaur hasn't been in the tier for long, but an argument proposing that 'the meta will adapt to' Mega Venusaur is a prediction at best and shouldn't be a driving force behind an anti-ban argument. Hypotheticals are volatile, and there's no guarantee that Mega Venusaur will be adapted to. Remember the join Breloom and Buzzwole suspect test which ended in Breloom's unban? Some may have thought that it would've been adapted to, but Breloom ended up being suspected a second time and subsequently banned. This logic isn't sound and hasn't been reliably accurate in the past, so I wouldn't consider it highly at all. The next bit about Mega Venusaur 'having a positive effect on the revitalization of balance teams' is also something I'd like to refute. Strictly balanced teams have struggled over the past couple of months, and Mega Venusaur's introduction to the tier has not only improved balance, but has put it on steroids and has caused balance to become unusually great. The issue of its recovery is also not a huge deal, as this may lead some to believe that Mega Venusaur is the only member of its team up against a fully stacked opposing team. On some balanced teams, I have seen Mega Venusaur supported by Wish users, such as Sylveon, Alomomola, and even Umbreon, which doesn't force it to rely on Synthesis as much. Generally, the issues presented in this excerpt are either flimsily presented or are vastly undermined.
Pif has provided three arguments that are insufficient to ban Mega Venusuar and three others that propose it is good for the tier. I'll separate my responses for each of these six arguments so that my insight is easier to follow.
Arguments that are insufficient to ban Mega Venusaur:
--- All S rank threats are going to be restricting as well as all metagame threats, Venusaur isn't actually nearly as restricting as other threats
I've addressed the issue with treating offensive Pokemon in the same vein as defensive ones and why it's an inaccurate way to present an argument. Mega Venu definitely isn't as offensively restricting as the other S rank threats in Scizor and Latias, but it sure offers more defensive maneuverability (to the point where it's unhealthy) than these two and is arguably has the most sustainable longevity amongst the three.
--- Venusaur isn't really versatile at all and actually can almost never get past many of its counters
Mega Venusaur has only been with us a short while, so making any conclusions about its versatility is a rushed assumption at this point. As of now, the most popular set I've seen runs Synthesis, Giga Drain, Sludge Bomb, and HP Fire. The coverage sure is versatile and above average, considering Mega Venusaur's above average offensive firepower for a defensively oriented wall. Most of its counters, the majority of which are Psychic or Flying-types, already have a harder time functioning due to the prevalance of Pursuit trapping and Stealth Rock. It's also important to note that Venusaur doesn't need to get past its counters for it to function properly. That's what teammates are for. While laddering, I played versus an obscene amount of Mega Venusaur, Empoleon, and Krookodile cores, all of which would obstruct my usual Mega Venusaur countermeasures. This reasoning in particular is a shallow one to support the anti-ban argument.
--- You think Venusaur is brainless? Try Regenerator Amoonguss
I'm not a fan of the 'Mega Venusaur is brainless' argument in general, but completely avoiding the suspect-worthy Pokemon to talk about Amoonguss to try and downplay Mega Venusaur's abilities seems to be quite the flawed argument. This is a particularly unproductive point to discuss or even address, as Mega Venusaur being brainless to use isn't a point that should be weighted heavily whether you're assuming a pro-ban or anti-ban stance.
Arguments that propose Mega Venusaur is good for the tier:
--- It helps keep Manectric-Scizor cores in check
With Gliscor gone, the tier has lost a blanket check to most voltturn cores. This doesn't mean that there's a specific need to plug Mega Venusaur into this role and to use this as a justification for allowing it in the tier, and there are plenty of other ways to discourage and counteract voltturn chains. Hazards, Ground-types, and general Mega Manectric and Scizor checks are only a few ways for teams to obstruct opposing voltturn based teams. Of course, Mega Manectric and Scizor aren't being suspected right now either, so it's not absolutely necessary for anyone to address the need for a check to the Mega Manectric-Scizor core. If anything, both Manectric and Scizor can pivot out into a Venusaur check and potentially force it out, thus forcing it to take multiple instances of hazard damage and chip from the aforementioned pivot move.
--- It gives balance a very strong tool
Sage addressed the same issue in his post, which I have quoted earlier. Yes, Mega Venusaur does wonders for balanced teams and brings the playstyle more relevancy. However, balance has been extremely souped up solely due to Mega Venusaur's presence. Other S-ranked Pokemon in Scizor and Latias are huge contributors to the effectiveness of offensive teams throughout much of the gen, but the playstyle's success isn't exclusively resultant of the two's impact.
--- Mega Venusaur keeps bulky waters in check and even breaks through Alo-Quag-Bliss
My reasoning against this point is similar to how I feel about Mega Venusaur checking voltturn cores. The issue of breaking Alomomola, Quagsire, and Blissey cores isn't as serious of an issue as this part of Pif's post makes it out to be, as there are plenty of wallbreakers and stallbreakers that deal with this trio. As such, this particular argument as well as any others based around 'benefits' that Mega Venusaur may provide, are moot points.
Here, Hogg proposes the idea that Mega Venusaur isn't a limiting factor while building. To support this point, he states that some of the teams he's built have 'really strong anti-Venu techs (such as one with Reuniclus and mixed def Chesnaught).' Upon checking the VR, I've found that both Reuniclus and Chesnaught are ranked at C+. Furthermore, Amane Misa stated in her own post that Toxicroak was more effective with Mega Venusaur in the tier, and Pif also listed Venomoth as a Mega Venusaur check in his post that outlined all of the supposed checks to Mega Venusaur in the tier. It just so happens that these two Pokemon are ranked at C+ as well. Sure, there are other, higher ranked Pokemon like Kommo-o that have benefitted from Mega Venusaur being in the tier, but there has also been a rise in more unorthodox countermeasures, such as Toxic Corrosion Salazzle, Z-Dream Eater Rotom-Mow, and Z-Extrasensory Raikou. I can't remember the last time a premier threat caused THIS many countermeasures, common or unorthodox, to arise and actually assume some level of viability. Prior to Mega Venusaur's suspect test, the vast majority of the aforementioned Pokemon and sets were irrelevant, and this change in drastic countermeasures should definitely be a major concern to all players who are interested in helping to shape the best tier possible.
In comparison to everyone else I've quoted thus far, I trust McMeghan's abilities as a player and contributor the most. Despite this, I still disagree with some of perspectives he's offered. MCM starts off by making a comparison to Mega Venu's effect on the XY OU tier, and while I'm fairly certain that he's not letting the effect Mega Venu's had in another tier affect his judgement on how it pertains to UU, it's still pretty pointless to bring up as the two metas are vastly different and are subject to different trends and standards. He then states that Mega Venusaur is manageable due to two reasons, those being that its limited recovery can be abused and that it's subject to all types of hazards. Throughout my own ladder run, I've seen opposing players conserve Mega Venusaur's Synthesis PP and haven't played a single game where it exhausted all of its Synthesis PP. The fact of the matter is that the majority of games aren't going to be as slow-paced or intensive for Mega Venusaur to ever risk losing its recovery move's PP, and that the issue in general is being oversimplified to a large extent. As for the point that Mega Venusaur is affected by all hazards, it of course doesn't mind Toxic Spikes at all and is of course subject to significant damage from spikestack teams. My issue with this point is that a bunch of the tier's best Defoggers synergise well with Mega Venusaur, and as Serperior has risen to OU, there isn't really a consistent way to discourage or even prevent Defog. MCM also brings up Amoonguss and how Regenerator allows it to circumvent its otherwise limited recovery options in an attempt to justify Mega Venusaur's unban, but the fact is that Mega Venusaur is the second of the recent drops that is being suspected, not Amoonguss. The last point I want to address about MCM's post is about 'Venusaur's potential and future' in the tier. This section is full of hypothetical assumptions, similar to Sage's post, the most prominent one being that 'the tier is still trying to find the best ways/formulas to deal with Venu.' In my opinion, the tier's already been affected in such a monumental way, with the viabilities of many Pokemon undergoing change as a result of Mega Venusaur's introduction that there really is little room for any other additional countermeasures to shine. I've already gone over why this very change is an issue when addressing Hogg's post, and I do stand by my proposal that the negatives brought about by these changes far outweight the benefits.
As I've said before, my main issue with Mega Venusaur isn't about how arguably broken it is, but its affects on the tier and how they're extremely large scale. The tier is being flipped near upside down with the rise of previously (borderline) unviable Pokemon and building trends are disrupting a balance that could be had without Mega Venu's presence in UU. Putting the 'Mega Venusaur is broken' rationalization aside, if you could choose to play a tier including Mega Venusaur and one without, which would you go with? I'd definitely feel safer in believing in the upside of the latter, and I do hope you'll join me in
banning Mega Venusaur from the tier so that, to the best of our capabilities, we may further contribute towards a better tier.