Given cart accuracy is one of the golden rules of tiering policy, that alone is in fact a sufficient point. We have a complex ban on Sleep. This should not be a complex ban, but a flat ban.
-
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!
Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion v4 [Volcarona Banned]
- Thread starter TPP
- Start date
This is exactly it
As I've said in another post, so many proposals for how to handle a ban or a policy are shot down with the reason "You can't replicate that on cart"
So if you want to be able to keep using that reason, you best clean up old archaic rulings from 2 decades ago to keep it up to that standard, or people will keep pointing to it, and you'll deserve that headache.
So by that logic terastillization can never be banned because it wouldn’t be cart accurate?
Smogon singles has always had its own ruleset. Many rules that cant be replicated on cart but still are official for Smogon.
On their own, maybe not. But combined, absolutely. You could stretch the truth a bit and say that HP percentage mod is "not cart accurate", but it is not archaic. Nobody would say that you would ban it, because solely of cart accuracy. There is probably something that is archaic, but cart accurate, so it stays because it technically may be better.
I'm not fully convinced that sleep clause should be removed, I personally think this is another meta trend or darkrai is the sole mon causing this trend, but you have to at least see that this shit keeps happening. If games become coinflips, that isn't really the best thing to happen. Plus, the fact that it is a worse set somehow makes it better, because people don't expect it that often and when they do, shit, it isn't a cheese set it is actually NP + 3 attacks. It makes guessing games out of pokemon that can decide games, which we shouldn't really do. That's why gambit was, and most likely still is, a major annoyance, it can make coinflips the preffered option.
This is a false equivalency. The banning of Terastalization would be like Dynamax, which is to say a gentleman's agreement to not press the Terastalize/Dynamax button at any point in the match. This is the same as any other ban we have, such as agreeing to not bring Ubers to OU, or to not use banned abilities/moves. These are not mods to the game like Sleep Clause is.
Banning Dynamax was also cart innacurate. Smogon has always abided by its own ruleset and all of sudden sleep clause should be banned because its “cart innacurate”, please.
Nerf Miraidons base stat total and ability so that it's at an OU power level and it's not uncompetitive, unhealthy or broken in any way. However, this is unacceptable because it would be modding the game to artificially nerf something, rather than banning it outright.
But.... it isn't cart inaccurate.
Bravo my man for the confidence to say something so obviously inaccurate with such confidence
4, it is high variance but it doesn't fully cut out skill.
That has nothing to do with anything lmao
How is it any different than balancing an objectively broken mechanic by making it just magically fail if you try to use it twice?
It is cart inaccurate . On cart you can dynamax without problem. But with smogons ruleset you cant at all. Not faithful to cart.
Care to elaborate? I don't see how it's incorrect at all; what modification to the game is required for players to simply not use Tera? How would it be any different from simply not bringing OHKO moves, or an Uber?
Yeah, using this headass logic nothing should ever be banned ever and Smogon wouldn't exist. The problem is this isn't the same logic being applied to Sleep Clause.
Every other clause and rule and ban on Smogon can be replicated by a gentleman's agreement. If players want to play OU on a cart, they agree not to bring Ubers, or OHKO moves, or whatever. If they violate that agreement, they forfeit the match as far as Smogon rules are concerned. Sleep Clause cannot be replicated by a gentleman's agreement as it is on Showdown. You can't Spore a Pokemon you think might wake up and have it fail if they switch.
You've been participating in this conversation long enough that I struggle to believe you haven't already grasped this, so this sudden to pivot to "actually all bans are cart inaccurate lol" feels like arguing in bad faith to be honest. Like holy shit you guys are grasping at straws at this point.
Last edited:
Unsure how anything stated in my post is wrong. Given my assertion is that banning Tera/Dynamax would be/was cart accurate, I would assume you think that is incorrect. At least to my knowledge from posts in the View from the Council thread which even sparked Policy Review, the bans we have are implemented on the teambuilder side to not introduce another loss condition, and so that the moment the game begins, it is then 100% replicable on cart through the use of an impartial judge.
you're missing the point being made. the idea is that if a game from gen 8 was replicated on cart, the lack of dynamaxing would be explained as a gentlemens agreement between the 2 players to not use the button. showdown does this by just not having the button available
this isnt the same as sleep clause though, because sleep clause is impossible to be replicated in any shape or form
The Dynamax/Terastal ban is very easily enforceable on cart. Just... Don't click the Dynamax button. There are no mechanics that can force a player to Dynamax against their will and force a DQ this way.
For sure I understand that its not replicable on cart. But why is it an issue to gen 9’s metagame? Since that the whole point of this discussion.
It’s absolutely cart accurate because it’s what all other bans are: a gentleman’s agreement. I can’t stop you from clicking the Dynamax button just like I can’t prevent you from pulling up to our on-cart OU game with a Kyogre, but we CAN both agree before the game starts to never click the Dynamax button and not bring our Kyogres. You CAN’T both agree to make sure your sleep moves fail if you’ve already put something to sleep, though. That’s just a modification of the game.
Because sleep is uncompetitive on Darkrai and Iron Valiant, and rather than ban two very major pokemon it is cleaner to ban sleep, preserving two pokemon, making the metagame entirely cart accurate outside of the timer, making the better player win more often, and causing barely any collateral damage (amoonguss drops 1 or 2 ranks on the VR).
Edit: forgot Lilligant is a big thing too, which would also either be uncompetitive or be banned as a collateral of sleep clause.
The ammount of mistakes in astonishing, I wll select and respond to a few of them:
-Is my team weak to spikes? Yes. Does it automatically 6oed/loses against a team with spikes? Absolutely not. It got 1900+ with this team and I belive it is like top 100 or something and I'd say that overally I'm not a strong player, if my team was that weak to spikes as you say I would not get these results.
Furthermore you say that spikes is the biggest thing in the meta but I think it really isn't. Volcarona is everywhere, Raging bolt is everywhere (you even mentioned it) thus unaware clef to me seems more valuable than magic guard clef at the moment and for this specific team. Practice proved me right on this take. I will trust practice more than arrogant "quacc" takes on this one.
-Dragapult absolutely can deal with blissey in stall as curse + mola pass can burn out the 8 soft boils it has at its disposal, If I remember correctly it is literally what happened in the game I linked (in general it happens in almost any stall matchup I get on the ladder). Sub/wisp/hex/curse d pult is an extremely niche set and I belive to be one of the few persons using it (especially with mola pass). So if you don't know how it works or don't want to pay attention please just don't respond. If you want to respond to something you should actually understand the f you are talking about.
-Your argument about why gliscor is not unkillable and shouldn't be banned is that you can PP stall 16 turns of protect? Bro for real? You didn't find anything better to say LMAO? First of all this implies that if you are not running HO your average game lasts like 200 turns (and most players do not find this particularly nice) and how often do you have games where gliscor protects are PP stalled to 0 or close to 0? Idk what game you are playing but the fact this is one of the best arguments you could come up with makes me want to repeat:
BAN
Not even Gliscor fans like you can come up with a reason on why it is ok that doesn't sound like an absolute joke.
-WHATABOUTISM != SOUND LOGICAL ARGUMENT. I don't know how many times this has to be repeated: whataboutism is just a fallacy. If everyone (and spoiler: everyone may have different opinions than yours even if you seem to not accept it) has a differrent mon they want to ban someone will say "ban this" someone else "ban that" and then no actions are going to be taken.
For real whataboutism is scientifically a wrong argument. It's not even my opinion, It's a well known thing.
PS:
The terablast Cinderace example is T E R R I B L E. Lets deconstruct that wack example you have made:
-first of all, did it happen in an official tournament? On the ladder? If yes what's aproximately the elo range? Because let me tell you this set really sounds like a 1200 elo thing. Maybe the creator is a Genius that won 23 tours but I would like to have more context on this story you mentioned.
-Let's assume that the team and player you played against are legit good: Terablast ice cinderace Vs Gliscor is just WRONG. Especially if you know you have a chance to not kill this play itself is extremely bad. For real no shit that this kind of play does not let you win against gliscor.
I can guarantee that even players that do not make this kind of horrible/wack plays struggle against gliscor. This game you used as an example makes absolutely no sense. Of course if you terablast ice with cind and know you have a chance to not even kill gliscor you gonna lose, you purposely took this bad game as an example to prove the point that "gliscor is ok it's just the players that are bad".
Sorry but these kind of cheap arguments do not work with somebody that has at least 2/3 neurons that comunicate with each other at least a couple times a day.
PS 2:
Sorry to burst your bubble but if the majority of qualified playerbase deemed gliscor broken it means that the majority of the qualified playerbase found gliscor broken.
So we would ban a whole status condition because 2 fast mons with hypnosis have the “potential” to abuse it. Id rather suspect test the mons. I just dont think sleep is a prominent problem to the metagame enough to warrant a ban.
but the pokemon (especially darkrai atm) are not banworthy apart from the brokenness of the status they induce. also ignoring the issue of sleep clause will eventually get us into this position again.
Welcome to Pokémon Would You Rather!
Ban Sleep | Ban Fast Sleepers | Remove Sleep Clause |
|---|---|---|
Amoonguus drops 1/2 VR ranks, everything is stable and the meta is better, future gens are better. | Darkrai, Iron Valiant and maybe Lilligant-Hisui are banned to Ubers, many more mons will be banned in future with sleep. | ANARCHY |
- Darkrai, Iron Valiant and Lilligant-Hisui are banned
- Next gen +5/6 mons are banned to keep Sleep Clause
- Gen 10: 8/9 more mons banned
- Gen 11: So many mons are banned that the people behind UUbers make a new UM, SleeperMons, which only allows mons who are banned due to sleep.
- Gen 12: SleeperMons becomes bigger than OU, having more mons
- SleeperMons overtakes OU, OU unbans all the mons and bans sleep to try and regain control but nothing happens anymore.
Last edited:
Exactly, its just kicking the can down the road to maintain some sorta status quo, why keep a mistake made 2 decades ago, that does not align with other standards, just because "Well its always been like this"