I've been thinking of whether to make this post for quite a while and have decided it is about time to come out with it or the generation will be over before I do. There was certainly a time when the tier list had quite glaring inaccuracies at all levels. I remember when Tapu Fini and Mega Metagross, two behemoths of the format even when I was just starting out as a player were both ranked A. I do think the tier list has come a long way due to the hard work of the community, where S -> B+ and perhaps even to B tier are largely accurate. Some of the suggestions above are good steps which I agree with, especially on Mega Lopunny and Tapu Fini. If I was to make my own, I would move Thundurus-T to A+ but it is not something I have a very strong opinion on. What I do have strong opinions on is the state of the lower tiers.
I've been somewhat critical of the lower tiers, the C tier in particular on both Pokemon Showdown and Discord and thought it might be a good idea to explain my issues with the grouping and hopefully get some impetus to restructure the tier whether for this generation or the next.
I think most of the issues come down to three things:
1. Lack of clarity on what defines a niche and the category being far too broad
2. Lack of updates to the list leading to pokemon from older metas laying there by default
3. Lack of game knowledge, particularly full cast knowledge when it comes to their application in BSS
A pokemon that holds a niche, at least in my mind, is one that fulfills a valuable or unique role in a team that could not be performed better by another pokemon. This is only the first part of what I think constitutes a niche though. The second part which I think is overlooked is that the pokemon must fulfil the above whilst being able to be part of a team that could consistently reach to the peak of the ladder if used by your average high ladder player (not some laddering god who can get pikachu to rank 25). Essentially this is saying that your team is not significantly worse for utilising that archetype. This is what I think disqualifies a lot of B- and C pokemon and why they should be axed off the list. Take B- for example, a pokemon like Mega Alakazam sticks out to me as extremely dangerous pokemon if utilised correctly which I wouldn't at all be surprised to see on a team getting 2100 at the end of this season. For a pokemon like Entei, I do not feel the same way. I could give many examples here but one is enough to get the point. This issue is further compounded because I can take pokemon like Gastrodon in C tier and have the same thoughts that I have about Mega Alakazam because C and B- have so much overlap.
The last two issues are far less major but worth noting. A lot of these pokemon placements come from over two years ago. An obvious one is Alolan Marowak, which before the release of Mega Mawile and in an era where Tapu Koko was far more used had a far stronger niche than it does now. I'd hazard a guess this hasn't been updated for a very long time because touching these lower tiers kind of is a mess and the pokemon are not really explored very well. It is not something I hugely want to get into, but it is of note. However it is because of this that people will keep suggesting Mega Aggron, Moltres or one of my favourite ones Mega Steelix. It is because, by the very broad definition of niche, they actually fit into a C or B- tier. Some of these pokemon even have the odd top team to back them up, just like many of the current C and B- tiers do. There are certainly ones that would easily be in C without a question like Shedinja.
I think the question of lower tier mons we need to ask is, if they perform a niche, is it significant enough to mention or are they just a nerfed version of a better pokemon that could be substituted there? If they do have a significant niche, does this work within the context of the team and make that team archetype competitive at the top level of play?
If the answer to either of these questions is a no, in my opinion they need to go and I feel if people really think about it, it applies to quite a few pokemon on the list, probably over 10 pokemon and would help spring clean the tier.
I've been somewhat critical of the lower tiers, the C tier in particular on both Pokemon Showdown and Discord and thought it might be a good idea to explain my issues with the grouping and hopefully get some impetus to restructure the tier whether for this generation or the next.
I think most of the issues come down to three things:
1. Lack of clarity on what defines a niche and the category being far too broad
2. Lack of updates to the list leading to pokemon from older metas laying there by default
3. Lack of game knowledge, particularly full cast knowledge when it comes to their application in BSS
A pokemon that holds a niche, at least in my mind, is one that fulfills a valuable or unique role in a team that could not be performed better by another pokemon. This is only the first part of what I think constitutes a niche though. The second part which I think is overlooked is that the pokemon must fulfil the above whilst being able to be part of a team that could consistently reach to the peak of the ladder if used by your average high ladder player (not some laddering god who can get pikachu to rank 25). Essentially this is saying that your team is not significantly worse for utilising that archetype. This is what I think disqualifies a lot of B- and C pokemon and why they should be axed off the list. Take B- for example, a pokemon like Mega Alakazam sticks out to me as extremely dangerous pokemon if utilised correctly which I wouldn't at all be surprised to see on a team getting 2100 at the end of this season. For a pokemon like Entei, I do not feel the same way. I could give many examples here but one is enough to get the point. This issue is further compounded because I can take pokemon like Gastrodon in C tier and have the same thoughts that I have about Mega Alakazam because C and B- have so much overlap.
The last two issues are far less major but worth noting. A lot of these pokemon placements come from over two years ago. An obvious one is Alolan Marowak, which before the release of Mega Mawile and in an era where Tapu Koko was far more used had a far stronger niche than it does now. I'd hazard a guess this hasn't been updated for a very long time because touching these lower tiers kind of is a mess and the pokemon are not really explored very well. It is not something I hugely want to get into, but it is of note. However it is because of this that people will keep suggesting Mega Aggron, Moltres or one of my favourite ones Mega Steelix. It is because, by the very broad definition of niche, they actually fit into a C or B- tier. Some of these pokemon even have the odd top team to back them up, just like many of the current C and B- tiers do. There are certainly ones that would easily be in C without a question like Shedinja.
I think the question of lower tier mons we need to ask is, if they perform a niche, is it significant enough to mention or are they just a nerfed version of a better pokemon that could be substituted there? If they do have a significant niche, does this work within the context of the team and make that team archetype competitive at the top level of play?
If the answer to either of these questions is a no, in my opinion they need to go and I feel if people really think about it, it applies to quite a few pokemon on the list, probably over 10 pokemon and would help spring clean the tier.
Last edited: