Metagame Metagame Discussion

Coconut said:
I'm not looking for opinions on tera (yet), but just know that we're keeping an eye on that too.

Thanks for your patience.
Click to expand...

I am aware that you guys are not looking for opinions on tera, which leads me to think that a tera suspect is off the table. However, the whole porpouse of this post is to make you guys reconsider, and I think that this is the correct time since you guys made a Survey.

LC is an unique and special tier that has 5 level mons, which makes it different for the others. This has been used as an argument in the past to take us away our spot in official tournaments. I strongly believe that LC should have a place in officials and that our differences doesn't make our tier less competitive whatsoever. However, the truth is still the truth and we shouldn't deny this fact, in fact we should be proud of being different.

Taking this into account, it is not crazy to think that tera might be a broken and unfair mechanic in LC while being completely healthy in other tiers. Since LC has 5 level mons, most of the games are done pretty quickly, it is a very offensive and straight forward tier. Due to the games being shorter, the importance of every turn is higher (this doesn't obviusly mean that 100 level games cannot be decided in one wrong turn, there are some cases of course, this just means that there are less decisive turns in these. Higher turns game -> More chances to fix your mistakes or things that went wrong). To make a metaphor, It's like in 100 level mon tiers, when you play HO or offense there are more chances to have shorter games decided by 50/50s and crucial turns than by playing stall (being LC the HO game and stall the 100 level mon game). This is again not an opinion, it's just a fact.

I am making all this points to explain that my issue is not with how tera interacts with the current metagame, but with how interacts with the pure offensive nature of LC. Tera needs to go. I can make hundreds examples of tera being completely unfair and game changing, but I chose two.

[Gen 9 DLC 1] LC: Hacker vs. CDNThe3rd - Replays - Pokémon Showdown! (pokemonshowdown.com)

1705145830386.png


To give some context, this is Hacker agaisnt Osh, LC circuit semifinals, semifinals of probably the highest level individual tour in LC.

Turn 18: Osh reveals tera electric shellder, kills tera water toed and hacker forfeits.

This obviously was a clever team building move by Osh, I do not want to take him away any credit but just to show that tera is really stupid because Hacker had absolutely no way to play around that and he couldn't really set guessed that either. The worst thing is that if you take a look into Hacker´s team you don't see a team that specially has any issues with Shellder, and he even made a great gameplan around Shellder, keeping the defensive tera with Toed to check it. However, tera is unfair and creates making gameplans so much harder in this tier and almost a coinflip in decisive turns. Tera needs to go.

[Gen 9] LC: Wail Wailord vs. eric versusツ - Replays - Pokémon Showdown! (pokemonshowdown.com)

1705145859964.png


To give some context, this is eric against myself, from SCL, obviously another tour with some of the highest level players.


Turn 21: I have three mons left while Eric only has vull left. I have no way to predict which tera eric is using. If I attack with stunky and he is tera ground I force a 50/50 with tera grass numel (I didn't want that, I wanted a safer path). If I attack with stunky and he is tera electric I win. He might be any other random tera like fairy or ghost but it's not common. I decided to go numel and he revealed tera fire (which was not common at all, I haven't seen that before ever), which in retrospective was a mistake but I had absolutely no way to figure out that he was tera fire. Tera needs to go.

I am aware that I made two examples of DLC 1 metagame, however as I pointed out earlier my issue is not with the metagame but with the nature of LC itself, so these examples are valid. This happened, happens and will continue to happen if we do not ban tera. Tera needs to go.

I can also make more recent examples, on how annoying was to predict which tera scraggy had (poison, electric...) and how your whole way to adress it changed, leaving you so many times into a coinflip of guessing the right tera.

I quote from Tiering Policy the definition of broken: "it almost dictate / require usage and a standard team without this element facing a standard team with one would be at a drastic disadvantage" this fits with tera really well but unlike a mon, you always have tera in your team.

Take a look into the definition of uncompetitive from Tiering Policy: "elements that reduce the effect of player choice / interaction on the end result to an extreme degree, such that "more skillful play" is almost always rendered irrelevant".

It's not exactly uncompetitive because with tera, the effect of player choice matters, it is just a coinflip to guess tho, which no skill whatsoever involved. It is not like the "more skillful play" is irrelevant, it is more like there is just no "more skillful play" with tera, there is just luck.

I don't think tera fits perfectly fine as uncompetitive or broken, but is a little bit of both making it bad for the tier.

Tera is both borken and uncompetitive since it makes teambuilding more restrictive and so much more important, making bad matchups harder to win and benefiting the worse player, since it is a lot of the times jut a coinflip to guess the right tera (like happened to me), and sometimes it doesn't even matter, your team might just lose to the right tera of the right threat (like happened to Hacker).

Finally, and most importantly, in case I didn't make myself clear: Tera needs to go.
 
Tera is not broken. The mechanic itself is not overbearing like Dynamax was, where it turned basically every mon into a nuke at any point. It arguably breaks some Pokemon (that are arguably already broken) including Scraggy, Vullaby, Shellder, and so on. edit: A team that doesn’t Tera isn’t even necessarily at a disadvantage, see this game from LCWC week 4.

Tera itself doesn’t restrict teambuilding; as has been mentioned, stuff like Tera Electric Shellder can be a “clever team building move”, and I think the mechanic promotes innovation on the whole. The restrictive stuff pops up when already restrictive mons become even better (see the aforementioned examples).

Tera is not exclusively offensive; many uses are defensive by design, like Tera Flying/Fairy Pawniard. This can arguably be seen as a boon to keeping Tera in such an offensive tier, as it can essentially let you play a 12v12 in the builder based on what mons have what outs against what Teras. This can make building more complex, but also more rewarding.

People arguing for a Tera suspect (when it’s explicitly not the focus rn because there are borked mons at play) should in the future use good examples and arguments, not games where people made cool innovations for the first time or themselves admit to making errors.

In terms of the survey, hoping to see results soon on that, because I thought it was a really interesting slate of mons included on there. I still have the biggest issues with Growlithe-H, but that could be just a factor of my building/playstyle. Yeehaw!
 
Last edited:
to add onto this, i dont think tera is broken and tbh enjoy what it does and brings to the metagame in terms of primarily options you can do while building in particular. you can afford to run teams with not as quite excellent counterplay at the cost of just using a defensive tera to handle something that would otherwise be annoying. the main problem i think people have with tera is that it can quite often destroy certain setup sweepers but to me the solution there is clear, just ban the pokemon that tera pushes over the top (we should quickban pory)
Wail Wailord said:
[Gen 9 DLC 1] LC: Hacker vs. CDNThe3rd - Replays - Pokémon Showdown! (pokemonshowdown.com)

Turn 18: Osh reveals tera electric shellder, kills tera water toed and hacker forfeits.

This obviously was a clever team building move by Osh, I do not want to take him away any credit but just to show that tera is really stupid because Hacker had absolutely no way to play around that and he couldn't really set guessed that either. The worst thing is that if you take a look into Hacker´s team you don't see a team that specially has any issues with Shellder, and he even made a great gameplan around Shellder, keeping the defensive tera with Toed to check it. However, tera is unfair and creates making gameplans so much harder in this tier and almost a coinflip in decisive turns. Tera needs to go.
Click to expand...
i loaded a team with minimal outs to shellder, and lost to shellder. if tera did not exist i would have lost this game on matchup alone because my out vs shellder with this team is just defensive teras.
 
Dont call me a hypocrite Ive been on the ban tera train since the beginning and nothing has changed
Its still a bs mechanic that has no place in a metagame that tries to be competitive and anyone that tries to defend it is just coping
"Hurr durr I had no shellder counterplay" oh you expect me to believe that a circuit winning player suddenly loses the capability to account for basic threats nah
Just ban the mechanic and maybe we can finally have people be good at the game again
 
Porygon? More like Pory-GONE lmao.

Sorry for the joke that we literally used last gen, but the LC council has decided to quickban Porygon. This was already fairly popular among the top-level player base before the survey even went out, but it's good to see that the overwhelming majority of people who have voted in an LC suspect test before had put Porygon at a "4" or "5" on the survey. Porygon does a lot of damage with its Download boost, and either the bulk from the agility set or the immediate presence from the Scarf set makes it nearly impossible to outpace or safely check. Priority is the only definitive answer, but Tera complicates things even further, with the sudden change in typing making it difficult to pin down a specific priority user that reliably stops the digital duck from running through teams. All-in-all, Porygon has become an overcentralizing force that can blow through checks a little too well for the current metagame.

Please continue to fill out the survey: https://www.smogon.com/forums/lc-tiering-survey/ even though it has Porygon on it. Additionally, if you're looking forward to the next tiering action, you can expect it to be a full suspect test with a ladder and everything, so I'll be looking forward to seeing what you guys want to see in the next LC test. Also thank you to those who understood the assignment and didn't bring up Tera despite me explicitly saying we're aware.

Kris Marty Mia (mia let me know if you're not the one to tag for this)
 
I think this take shouldn't cause too much drama

with pory dead, I think snivy's time has finally arrived

This pokemon simply doesnt have enough answers, if ur only check is foongus, ur prob getting trapped.

Vullaby and stinky are both pokemon that take big damage from leaf storm with rocks up, stinky Is a roll for a 2hko and vull loses momentum cuz it kinda has to recover.

Scarf snivy is very fast fast, faster then howlith or any non gastly scarfer.

evio with glare can power through its own checks with glare and knock.

And ofc this pokemon is an amazing tera user, for both scarf and evio.

I think this pokemon should be looked into
 
A Small Post on why Tera Should (Probably) be Banned from LC


1. Offensive Tera is a Balanced Mechanic Due to the Presence of Defensive Tera as a Counter-Option.

While to an extent true, the main problem lies with roles of the mons from a structural perspective. While offensive mons are often designed to Tera that specific way as often as possible, as they're built to win with Tera in mind, Defensive mons that are forced to Tera to counter said Tera'd mon likely had a different purpose on the team largely based on its typing that it cannot perform after Teraing. Most offensive mons that tera's doesn't even neccesarily have a defensive role on the team, making them relatively more free to click without losing other standard matchups. A prime example of this is Shellder. A regular team would often break that by checking it with a not Knocked Mienfoo. However, when Shellder Teras into Ice / Water, Mienfoo just drops regardless. Alternatively, Ghost takes advantage of the 2 most important moves Mienfoo has to deal with set-up Sweepers; Fake Out and High Jump Kick. This leaves you with either Teraing said Mienfoo to tank hits before knowing what tera they even have (See Ghost/Electric/Rock beating Water that beats Ice and Water, but Water and Ghost pummeling through Steel). Alternatively, you now have to go to your other viable tera mon. Let's pick a currently incredibly common defensive mon with a common defensive tera to deal with most of these types; Tera Water Foongus. Once Foongus has Tera'd, common Foongus structures are now left with no Fighting Resist in a Mienfoo dominated tier. In many tiers the relevance of these interactions are diminished by the general Hp of these checks now being so low regardless that they wouldn't be able to effectively check said Fighting types regardless of Tera, but in LC we have 3 top tier Regenerator Mons that works as the foundation of almost all our bulky cores along with a couple other key mons. Their main thing is that they can consistently come in and tank the hits they should, then Regen up. We all know these interactions. Teraing your Fighting Check Foongus is inherently worse than a non-regen check not only due to the general longevity of Foongus, but because of the longevity of Mienfoo.

1. Offensive Tera has more value than defensive Tera, an offensive Tera is generally built around to be used specifically like that, one does not lose any defensive utility, whereas most defensive Teras that can function as a reaction to these will generally hinder the mon from functioning in its original (and for many bulky mons, vital) role. See Tera Foongus (Steel/Water/Ghost), Mienfoo (Steel), Koffing (Steel), Snubbull? (Steel). See exceptions in Vullaby, since it rarely has anything specific it needs to deal with bar again incredibly specific matchups, it's just a good catch-all.


2. The General Unpredictability of the Mechanic

First of all, "You can gauge" is incredibly speculative, and while a skill one aquires with meta-knowledge, you can still only narrow down to an extent, fact still remains that there's rarely only 1 good Tera Type for any mon regardless of team, it all depends on the builder and what they prefer. The example Wail Wailord brought up vs Eric is a perfect example of this, we know the many viable Tera-Types of Vullaby, and Wail logically narrowed it down to very few (But still not just 1 good), and still lost because Eric had found an unorthodox, but good Tera. While in the builder, it's already difficult enough to build a viable team that accounts for 20+ mons with 40+ sets, but having to account for 99+ different Type combinations is close to impossible. No matter how well you build, and almost no matter how well you play, chances are there are not only one, but several good and viable Tera types (and accompanying small set adjustments) that'll just auto-win against your team, to a bigger extent than niche sets would in previous gens. This makes for more of a diceroll going into a match than earlier, which (especially for all of you who want a high-skill meta (Looking at the Pro-Gen8-Vull lads)) closes the skill-gap significantly as any player can just get a lucky match-up to the point where it's unwinnable for the opponent without having to sacrifice general viability moreso than in earlier gens. It's difficult to come up with specific examples of this, as it's moreso the concept of it, but as a builder who's previously dabbled with extreme counterteaming (To the point where I've succesfully brought Z Sleep Talk Diglett with Knock Off Mareanie to trap Foongus in gen 7), I'd argue my experience with the subject should hold some credibility.

2. Unpredictability. "You can gauge" is speculative, and while you can definitely narrow down, fact still remains that there is never just 1 good tera type for any mon, it all depends on the builder and what they prefer. See Wail example vs Eric, a high level performance where Wail has logically narrowed down to the most likely ones and it's still a 5050 and still gets it wrong because Eric had found a solution that fit him even better.
1. similar meta, even a more balanced one than the current 2. High level performance where Wail has logically narrowed down to the most likely ones and it's still a 5050 and still gets it wrong because Eric had found a solution that fit him even better. 3. literally everything that was viable in that meta is still viable bar like Wattrel.

3. More Options in the Builder

While a broader meta often is fun in terms of the amount of mons you can use, it makes for a worse building experience when trying to win as consistently as possible. While a too narrow meta isn't fun again, even without tera we've historically had pretty diverse metas with 20+ viable mons and multiple sets for them all, but as mentioned in point 2, adjusting for these 20+ mons with 40+ sets is already hard, having to account for 99+ type combinations for all of them is more or less impossible. I prefer a meta where skill in the builder and kill in the match should hold similar value, but with this much to cover you'll have to roll a dice regardless of your building and playing skills.

If you're really this lazy, why are you still here?

4. Side-Point, the Amount of Pokemon Banned where Tera was, or will be, the Breaking Point.

While arguably some might still have been banned regardless, the fact is many of these mons would not have been as unanimously considered broken if it wasn't for the sheer amount of (or strength of) their tera types. Even Scraggy would be debatable, with the diverse options we have now to deal with them all compared to previous gens where they could roam free amongst a differently limited pool of mons. See Scraggy running wild in Mienfoo/Koffing/Foongus meta, where we now have viable options like Snubbull to defensively answer it (without Teras involved). Snivy might still be broken for scarf + goth reasons, but even then a plethora of viable mons can stop that sweep, whereas now it's a 5050 is it Tera ghost to deny priority, or is it Tera grass to power up and just nuke through said resists regardless?

List of mons that are likely to be banned due to Tera Pushing them over the line;

Snivy, Magby, Gastly, Torchic

List of mons that are not unlikely to have a broken set found that is inherently broken due to Tera;

Mienfoo, Vullaby

Berks said:
Tera is not broken. The mechanic itself is not overbearing like Dynamax was, where it turned basically every mon into a nuke at any point. It arguably breaks some Pokemon (that are arguably already broken) including Scraggy, Vullaby, Shellder, and so on. edit: A team that doesn’t Tera isn’t even necessarily at a disadvantage, see this game from LCWC week 4.
Click to expand...

Comparing it to Dynamax is unneccessary, just because Scyther is broken as shit doesn't mean Scraggy can't be too. What baffles me the most about this segment tho is this;
A team that doesn’t Tera isn’t even necessarily at a disadvantage, see this game from LCWC week 4.
Click to expand...
Like yeah, in some match-ups, depending on how both players play, sometimes you don't have to Tera to win. However, bringing a team that can't Tera or just suboptimally can vs a team that can Tera properly is inherently a major disadvantage. This is like arguing that teams doesn't neccesarily need 6 mons, because sometimes Dpp games are won without revealing a 6th mon.​

Tera itself doesn’t restrict teambuilding; as has been mentioned, stuff like Tera Electric Shellder can be a “clever team building move”, and I think the mechanic promotes innovation on the whole. The restrictive stuff pops up when already restrictive mons become even better (see the aforementioned examples).
Click to expand...

The sheer amount of "clever team building moves" available in the builder that has to be considered when building is what pushes it over though. Also, dislike the phrasing, diminishing previously established metagame staples to "clever team building move" is not an argument, it's just a poor political phrasing. Sorry if this feels like an attack, I genuinely like Berks, but I've grown sick of arguments like these being thrown around without any substance.​

Tera is not exclusively offensive; many uses are defensive by design, like Tera Flying/Fairy Pawniard. This can arguably be seen as a boon to keeping Tera in such an offensive tier, as it can essentially let you play a 12v12 in the builder based on what mons have what outs against what Teras. This can make building more complex, but also more rewarding.
Click to expand...

Again I've touched on this, but defensive Teras often lose their main purpose vs offensive mons they'd previously dealt with, making it a these 6 with a huge gap or these 6 with a huge gap vs 12 in the builder moreso than 12v12. Furthermore, while technically a "Defensive Tera" due to the resistance to otherwise 4x SE HJK/Drain/Mach, Tera Flying/Fairy Pawniard is an Offensive Tera due to its set-up nature and the relevance of Terablast as an offensive STAB. But I guess that's just definitions and semantics.​

People arguing for a Tera suspect (when it’s explicitly not the focus rn because there are borked mons at play) should in the future use good examples and arguments, not games where people made cool innovations for the first time or themselves admit to making errors.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'll count this one up as a not good example and argument tho, for reasons explained above and because... Well, his words. I feel a little bad for pulling out 1 specific post out of many like this, but this one just baffled me.​



Last, I prefer a meta where we don't have to ban every strong offensive mon just because they're broken with Tera. I simply don't want yet another meta where Mienfoo again is the top offensive threat by running a bulky pivot set. See CG Gen 8 (Bless the current Gen 8 Oldgens players for breathing fresh life into that gen). If we can, however, manage to keep such a meta without banning Tera, that'd definitely be preferably, as it's inherently a feature I do enjoy.​
 
Nultiprise said:
Getting ride of the gen mech will mostly kill the ladder that is already on respiratory assistance. (and risks scaring away new players) that is almost killing the gen in spot
Click to expand...
I think you fail to consider that not many people care about laddering in Little Cup regardless of the gen. Imo the few people that do ladder consistently should be playing in a more playable meta
1705433884189.jpeg
 
problem: tier bad

solution 1: ban 4-5 problematic offensive pokemon

issue: prob the route were going down, but if ur gonna ban every offensive mon that becomes problematic with tera, ur gonna ban every offensive mon lol. Ur inevitably gonna end up with another foo vull balance centric tier where every team is the same 4 pokemon with 2 flex slots. It would be like every other lc, but with defensives Tera only?

This one is gonna end up stale. Our ruleset needs 1. more diversity in playstyles 2. interesting offensive options

solution 2: ban tera

Issue: the gen loses it sense of identity and anything that Made it interesting, no one will ever want to play jsut a slightly worse oras once it stops being cg

our ruleset needs 3. a solid sense of identity

The issue with these proposed rulesets is that we will inevitably throw out the baby with the bathwater.

We need to think of what we want and give ppl tools to achieve those goals

To recap:

-a mix of playstyles
-a solid offensive options that are fun to use while no breaking rule 1
-a strong sense of identity


MY RULESET

-Unban vulpix-kanto
-Unban vulpix-alola
-Unban cutiefly
-Unban webs
-Unban aipom
-Unban scraggy
-Unban missy
-Unban giraffe
-Unban gligar
-Unban rufflet
-Unban dunsparce
-Unban Murkrow

The moves NASTY PLOT and SWORDS DANCE are banned!

​

Explanation: with 3 new ho archetype and a variety of actually solid staples that can stay relevant with the power level, this ruleset offers a variety of very interesting offensive playstyles side by side with very strong balanced staples. I banned np and sd to avoid giraffe glig and missy from being too strong on hyper offense. This tier therefore has at least 3 viable ho archetypes with plenty of usable pokemons and a probably very solid balance archetype with albeit limited options. The tier would definitly have a very strong sense of identity and in fact becomes the most unique lc tier afaik.

"oh but its unskillful" no its not, you can use a variety of different options in the builder, especially with tera.

"too ho centric" ok and? every other gen in balanced centric, is it too bad to try something else for once

I would like for this ruleset to be tested in an lpl or wtv so ppl can play it. if we like it, i think we should seriously consider this constructively built ruleset
 
Is it just me or does the LC ladder seem dead? I keep running into lower level opponents as I try to ladder with this team I built, and I keep running into low Elo after low Elo opponents gaining only +8 or +10 per battle
 
I don't play this gen of lc but I'm curious what changed that made drifloon not just okay in the tier but also a mid tier? Is it just the pokemon available or the mechanics of the generation?
 
Serious question what would it take to bring back the team building competition for SV? I thought it was really fun in SS and now that the metagame is starting to settle with all the DLCs being released could be a good time to do it.
 
Kowasabii said:
Serious question what would it take to bring back the team building competition for SV? I thought it was really fun in SS and now that the metagame is starting to settle with all the DLCs being released could be a good time to do it.
Click to expand...

It was a decent amount of work and I think people started to get a bit sick of it towards the end of SS so eventually I retired it, but if people want to see it come back I could trial run a few weeks of an SV edition, I didn't realise people missed it

Edit: It's up
 
Last edited:
I think we should ban Gastly. It has no reliable switchins and its sets often require seperate counterplay.

At first I suggested that Gastly and Hisuian Growlithe should be unbanned going into LCWC due to us gaining multiple tools that should help deal with them. However, I think that instead of that the meta got incredibly restrictive in terms of what your options for dealing with Gastly are in the builder and in game. The main question this led me to asking myself is what is the counterplay for Gastly, and I think the answer to that is a little bit of a complicated question.

Eviolite Gastly Counterplay
Obviously, the first thing that comes to mind with this is pokemon that either don't mind Will-O-Wisp or are faster and can just KO it. Hisuian Voltorb and Scarfers like Hisuian Growlithe are faster and can deal a good amount of damage to Gastly, but at the same time they really don't appreciate switching into this set to begin with, but let alone the other Gastly sets your opponent has to account for. Alongside this, it beats all traditional counters to Gastly like Pawniard and Stunky that resist both of its STABs by just burning them and suddenly you just lost a Pokemon because they cant do any damage while burned. Theres also some pretty good albeit rare options this Gastly can use pretty well like Tera Blast Ground to completely get through Stunky and Hisuian Voltorb. I find this to be the most problematic Gastly set by far.

Life Orb Gastly Counterplay
This set gives up the defensive utility you gain with the aforementioned set for the reward of being an immediately incredibly threatening wallbreaker. The counterplay to this set is fairly straightforward, since this mon 2HKOS the entire tier, and has a good chance to OHKO a few pivotal mons like Mienfoo and Glimmet with hazards up often forcing defensive teras. However, I still view these outcomes as benefecial for the Gastly user due to the Gastly user either just scouting the Tera type, or just tanking advantage of one of your opponents pokemon being forced to Tera early to benefit your position either mid or late game. So basically, the counterplay to this set is either
  • Have a fast pokemon like Hisuian Voltorb or Hisuian Growlithe in vs it
  • Use defensive Tera on it (loses to evio set) despite maybe needing to preserve your tera for later. Or the Gastly user could just scout your tera.
  • Switch Pokemon in on it that naturally resist its STABs like Pawniard and Stunky (dont like switching in on evio) to switch in. While these do the job of switching into Life Orb, neither of them enjoy switching into the Evolite set AND they both get 2HKO'd by offensive Gastlys coverage.
Its up to you if you think the counterplay for this set is reasonable or not, but I personally still find it terrible to play vs in game.

Choice Scarf Gastly Counterplay
You use this set to outspeed mons like Hisuian Voltorb and other scarfers that would otherwise be able to get past the two previously mentioned Gastly sets. This basically means that to beat this set you just use Pawniard and Stunky to beat it with actually no problem here. I would find this set to be completely healthy IF you didn't have to account for the other Gastly sets in game. The main thing I think of with this set is games like this one where the sheer threat of having to respect this Gastly set by coming in on something like Hisuian Voltorb to bluff that you are scarf but as a result are able to grab a completely free KO that should have been punished otherwise.

So how does banning Gastly make the meta better?
I think that the immediate result of banning Gastly would be that teambuilding would be a lot more easier by not having to account for a huge threat like Gastly in a meta with VERY many threats. Building aside, I think that playing vs Gastly in game is as challenging if not even more challenging than trying to account for Gastly in the teambuilder by having to cover all sets in game. The main drawback I see to banning Gastly is that you lose the strongest special breaker in the tier, but I dont see this as a problem when pokemon like Hisuian Voltorb and other strong special attackers in the tier still exist. But even despite all of that, I think that Gastly itself is a pokemon that is too good for the metagame regardless and I would describe it as broken.

BAN :pmd/gastly:please
 
ngl if you just read hacker's post on the topic you dont need my opinion, this post only serves as conformation for your opinion that you already have and are not changing

right now gastly is problematic enough from a teambuilding perspective to be looked at for a suspect or potential ban. I do think that the main problem with gastly is its MU vs the "meta" BO teams that are present right now. If you've played this tier at all every team barley deviates from the same 6 mons and is overall pretty stagnant. these teams dont change often because of gastly's position in the meta making it hard to account for all of its sets. Basically forcing teams to fixate on the same mons to beat gastly's plenty of sets.

on the other hand, non meta playstyles are pretty decent at dealing with gastly, things like niche weather teams and balls to the walls ho have an easy time playing around gastly. Tho these are niche strategies, and the same could be argued about pretty much any other meta with a problematic mon in it, so i dont believe that this really helps gastly's case at all, but it is more food for thought that gastly's main claim to fame is versus the meta. Also crafting an entire meta around a singular mon is kind of the definition of an unhealthy meta but i digress. gastly is problematic versus the best team styles in a way which the meta struggles to play around.

now ofc these new playstyles would allow for the usage of lower tiers which opens up the meta right? but more often than not these teams utilize the same top tiers with set variation, and their viability is completely independent of gastly's, as they dont serve to beat one specific mon. So in the end gastly only ends up harming meta playstyles without bringing up any other playstyles

gastly just does well versus the meta in a way that restricts the meta to just a handful of mons which can account for its multitude of sets and variation. and I agree with everything thats said in hacker's post about gastly. Gastly should be suspected.
 
My opinion is that Gastly is above the other Pokémon in this tier, this is clear even in my game in the world cup against kythr, Gastly simply clicks buttons and wins, when he entered my voltorb, I went to my bulk mienfoo imagining that it would be scarf, I simply realize that I'm going to lose a Pokémon, and I know that at this level of the game playing with one less Pokémon would mean defeat, so I tried to dribble hard, but there were also subs, at that moment I realized that it would be impossible to stop it, Gastly can have countless sets, and has incredible versatility, a speed that surpasses almost all mons in the tier, perfect coverage, and one of the biggest spatks in the tier, in addition to 3 immunities, it can be, eviolite, scarf, or life orb, It's impossible to predict which one we'll be facing, so voltorb isn't that efficient, who's going to risk getting in the gastly's face when it could actually be scarf? Due to the versatility of sets, coverage, stats, it is mandatory to use stunky on all teams, otherwise gastly will have an open game to destroy, and there is no point using bulky mons, gastly goes through everything. It is clearly above the other Pokémon in the LC, and should be banned, and the worst of all is that not even Stunky or Pawniard are enough to defeat it, it is so strong that defeating the counter itself many times, the only thing What scares the gastly is another gastly
 
Last edited:
While I'm not sure how I would vote on a Gastly suspect if it were held today, I do believe that the mon is worthy of a suspect test. It is in the best interest of the tier for us to move forward proactively with our tiering decisions, and while this does not mean that we should suspect test mons simply for the sake of it, Gastly does rise to a sufficient level for a vote for a few reasons:

1) Breaking power. Life Orb Gastly is an absurdly strong set, and in Gen 9 it is simply unpunishable in the main way Gastly is limited in pre-SM LC: Pursuit. There are only two mainstays in the tier that naturally outspeed it (Voltorb-H and Diglett-A), and while both are good to great mons, neither can switch into Gastly and both are destroyed if Gastly gets a Substitute up. The sheer power, speed, and coverage of LO Gastly gives it plenty of opportunities to sub, too. Vullaby is not a reliable check without a well-timed defensive tera, and while Stunky is a check, it still takes big damage and relies on speed ties.

2) Set diversity. LO Gastly and Eviolite Gastly are both A+ or S tier sets individually that make each other more dangerous by requiring different counterplay. Eviolite Gastly, the main catalyst for Gastly's original ban this generation, neuters Stunky by wisping on the switch and also punishes would-be check Pawniard. Guessing the set wrong can occasionally be game-losing. Scarf Gastly is a healthy set on its own, but it adds additionaly stress to this dynamic.

3) Teambuilder restrictions. This is one measure of a broken mon where I think Gastly is less powerful. Gastly's offensive checks (Stunky, Voltorb-H, Diglett-A, Scarf Growlithe-H) are already quite good, and there are few instances of otherwise-unviable mons or sets emerging solely to check Gastly. If anything, potential Gastly counterplay like Zorua-H may still be underexplored (though is hardly foolproof). Gastly might limit the use of specific mons like Trapinch but I think this stops short of being truly restrictive. Gastly's power is mostly expressed in the game itself.

I don't know if we SHOULD ban Gastly, but I do think Gastly should be suspect-tested.
 
goldenghost said:
2) Set diversity. LO Gastly and Eviolite Gastly are both A+ or S tier sets individually that make each other more dangerous by requiring different counterplay. Eviolite Gastly, the main catalyst for Gastly's original ban this generation, neuters Stunky by wisping on the switch and also punishes would-be check Pawniard. Guessing the set wrong can occasionally be game-losing. Scarf Gastly is a healthy set on its own, but it adds additionaly stress to this dynamic.

3) Teambuilder restrictions. This is one measure of a broken mon where I think Gastly is less powerful. Gastly's offensive checks (Stunky, Voltorb-H, Diglett-A, Scarf Growlithe-H) are already quite good, and there are few instances of otherwise-unviable mons or sets emerging solely to check Gastly. If anything, potential Gastly counterplay like Zorua-H may still be underexplored [/B]
Click to expand...


I think Horua would be a perfect example of a poor mon getting used as counterplay. It's not a shitmon and better than stunky or pawn into scarf since ghost stab is a bigger threat than poison and you don't care about willo. But it has less of a place in the meta than pawn and will share both of their fates against lorb: being cleanly two hit by tbolt unless they run extreme sets. (Stunky can essentially never live two). And while it is exploitable anyways due to Gastlys sheer power and versatility lacking sucker is a huge drawback
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top