Announcement np: SS OU Suspect Process, Round 1 - Boom Boom Pow

[no_oface]

What do you mean by another Dynamax abuser come along? At this moment I say people have probably discovered all the broken stuff. The other are mostly just gimmicks - there are always many checks to them. Dynamax Poltergeist is good but it is walled by literally every Dark type. A lot of things check Hawlucha at +2 - G Weezing, Aegislash, Def Gastro, Def Clef (though not as common). Barrasweda cannot muscle through a lot of things without Max Knuckle, and it often get revenged by priority SP if running LO. It's just Gyarados and Togekiss are over-centralizing (T tar is like ORAS MMetagross - it can beat anything but requires the right coverage so that's questionable)

its been how long and you're ready to declare that all the broken stuff has been discovered. i think you're underestimating what this community is capable of.

neutral +2 hawlucha has over 50% chance of ohkoing 252/0 aegi with max lightning after rocks, easily 2hkos 252/252+ gweezing with acrobatics, def gastro gets clapped as well?

edit: had bp of max lightning lower in original calcs. better chance of ohkoing aegi etc.

 

[Wapf]

One point I'd like to mention is that if dynamax is not banned, how long it will take until the metagame gets put into a relatively stable and balanced state. Complex bans might end up being necessary (choice locked mons not being allowed to dynamax for example) Mons like gyarados and hawlucha will definitely be suspected, dynamax levels being lowered maybe. Every generation starts off as a bit of a mess from a balance perspective, but usually the few mons that are obviously broken like zygarde-complete are banned within a few weeks. With every mon in the game having insane potential with dynamax, we could be months in and still have a chaotic mess of a meta.

If it's just banned, it will simplify the hell out of identifying what mons are broken and what mons aren't. I'm not gonna be voting here, I'll leave it to people a lot smarter and better than me. BUT as someone who's played mons competitively since BW, I have to say that dynamaxing really makes the game less fun to me and really doesn't seem conducive to having a healthy meta.

It's similar to how BH functions. Randomness is fun, but when every mon can do a million things, the game feels like there's too much randomness to play around or predict. Dynamaxing gives me a very similar vibe. I feel like eventually the gimmick will get old and people will get really tired of losing to a random dynamax gimmick set they had no way of predicting.

 

[YellowSmurf]

its been how long and you're ready to declare that all the broken stuff has been discovered. i think you're underestimating what this community is capable of.

neutral +2 hawlucha has a small chance of ohkoing 252/0 aegi with max lightning after rocks, easily 2hkos 252/252+ gweezing with acrobatics, def gastro gets clapped as well?

+2 252+ Atk Hawlucha Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Gastrodon: 312-367 (73.2 - 86.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

Gastro go for Clear Smoke and Lucha get revenge killed. Or if u r risky enough click Scald.

+2 252+ Atk Hawlucha Acrobatics (110 BP) vs. 252 HP / 120 Def Weezing-Galar: 240-283 (71.8 - 84.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

Wow is a thing. Also,
0 SpA Weezing-Galar Strange Steam vs. 0 HP / 0 SpD Hawlucha: 248-294 (83.5 - 98.9%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

For no phys def investment Aegislash
+2 252+ Atk Hawlucha Thunder Punch vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Aegislash: 107-126 (52.4 - 61.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
(There is no calc for max move yet, but obv the only way it KO Non phys def Aegislash is that terrain already need to be up, which should not be the case if you play smart. Furthermore if Lucha runs Thunder Punch, I don't think there are any mons in OU it can safely set up on without screen (which should give you more than adequate time to figure out counter measure)

I don't even want to mention Pex and G Cor, but they are always available. Not to mention you can always GMax back to live acro and revenge Lucha

The reason people think Max Move are broken is because they fail to identify the threat from team preview and let their check get chip. I'm not saying that these calcs are not crazy, but the same case can be made for Lucha in SM OU. The only major Lucha checks that were lost are Skarm, Fini, and Zapdos but we did gain G Cor, G Weez, and Aegislash. Also there are many other potential checks like Hippo, Rotom, and Corvinight.

 

[100 Hoes Kaido]

+2 252+ Atk Hawlucha Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Gastrodon: 312-367 (73.2 - 86.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Leftovers recovery

Gastro go for Clear Smoke and Lucha get revenge killed. Or if u r risky enough click Scald.

+2 252+ Atk Hawlucha Acrobatics (110 BP) vs. 252 HP / 120 Def Weezing-Galar: 240-283 (71.8 - 84.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

Wow is a thing.

Jesus christ, this is as sad as people claiming Thundurus was a Zard x counter because it had priority twave back in early XY, since we're here, might I also suggest you to bring your "if u r risky enough" argument to DPPt regarding Salamence and how scarfgon can potentially revenge kill him if you're well, risky enough?
I stopped thinking about brokeness back in BW1 regarding suspects, I think mostly about what are the positives and negatives about thing x and from there I try to balance, so yeah, if my crashing connection allows it I'll vote to ban Dynamax, as from what I've seen the voting reqs. is pretty lenient, and gigamax too before it gets 9,999 new releases to be honest, if it helps not promoting mindsets like yours.
Now, Dynamax is a very interesting thing, and potentially the apex of competitive chaos in competitive 'mon offered by Gamefreak, it has the z move factor when you're paranoid any turn something might one shot you, it has the added bulk and power from mega, and new ways thanks to the moves to be a threat you need to watch out for, the weather/terrain shit from bw and all that makes so many 'mons viable while you still build with only six slots, that's a masterpiece in GF's part, you took the things I detested in these generations and combined them, and what's worse, you even fucked up my concept of overcentralization not necessarily being evil as it gives you more leniency when teambuilding for threats, but that goes out of the window the moment this is a mechanic accessible to all 'mons, it's a coinflip worse than Aegislash, as Aegi is one single 'mon, here it's every 'mon any turn, for that reason, I think it's literally pointless to talk about checks, counters etc, yeah gyarados, hatterene, corviknight etc are a pain, but they don't even have to be the choice of your opponent during battle, scratch that, they don't even need a shitty item to do the transformation, they function just fine if you dyna something else.

 

[Of Moose & Men]

The fact we have had 20 posts suggesting roundabout ways to keep a broken mechanic in the meta should speak volumes.

The council is not budging, stop bringing up these mostly arbitrary clauses to keep a broken mechanic in the metagame.

It either stays or goes. Stop tip-toeing around the subject.

 

[Colonel M]

Adding to what I said earlier - I'm deleting posts from here on out suggesting things such as "lower tiered mons can use Dynamax in OU" and "adjust Dynamax levels to only X%".

It's all or nothing. No Gigantamax Pokemon spared either. Take it or leave it. We've discussed things like this around and around in the Policy Review subforum and OU Metagame thread (not so much these two but ways to "nerf" Dynamax), and unless Dynamax stays for some reason the council is not interested in complex banning of the mechanic. Read the OP if you're confused. I don't think TDK and company are looking for complex bans as their solution.

That said, if you have to resort to measures such as a complex ban of a mechanic, you would think that would send red flags that the entire mechanic is a problem and it's not just the outliers.

 

[DaRkRaii]

The biggest thing for me is how everything just compounds on top of itself. You're getting a huge HP boost, moves are doing way more damage, you're unable to be flinched (as an example of no counterplay to waste some Dmax turns), the best moves end up having crazy secondary effects on top of the huge increase in damage, so it turns the game in a really big snowball effect. I was messing around with Gyarados and it is as ridiculous as people claim. One Max Airstream kill and you start snowballing. Max Geyser sets rain and you're getting Moxie and speed boosts and rain boosts al in one kit. It's supremely overloaded to the point where the game turns in to who dynamaxes at the most opportune time. I would not be completely adverse to banning the best users of the mechanic, but at the same time, it speaks volumes to the mechanic's potent ability when Pokemon like Togekiss go from never being used in OU to a top 3 threat when Dynamaxed. This just overlaps with losing really good checks/mons from the national dex cut.

 

[Pokedom10]

Ditto was (re)built to counter players who used a set-up 'mon and expected a free sweep. Ditto was not built to rule a tier because every single Pokemon can now be a set-up 'mon.

I'm never going to get to the point where I can officially vote, but I stand firm with banning this dumb trash. Double HP, 3 Z Moves with added effects, breaking locks, and being random as all hell. Why are we still squabbling about this? Get it out of here.

 

[TheGalleryKing]

Adding to what I said earlier - I'm deleting posts from here on out suggesting things such as "lower tiered mons can use Dynamax in OU" and "adjust Dynamax levels to only X%".

It's all or nothing. No Gigantamax Pokemon spared either. Take it or leave it. We've discussed things like this around and around in the Policy Review subforum and OU Metagame thread (not so much these two but ways to "nerf" Dynamax), and unless Dynamax stays for some reason the council is not interested in complex banning of the mechanic. Read the OP if you're confused. I don't think TDK and company are looking for complex bans as their solution.

That said, if you have to resort to measures such as a complex ban of a mechanic, you would think that would send red flags that the entire mechanic is a problem and it's not just the outliers.

Fair enough man, but I'd appreciate if you'd at least give me the chance to edit a post that you delete for 20% of it not following a rule you had not announced yet. I guess I'll rewrite the rest.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will be voting for no ban.

Dynamax has some problematic elements, it puts much more focus on turn by turn decision making and is currently constraining teambuilding due to certain threats. Something does need to be done for a healthy metagame.
However, the dynamax meta requires no less skill than previous metas. The more a game is based on luck, the more all players will trend towards a 50% winrate. The fact that so many of you have so easily acheived the 80+ GXE required for reqs shows that the better players are still able to win consistently. GXEs of 80+ do not happen in games that are truly decided by coin flips. Mathematically speaking the meta is no less skill based or competitive than before, it is merely testing different skills.
There is also a concern that so rapidly blanket banning dynamax and separating our meta so decisively from the console version will alienate the large number of new players sword and shield brought to the competitive community, ultimately damaging Smogon as a whole. A dead metagame that has no new players is significantly less healthy than what we have now.

Ultimately, I do think something needs to be done but I don't think the situation is anywhere near as dire as some suggest and see blanket banning as a rash overreaction. As we were told above, this suspect test is "take it or leave it" and no further discussion of alternatives will be permitted unless we vote no ban.

No ban is my only option for pursuing an actually reasonable policy.

 

[Gary]

There is also a concern that so rapidly blanket banning dynamax and separating our meta so decisively from the console version will alienate the large number of new players sword and shield brought to the competitive community, ultimately damaging Smogon as a whole. A dead metagame that has no new players is significantly less healthy than what we have now.

This is a terrible argument to keep Dynamaxing for a number of reasons. First off, Smogon's goal isn't to attract as many players as possible, it's to create a balanced and competitive metagame. If people don't like that and would rather abuse broken Pokemon/mechanics, then Smogon is not the right place for them. If we focused solely on attracting as many people as possible it would lose its purpose very quickly, and at that point, might as well not even exist. You can't please everybody, and luckily Smogon is a great alternative for people who prefer a more balanced and competitive way to play the game, while the carts provide absolute freedom. It's literally a win win.

Second off and most importantly, saying that banning Dynamaxing will attract less players is an incredibly baseless assumption because there is absolutely no evidence to support something like this being true. On the contrary, this could very well attract LESS people. As you can probably tell, the overall opinion on Dynamaxing is rather one sided. Many people seem to think that it doesn't belong. If it were to stay, there's a chance that many of them could leave. So in the end, we could gain a handful of new players that want to play an unofficial 6v6 Singles Dynamax meta if it stays, or we could also potentially lose a small or large handful of veteran and new players that wanted to play singles without it.

So no, saying that Dynamaxing should be kept around so we can attract newer players is probably one of the worst possible reasons to keep it, because it could literally create the opposite effect. There is nothing reasonable about that. I'm not even going to bother dissecting the rest of your post because anyone can see why basing your opinion on "balance" by using the total number of users who got reqs on the very first suspect of a new generation is just.....ye.

 

[BlazeLatias]

Mostly just echoing but in the time ive taken to read recent posts (yes i do that when i'm really bored). All of these arguments or at least a large majority of them for keeping dynamax all seem to be the same thing which are simply unreasonable and dont actually in most situations debunk the reasons why its being suspected. Its simply "But its the gimmick of this gen or Stall will become to strong or just make two metas!"

Instead of just complaining about most of these half baked reasons to keep dynamax im just going to say somthing ive seen a few times in this thread. Removing dynamax isnt some big ploy to make stall the #1 playstyle. Thinking that banning things is just to make stall better is possibly the worst mindset ive ever seen. Dynamax is simply unhealthy and negatively impacts the entire metagame as a whole. This isnt a ploy to make the almighty stall more playable its a way for us to remove what is a very problematic mechanic from the metagame. Simply put if you cant break stall without dynamax you should re-think how you build teams. But thats not relevant so i digress.

This suspect test will hopefully steer the meta in the right direction and should it stay this metagame things will never change and the meta will never be capable of moving forward because dynamax has its fingers wrapped around it.

 

[TheGalleryKing]

This is a terrible argument to keep Dynamaxing for a number of reasons. First off, Smogon's goal isn't to attract as many players as possible, it's to create a balanced and competitive metagame. If people don't like that and would rather abuse broken Pokemon/mechanics, then Smogon is not the right place for them. If we focused solely on attracting as many people as possible it would lose its purpose very quickly, and at that point, might as well not even exist. You can't please everybody, and luckily Smogon is a great alternative for people who prefer a more balanced and competitive way to play the game, while the carts provide absolute freedom. It's literally a win win.

Second off and most importantly, saying that banning Dynamaxing will attract less players is an incredibly wild assumption because there is absolutely no evidence to support something like this being true. On the contrary, this could very well attract LESS people. As you can probably tell, the overall opinion on Dynamaxing is rather one sided. Many people seem to think that it doesn't belong. If it were to stay, there's a chance that many of them could leave. So in the end, we could gain a handful of new players that want to play an unofficial 6v6 Singles Dynamax meta if it stays, or we could also potentially lose a small or large handful of veteran and new players that wanted to play singles without it.

So no, saying that Dynamaxing should be kept around so we can attract newer players is probably one of the worst possible reasons to keep it, because it could literally create the opposite effect. There is nothing reasonable about that. I'm not even going to bother dissecting the rest of your post because anyone can see why basing your opinion on "balance" by using the total number of users who got reqs on the very first suspect of a new generation is just.....ye.

I don't think Smogon should pursue the largest possible number of people. I do think that any metagame requires a healthy playerbase with an inflow of new blood to avoid stagnation, and it is undeniable that the larger the gap between Smogon and console play, the fewer people will make that leap.
I'm well aware of Smogon's goal being to create a competitive metagame. As stated in the half of my post you ignored, the dynamax meta is no less competitive than other metas. You can claim it's more centralized, less fun, not rewarding of specific skills, or whatever else, but if you're asking "is it less competitive?", the answer is no. The standard deviation in GXE categorically proves that. Numbers do not have opinions and they do not lie.
This discussion is therefore not about how competitive the game is with or without the mechanic, because the answer to that is "it's pretty much the same either way". The discussion is about less tangible things like "what skills do we want to test?".

Do not get me wrong, as said above, I do think something needs to be done. I am voting for the option that doesn't completely shut down discussion.

You are right that if we don't ban dynamax and then do nothing, that may also alienate players, but I believe that there are options which more elegantly address the concerns of those people without requiring a blanket ban. In short, a vote to ban is final and absolute, so anyone who thinks the best answer is anything other than a complete ban is forced to vote no ban.

 

[wafflecone67]

Ban it. Ban it now

I want to get some data on Dugtrio in the current metagame before I make my ou page on him but there is too much up to chance which in turn leads to a lot of 50 '50s and complete shots in the dark. I probably won't ever get the elo score to properly vote in this suspect but let it be known this is the worst mechanic pokemon has ever had to deal with. Suprise mechanics aren't healthy especially if their applications only benefit one playstyle. I didn't even like z moves but this gen takes that a step further. Honestly, do we really want to see a repeat of gen 7 meta where perfectly fine pokemon were suspected because of their z set and removed from the tier and forced into uu bl? Because at that point you're banning pokemon in an already small subset. Many mons will take the place of the old and the tier will become homogenized. I would like to ask one question to those who want to keep it and cite their reasoning as it being " Gamefreaks new toy". What are the merits of even sticking to the cart if we aren't going to be acknowledged by Nintendo and GF in any way? Why should the meta be ruined due to a principle that doesn't improve it? I all for preserving relics of a gen but they have to be healthy and actually have depth to them. Not be brainless sweeping. The worst part and the most missed potential for me is that they have little to no defensive utility Even stall had mega sableye amongst the numerous balance and offensive mega's. This is just a power boost nothing more and it has no drawbacks.

 

[MattL]

I want to talk about the communications side, which is actually important, so please bear with me.

If (when) Dynamax is banned, this is probably going to be the biggest ban in Smogon history. Way more people use Smogon rules (or participate in non-Smogon officiated leagues/events that use Smogon rules as the ruleset) than you probably think. Although there is a vocal minority who vehemently oppose us, I think a much larger group is the people who have familiarity with what Smogon is but aren't knowledgeable about what our tiering policy is, how our formats work, etc., and either lurk or don't even come onto this forum, but are still affected by or interested in our decisions in some way.

Usually in the blind voting thread, the final post simply says "X people voted ban and Y people voted no ban resulting in X/(X+Y) percent ban vote which exceeds the threshold, therefore __ is banned". For this, I don't think that's enough given the magnitude. I recommend a new thread in this subforum is created titled exactly this: "Announcement: Dynamax is banned from OU - Explanation & Information". Google "dynamax banned" and look at the results. You want the official ban announcement thread to be #1 on the search results rather than people finding the other stuff that comes up, and you want people to click on it for an explanation - this is going to be a phrase that is Googled tens of thousands of times at least.

This isn't about appeasing the anti-Smogoners. It's about good PR practice. This is not "some people are bashing us so let's respond to them." This is "we recognize that we are a large institution whose influence is widespread, and we just made a groundbreaking change so let's make everything clear."

This OP has an explanation of why Dynamax is being suspected, but there are more things to cover than just that, plus you wouldn't know that a thread called "np: SS OU Suspect Process, Round 1 - Boom Boom Pow" contained Dynamax suspect/ban reasoning unless you clicked on it. I think the announcement thread should cover the following, in this order:

1. A reminder that we do not require anyone to use our rules (unless they're playing in our tournaments and stuff), we know that we are not the official Nintendo format, everyone is free to play by whatever rules they want to play by, and that Smogon's ultimate goal is to create a metagame in which player skill is as large of a factor in determining the outcome of games as reasonably possible.
   • This is important to lead off with. We know a problem is that a lot of people don't understand these things. Why not explain this right off the bat to better educate people and make it so fewer people are misinformed?
2. An explanation of the process. This was due to a suspect test, in which anyone (so long as they achieved sufficient ladder success) was able to vote. It's so it doesn't seem like this nebulus Smogon group just took a quick vote on it one day. Anyone can vote, even you! But we have to restrict it to people who have demonstrated strong metagame knowledge and skill.
   • A common thought is that we only think it's broken because we suck/don't know how to beat it. The opposite is actually true - the nature of the suspect process ensures that only players who haven proven that they're good (via impressive W/L ratio over a decently large sample of battles) are allowed to vote!
3. An explanation of why Dynamax detracts from the goal of making a more competitive metagame.
   • A lot of this can be taken from the first two posts in this thread, plus other posts that brought up good points about Choice item mechanic exploitation, long-term and overall skill minimization, etc.
   • Include why we decided to ban Dynamax as a whole, rather than just the most broken abusers, or do things such as make the Dynamax level 50% or ban Dynamax but not Gigantamax
4. A list of common counterarguments (common is important, even if they seem unreasonable. We all know that an insane number of people are going to ask "how could you ban the new major Gen 8 mechanic?". I know this isn't a good argument, but due to how common it'll be why not address it in the post? It's just like FAQs in a way). Then, for each common counterargument, an explanation of why it is insufficient.
   • The Naganadel ban thread did a good job of this
5. A list of places/formats people can go to if they want to use Dynamax

Yes, I did just write a massive post talking about how a post should be made, and you guys might've been planning on doing this already. Regardless, this is probably going to draw never-before-seen levels of traffic, and the fewer people who are misinformed or left without information, the better. Thanks.

 

[Dragonpetim]

This is a terrible argument to keep Dynamaxing for a number of reasons. First off, Smogon's goal isn't to attract as many players as possible, it's to create a balanced and competitive metagame. If people don't like that and would rather abuse broken Pokemon/mechanics, then Smogon is not the right place for them. If we focused solely on attracting as many people as possible it would lose its purpose very quickly, and at that point, might as well not even exist. You can't please everybody, and luckily Smogon is a great alternative for people who prefer a more balanced and competitive way to play the game, while the carts provide absolute freedom. It's literally a win win.

Second off and most importantly, saying that banning Dynamaxing will attract less players is an incredibly baseless assumption because there is absolutely no evidence to support something like this being true. On the contrary, this could very well attract LESS people. As you can probably tell, the overall opinion on Dynamaxing is rather one sided. Many people seem to think that it doesn't belong. If it were to stay, there's a chance that many of them could leave. So in the end, we could gain a handful of new players that want to play an unofficial 6v6 Singles Dynamax meta if it stays, or we could also potentially lose a small or large handful of veteran and new players that wanted to play singles without it.

So no, saying that Dynamaxing should be kept around so we can attract newer players is probably one of the worst possible reasons to keep it, because it could literally create the opposite effect. There is nothing reasonable about that. I'm not even going to bother dissecting the rest of your post because anyone can see why basing your opinion on "balance" by using the total number of users who got reqs on the very first suspect of a new generation is just.....ye.

Brother, you don't have to use so many fallacies. We are discussing normally. In my view, the PS is not meant to make a "competitive" meta. It's a battle simulator, the less real it is, the less it will look like a simulation. Yes, I know that 6v6 is not a mode adopted by GF, but if it was, it would have Dynamax for sure.

 

[Yung Dramps]

Ok, what the fuck happened? Are we getting raided or something? Where did this influx of people defending Dynamax with ill-informed one-liners and ridiculous reasons like "we can't ban the new gen gimmick even if it was not designed in the slightest for 6v6 singles and is broken because of that because it's the new gen gimmick" come from??.

If you are among those people, stop it. All you are doing is making your side (including the people who are actually trying to defend Dynamax in the proper fashion with actual balance arguments and evidence) look like bigger hooligans than Team Yell. Not even a week has passed and we are already getting into these ridiculous back-and-forths like the ones I saw in the late stages of the pre-Dynamax suspect OU discussion thread where the reasons for banning the mechanic are laid out ad nauseum with the response being "it's fun, we can't ban the big gimmick, just adapt, etc." and we just keep going and going and going because nobody can say anything to convince the other.

 

[Callmeyeshua]

Ill probs get reqs if Im able to find the time to try again. Had a 79 gxe after 40 and was like well fuck, this is horrible. Ive reached top 10-25 on the OU ladder several times in most gens. I have never ever had such a horrid time trying to figure out the meta.
Dynamaxing is by far the most broken thing Ive experienced in pokemon and Ive been playing since Shoddy. The entire thing has to go. This meta promotes coin flips so heavuily because of it. It doesnt help a lot of the metas biggest threats soft countered by themselves, or you have one chance before they win. Take a situation like this. Dracovish is gonna click rend you switch in your counter. If its not seismotoad you are now subject to a goofy guessing game as to rather they want to break choice lock. They get it right they win. They get it wrong and you switch on the coverage they lose. This is terrible for competition.

Its literally boils the game down to one or two turns. The micro qualities of the game are thrown out the window with dynamaxing. You cant setup for a sweep cuz ditto. You cant plan long term because at any moment they can dyna and your counter isnt one any more. Its simply too many threats that cant be dealt with if you misplay (more like misguess) once. It leaves no room for recovery. Another common example. Hydreigon has no counter imo. Closest Ive seen is some absurd steel berry max sp def ttar with rockblast. Usually If it can get behind a sub your only recourse is making really stupid plays orrrrrr bringing in a infiltrator mon so you dont have to sack mons to it. Now the problem is the only OU one is Dragapult, which will die if you dynamax...but if the hydreigon switches u just wasted your dyna and rhey kept their threat that you have one amswer for...that you just used.

It forces wayyyyy too many terrible plays on the reactive player. This why the ladder is full of balls to wall HO. It makes no sense to try anything else. Hopefully you get your jollies off before your opponent, thats the meta now..

I was going to not bother laddering until this was over but with so many folks not saying they are non ban I got to stomach it. This shit needs to go.

 

[Colonel M]

Brother, you don't have to use so many fallacies. We are discussing normally. In my view, the PS is not meant to make a "competitive" meta. It's a battle simulator, the less real it is, the less it will look like a simulation. Yes, I know that 6v6 is not a mode adopted by GF, but if it was, it would have Dynamax for sure.

I'm afraid you've already missed the plot then.

We at Smogon have "defined" the competitive 6v6 scene and it has been mostly placed within Showdown. And it doesn't matter what Gamefreak does or does not adopt to. We don't adhere to Gamefreak's rules 100% of the time, and likely never will. VGC and BSS are exceptions because those modes are supposed to replicate it as closely as possible. Remember Gamefreak also allowed Primal Kyogre and Primal Groudon into their tournaments. I guess if we have to follow Gamefreak we should do the same, ja?

 

[Clamshore]

So, I just want to preface this by claiming I'm not good player at all, but it's possible that maybe the perspective of a lower-ladder player can be valuable to the discussion.

A point in the thread I haven't really seen elaborated specifically is the idea of commitment. People have harped on the point by discussing choice items and Z-Moves and Mega Stones and all that but it's something I just want to shift the frame of mind to.

When you build a team, you're making a commitment. You're choosing what moves, items, abilities, and so forth will go on each said pokemon. These choices have consequences. A choice scarf makes your pokemon faster, but it's locked into one move. Life orb boosts the strength of your moves, but with a penalty to your health. Choosing leftovers gives you a bit of recovery each turn, but prevents you from putting on another item. Moves are a similar concept. You commit to 4 moves you want on your pokemon, and build your team around moves that compliment each other. My issue with dynamax is the fact that it removes commitment where it's been valued previously, and in turn, removes some of the competitive aspects of the metagame.

1. There is less of a drawback for equipping certain items. Before the introduction of dynamax, I was a lot more attentive to what I put choice items on. Being locked into a move isn't the most desirable thing, but the benefits of choice items far outweighs this. The fact that dynamax allows its user to bypass the negative side of choice items removes the importance of the decision-making process of making a pokemon a choice user to begin with. I don't have to worry about pairing my choice user with other pokemon that compliment it because it's able to dynamax and switch moves at any moment. It also allows the user to make more braindead plays, knowing that if dynamax is still an option in the back, then making an arguably worse play can have no bad drawbacks because the user can just dynamax right after said play and mitigate any punishment. The fact that anyone with any item can dynamax is an issue itself, but that'll be covered in point 3.
2. Moves require less commitment and strategic thinking. Excluding gigantamax, all dynamax moves do the same exact thing. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but dynamax moves take it up another level. Let's look at hydro pump. A strong move on its on, at 110 power but it has a drawback of 80% accuracy. What about rain dance? It sets up the rain, but no damage is done. Again, these are commitments you make. You spend a turn to set up the rain, or you launch off a powerful move but risk the move missing the opponent. Dynamax removes these commitments. It provides access to incredibly strong moves that can never miss while providing incredible secondary effects at the same time. In the case of max geyser, you're hitting like a nuke and then setting up the rain. Another comparison could be drawn to rapid spin and max airstream. Rapid spin does damage and has a secondary effect of removing hazards and boosting speed, but this is counterbalanced by the fact that it's a fairly weak move. Max airstream, like rapid spin, boosts speed as it's secondary effect, but is considerably stronger when hitting the opponent. These secondary effects stack with themselves in incredibly ways, leading to the snowballing effect everyone else is ranting about.
3. Any pokemon can dynamax at any time. This is the argument I think I've seen the most, but to boil it down to it's essence, any pokemon can dynamax at any time and flip the game on its head, and this can lead to a lot of dumb 50-50 situations. Decision making doesn't matter in the long run if you're caught in an unfavorable position where the opponent is ready to dynamax. The commitment comes here in when you realize any pokemon on the team can do it. What balanced out Mega Stones and Z-Moves is the fact that you physically had to equip them to a pokemon in order to use them and make the commitment when building your team. In the case of dynamax, no commitment is made, and this results in games being overturned in a whim because any pokemon can turn the game on its head, due to the snowballing nature of dynamax and the fact that it can be done at any time. Granted, it only lasts for 3 turns, but a lot can be done in 3 turns. That's 3 potential boosting moves from a pokemon who has had it's HP stat doubled, making it harder to take down.

That's all I really have to say about the issue and put my two cents in.

 

[TCTphantom]

Currently about halfway to getting reqs.

Personally, I find Dynamaxing unhealthy to the tier. The breaking point for me comes in two regards.

First, the choice lock bypass. I do not like getting out of a bad situation for free if I made a bad play, and I like it even less when my opponent does. Pokemon like Darm, Ditto, and Dragapult show this the best. If I make a bad play with Darm and mindlessly spam IC, I should not get to just kill a Toxapex or Ferrothorn for free with a dynamax. Ditto can revenge sweep super hard with Dynamax, even harder than it normally could since it can switch moves. Dragapult is able to become a lot scarier than just spamming shadow ball and hammer an unsuspecting Pex or Ferro. There are more examples than this, but the point still stands. i personally do not think it takes much skill to click a button and get rewarded for making a bad play. When building a team, you have to take into account the flaws of choice items. Dynamaxing hand waves those. Clamshore above puts this better than I could.

Next is how this mechanic has too many unhealthy abusers to be considered ok. Banning Dynamax is much cleaner than banning Gyara, Hawlucha, Excadrill, Barraskewda, etc. While some pokemon are super over the top, the mechanic is super strong everywhere. Most of the Max moves are insane, setting up weather, terrain, or giving strong boosts. The mechanic is just so splashable that any offensive playstyle gets so much benefit from it. When I build offense/balance, I usually have at least 3 great abusers of the mechanic so I can plan ahead. Why would I not take advantage of how many pokemon are stupid with the mechanic when building?

Finally, I just want to address any personal bias I may have. I just find this mechanic not fun. It does not reward me for playing well. It is not fun having a ditto on every decent team to safeguard against it. The meta with this mechanic is just not a good experience. Personally, I find the meta we may have super interesting. A limited format is something we really have not seen since RSE 200 (Or Prebank in Gen 6/7 but those lasted for a few months). What we have is a unique opportunity to explore this metagame to its fullest. But with Dynamaxing, thats gone. And I personally would rather it be banned than play with it.

 

[Katy]

Hello,

even tho most of the things are already said here in this thread towards Dynamax, I still want to say my opinion on it and why it should be banned.

First and Foremost the Mechanic itself: Dynamax brings multiple "curses" on the table with:

1. Adding Stat-Rises to the User (Max Airstream gives you a +1 on Speed as example) and other Stat-Rises on other Moves
2. Adding somewhat a secondary Ability: Max Flare (gives you Sun basicaally Drought) and Max Overgrow (summons Grassy-Terrain.

Now to the issue of these Additions. It changes the game entirely in a way where adding Stat-Rises / secondary Abilities to the Table with a strong high Baser-Power -Attack is unhealthy to the poiont where absurd high Usage of Mons like Ditto appears.
Ditto is used a lot but doesn't solve the issue of Dynamaxed Pokémon with multiple stat boosts / or a strong secondary "Ability".
Dynamax also changes the game entirely in a way where you can never predict the Dynamax-Scenario in a way tzhat the longterm Gameplan can get thrown around pretty quickly in just 3 turns.

Another example of how Dynamax is unpredictable is that you can't see via Knock off whos the Dynamax-User in the team of the opponent, because it can be used in the offensie but also defensive way on anjy mon at any turn possible. Unlike in generation 7 where you where able to identify the Mega-Slot or Z-Move User via Teampreview already in Generation 8 identifying the Dynamax-User isn't that easy.
Dynamax doesn't help entirely against Dynamax: Dynamax-ing your own Pokémon isn't a 100% answer to the opposing dynamax-ed Pokémon because you can be still put in a prediction scenario when you use Max-Guard against the other users Dynamax-ed Pokémon that in this turn the opposing Mon can just set-up infront of a Max-Guard and the opposing mon has still 1 - 2 turns keft to run rampant and breaking holes into your team.

Choice-Items will get negated (breaking through a Choice-Lock), is also a worrysome trait of Dynamax, because you can kill a potential check through the Choice-Item. Opponent has Ferrothorn or Toxapex, you have Barraskewda, locked into Liquidation, you wanna bypass Ferrothorn / Toxapex and you are able to Dynamax and use a Dynamax Close Combat or a Dynamax Psychic Fangs on the respectible mon infront of you, which is supposed to check your Liquidation move, thus maing it easier for Barraskewda in the Late-Game to use only its respective Water-STAB because you killed its check in a earlier scenario in the game already.
Same can be said about other Choice-Item-Locked Pokémon like Rotom-Forms and Dragapultra as example.

I think in conclusion: Dynamax is too unhealthy for the devolopment of a stabile metagame and thus should be banned.

 

[AmourPearlShipper]

Okay, so I had the time to play with it and Dynamax is pretty damn borked. I think it is extremely unhealthy for the metagame to have 130+ BP moves with additional side-effects.

Imagine Kyogre being allowed in OU and firing rain-boosted Water Spouts all over the place. Guess what, that's what Max Geyser is like...

Also, Dynamax not only increases your pokemon's HP by a scary amount, but grants you access to moves that can increase your defensive stats or cripple the opponent's. Which might mean you just got through your check/counter without any obvious signs, as here any pokemon can Dynamax without needing to hold an item or knowing a certain move... look at Z moves and megas.

Gyarados is retarded with Dynamax, it's almost impossible to revenge kill, especially with Max Airstream. There are no electric-type priority moves and once it is at +2 not even something like Zeraora can revenge.

So yeah, ban Dynamax.

 

[B1001]

I've played competitive pokemon on and off since Gen 4 - and never once have I dealt with something as unenjoyable as what's going on right now in the metagame. I've never felt the need to post or participate in the suspect process not once (even when Mega Kangaskhan was running around) - until now. As a matter of fact, my last non-recent post is from a Gen 4 RMT from 2008. My very next post is from a few weeks ago bringing up how awful dynamax is. That's a whopping 11-year gap.

This mechanic is completely absurd and has easily made this the worst laddering experience I've ever had (which is impressive since I thought nothing would beat Mega Kangaskahn). It's turned the metagame into a total joke and infested every single game that is played with its awfulness. There is no escaping this mechanic that almost always has a dramatic impact on every match.

Because a lot of points have already been mentioned, one thing I'd like to bring up is the risk/reward of regular play and how dynamax completely skews it beyond belief.

That's because in the vast majority of situations the person who Dynamaxed first has the advantage. Once they've dynamaxed they've likely either:

1) Taken out or severely weakened a key pokemon on your team
2) Accumulated stat boosts to set up for a sweep (often getting multiple boosts while simultaneously dishing out huge damage)
3) Doubled their HP to render your check useless (see Gyarados surviving thunderbolts)
4) All of the above, at the same time

Meanwhile, you have none of the above. Dynamaxing in response to their dynamax is almost never ideal - by the time you do it they already have huge momentum while you're scrambling to do damage control. And the unpredictable nature of dynamax just makes this all the worse.

In most cases the only way to safely counter someone else's dynamax is to do it on the same turn as them - which is not at all easy to do when they can literally do it on any individual turn in the game. It puts huge pressure on you to make the exact right read at the right time - and if you're wrong it's probably GG.

It's as if GF went out of their way to make defensive dynamax a much shittier option. If you want to defensively dynamax to try to survive their onslaught, all of your non-attacking moves turn into Max Guard. Things might have been interesting if we got a Max Paralysis/Toxic/Sleep/Restore to counteract their sweep attempt, but we get none of those. If Ferrothorn wants to dynamax to survive against Gyarados, he actually LOSES all his options and can only Max Guard while Gyarados nukes him and gets his boosts on the other turns. (Seriously, why the hell do we get 2-3 Max Guards in our movepool when we can't even use them consecutively?)

Before, setting up to sweep or using a choice item represented commitment and opportunity cost. You're either trading immediate damage and risking them staying in and damaging/statusing you with the former, or trading the freedom to choose between your moves with the latter. There are clear downsides to each that you have to work around by planning and playing intelligently.

That's the big thing here - you have to be intelligent with how you do things. When planning to sweep you have to take into account what they have left and what the situation will be like a few turns down the road. When using choice items you have to predict what they're going to do and risk losing all momentum or even getting crippled or set up on if you choose incorrectly.

Dynamax removes all of this from the equation. You can happily set up and ignore all of this as you get massively rewarded for doing so. Your double HP means your check can't kill you, the increased power means you can now out muscle them, and the added boosts mean the effects last long after the three turns are up. If the risk/reward in the past was 50/50, dynamax now turns it into a 90/10.

Right now, people are awarded for setting up or firing off choice moves mindlessly. It doesn't really matter if they're wrong or what happens next, because dynamax's doubled HP boost and additional effects override all of the normal repercussions.

Things like Gyarados don't have to find the best time to setup. They don't have to think about what move to use. They don't have to consider what can KO back in return. They'll just fire off nukes that boost their stats while having the HP to survive damn near anything that would normally kill them. And if they don't end the game outright they'll likely leave a giant, gaping hole in your team that's incredibly difficult to recover from. And while this isn't always the case, it is the case the majority of the time.

Choice users like Darmanitan or Dragapult don't have to think about what move to use and the risk they're taking on. If they pick wrong, they can erase the commitment of their choice item, seriously threaten or kill your wall, and at the very least force you into a 50/50 that didn't exist before.

While I didn't play much of Gen 7, it seems that Z-moves were a contested topic. But this is so much worse it's laughable. Before you had ONE power move that you got to use, ONE time in the match, at the cost of your item. You don't get the benefit of having a normal item and if you use your Z-move incorrectly, you essentially just wasted your item slot.

Imagine that, but instead you get to choose between three Z-moves. These moves have similar power, but unlike Z-moves they actually boost your stats or set up weather to increase the power further. Even choosing the wrong coverage move is a benefit as your stats get boosted. The effects of these boosts last long after the 3 turns are up (often being enough to end the game). Not only that, while you use these moves your HP is doubled. And, you get the benefit of using your item the entire time. It's not even comparable.

Lastly, I want to bring up the alternative of NOT banning dynamax. If this is the case then we're inevitably going to have multiple suspects for the most broken abusers of this mechanic. The question is, how many do we have to ban in order to have a somewhat balanced metagame? 5? 10? More? How much time would the suspects for those take? What happens when a new abuser pops up and now we have to go through the suspect process for them as well? What happens to UU and below that now doesn't have Ditto to protect them from their respective dynamax threats? How many threats need to banned in those tiers? What if the problem is even worse than what we're seeing right now? And what if we need to go back and just ban dynamax after realizing the metagame isn't salvageable? It's not a good look.

This metagame is already a circus, but choosing not to ban dynamax will make it a completely awful experience for a lot of people. It's going to be the same as a toilet that's clogged up and overflowing onto the bathroom floor - a shitty situation that just gets worse and worse.

TLDR; ban this shit and never look back.

 

[BAGANHA13]

It seems everyone wants Dynamax dead.. they hate it, it's broken, they want it banned, etc... what I am afraid of is what the meta will look like once it's banned. Does anyone even wonder? As OP said: it is the core mechanic of the generation, the one way in years the game is bringing us something new to toy with. So what? we just delete it in less than a month? and... what are we left with? A strictly less diverse game than last gens. No megas, half the cast gone, no Z-moves.... this will just feel like a small, scarce, constrained meta. The only new things compared to the past years are like... heavy-duty boots and the ~5 new mons that don't suck competitively. What a revolution. I was really looking forward to some fresh air with Gen 8, and cutting that main mechanic straightaway simply feels like a huge shame. So what if it is makes the game more reliant on your use of your dynamax in order to win? Saying it turns every game into a 50-50 is a flat out exaggeration. Making great use of your Dynamax with a team built around it while maneuvering so as not to let your opponent in a spot to abuse theirs is a true skill, and one that I find a lot of fun. The game changes, take the time to adapt as well! Two weeks is so short...

Please give it more time.

Please do not send us after 1 month to a noveltyless meta that will feel like a poorer version of the past gens.

No ban.

Your counter argument has to why dynamax shouldnt be banned is because otherwise this gen will lose its novelty, not to say those reasons arent valid for you to enjoy the game but if you think thats a valid reason here, then you're barking at the wrong tree im afraid.

Diversity isnt measured by the quantity of things that are available to your disposal, but the things that you can utilise with effectiveness, gen 6 with the introduction of megas is a great example of this, yeah they gave us more content with these new forms but it automatically scaled down the proportion of variety that gens 6-7 had, speaking in regards to OU, it was a necessity for pretty much every single team to have one of these since they were to good to pass on, not to mention that a lot of them were either too good or bad for the tier, reducing even more your options. Gen 7 introduced a severe power creep issue with their roster between the tapus, ultra beasts and pex. Sometimes less is more when it comes to diversity, you said it yourself that you were looking for a fresh experience, wouldnt the exclusion of mons like lando, heatran, tapus, magearna do that for you? Maybe not as you might've been talking about mechanics specifically but wouldnt that at least provide a bit of a diferent view on the meta at least?

Dynamax itself contributes a great deal for the lack of diversity in the meta imo, the lack of defensive resources outside of max guard means its a mechanic that clearly favors more offensive pokemon to use it, skewing the meta to a more offensive side, so much so that things like stall and even balance to some extent have almost no place in the meta and trust me i love to see stall this unviable as much as the next guy but making a meta solely ofensive inclined pretty much forcing everyone to pack a ditto on their team doesnt make it better, competitively speaking at least. Also i dont feel its fair for you to say to give more time for everyone to cope with this mechanic when you are already making assumptions of how its gonna be without dynamax and call it "small, scarce, constrained", the roster might not be that big but that doesnt mean it cant provide for a good meta, the numbers are comparable to dpp, which at the time it was the current gen, many considered to be the best meta and while ill agree some of it comes from not-so-experienced players who probably just had their first taste in competitive thanks to wifi and stick with nostalgia, it was undoubtedly a good meta regardless, its not perfect for sure and i believe at least a discussion needs to be made about certain things outside of dynamax like darm and dracovish but its a step to the right direction if the community wants to folllow by smogon's objectives.

Calling skilled to someone who can teambuild with taking full advantage of dynamax whilst being able to counter it is easy to say but thats not how it works in practice, when you have this many people complaining, most of them with great experience and certainly qualified to talk about these issues, saying that dynamax is a clear problem, then there is definitely more than just lack of time to "adapt" thats causing this problem.

 

[moocows]

It feels like a lot of people don't understand what anti-dynamaxers mean by “random” (or “swingy”)—which granted is a fairly vague term to use—so I’ll try to explain how I view the term. (Other anti-dynamaxers may be using it differently.)

I think we can all agree that one facet (among many) of maintaining a “competitive” metagame is making sure there’s an adequate amount of skill expression in matches. Essentially, we want more skilled players to generally beat less skilled players. Contrast this model with the opposite extreme, a coin toss where “skill” isn’t a factor.

Even under our ideal model, the more skilled player won’t win every time. We’ve accepted that Pokemon is a game of imperfect information that involves some randomness. There’s also the fact that different teams have different strengths and weaknesses, which introduces some more instability into the equation. In fact, the more skilled player won’t win every time even in games of perfect information and no chance such as chess!

Our goal is simply to finetune the meta such that more skilled player A beats less skilled player B with some probability X that we’re satisfied with, where X is >50%. This is actually the core assumption of many metrics for measuring skill, e.g. Elo.

The question we’re currently debating is: for a given skill gap, what should X be? Do we want a metagame where expert A beats novice B 90% of the time? How about 70% of the time, or 51% of the time? When we talk about dynamax introducing “randomness,” we’re saying that the dynamax pushes X too close to 50% for our comfort. Hence the coin flip analogy: dynamax certainly doesn’t make Pokemon a coin flip, but it brings it closer to one.

How does dynamax have this effect? There are a variety of factors, but I think the most compelling one is that it compresses skill expression into a smaller set of turns.

What do I mean by compressing skill expression? A lot of pro-dynamaxers have made perfectly valid arguments that dynamax does involve skill. That’s undeniable. But dynamax also elevates the importance of just a few turns to an unreasonable degree, which reduces the overall impact of skill on the match’s outcome.

Consider how a skilled player might win: accumulating small advantages over many turns. They’ll inevitably take some losses, since Pokemon is a game of imperfect information involving random chance, but over the course of a match they can employ their skill to accrue enough of an advantage to win. Dynamax interferes with this dynamic by giving a few turns outsize influence on the outcome of the match. Win those few turns, and you might just win the match automatically.

Let’s model it as a series of coin flips. In the non-dynamax model, player A wins a coin flip 65% of the time due to superior skill. A match lasts 11 coin flips, and the player who wins the most flips wins the match.

Now we introduce dynamax. Let’s designate turns 3-5 as dynamax turns; a dynamax turn win counts for 5 regular wins. Skill expression is still involved here, since the outcome of dynamax turns does rely on skill: play A still has a 65% chance of winning a given dynamax turn. But since dynamax turns are so important, Player B could make the right choices on those turns (or get a lucky crit, etc.) and win a victory due to the outcome of those turns alone.

I’m too lazy to do the math precisely, but it should be clear that including dynamax increases player B’s likelihood to win: an inferior player is obviously more likely to win a best of 3 against a superior one than a best of 11. Returning to the X model, dynamax pushes X (A’s win rate against B) closer to 50%.

(Additionally, due to the nature of dynamax these turns are more likely to be "50/50” turns: are they going to dynamax, and should I dynamax? I don’t feel like analyzing the nature of these decisions in depth, but suffice it to say that they involve less skill expression than “regular” turns.)

So yeah, that’s what people mean when they say dynamax is “random” (or “swingy”). Suppose that in a non-dynamax metagame, expert A beats novice B 80% of the time. Dynamax might push that rate down to 60%. The optimal value of this winrate (X) is obviously subjective, but anti-dynamaxers generally think that it’s too low in the dynamax meta, which reduces skill expression in an uncompetitive way.