While discourse on Iron Crown is generally premature in nature, I was more in favor towards it being included in the OTR thread strictly because it was also on my radar of what would be broken ever since the hearthflame ban and more obviously the gouging ban. The list of counters is abhorrently small with most having to run specific things: Volcanion has to run Flame Charge to not lose to CM WP, Moltres-Galar has to run Assault Vest to not just raw lose to even Booster Energy and presumably other sets, Ursaluna loses to WP unless Guts Swords Dance which loses to Specs, or at least has to setguess etcetera. There's some hard counters that are generally good but more and more sets are being actually viably used, for example I last minute changed the set on
this iron crown making it much bulkier and giving it more SpA for fun, and it led me to have a favorable MU vs SD Rhyperior with little to no opportunity cost. I'm saying it's premature because it's at a state where you can expect certain sets and you know what they run, but the more innovation that comes and the stronger an argument for it being broken. I'm not generally in favor of a suspect yet but I predict I will be in the future.
I'll preface this with the fact that I've been undecided about Regidrago for a long time and it was one of those mons that I needed to see in practice to get an opinion on, but after witnessing it for a full PL season, a full UMPL season, and almost the entirety of WC Pools I can say that I've felt it to be literally just a good pokemon with nothing really standing out about it besides some slightly more polarizing winning and losing match-ups. But let's start from the basics:
Tiering Policy
1v1 policy is fundamentally different from regular tiering policy and has been somewhat mentioned before but no effort to create a standalone 1v1 tiering policy has been made or finished as of yet, so I'll be expressing one of the concerns that has been singlehandedly bringing down metagame conversations since uselesscrab was born.
While a lot of the assumptions and goals in tiering policy are aligned with 1v1 and I will also not go into definitions of skill because that's a whole other can of worms, the definitions in tiering policy could very heavily benefit from being redefined with a singular addition.
Definitions in 1v1 Policy
0.) Composition
Almost no Pokemon will be only one thing, whether that's Broken, Unpredictable, Uncompetitive or Unhealthy, but they will always be a combination of some. This means that when defining a Pokemon in the metagame it's important to note which of these characteristics are more noteworthy than others, and by how much.
I.) Broken
This usually refers to something that has very few checks or counters, making building with these threats very streamlined and building against these threats very restricted. Let's take the most extreme example: BW Cottonee. Cottonee had a singular set that remained unchanged throughout all of its lifespan, but it was so strong that the list of Pokemon that could beat it was incredibly small, making building with it a total breeze and building against it a complete chore. These Pokemon don't necessarily need a lot of sets to be strong, but their BSTs and/or defining characteristics make them too much for the metagame to handle. Other examples could be SS Necrozma or SM Kyurem-Black.
II.) Unpredictable
One of the more common descriptors of broken Pokemon in 1v1 as of recent is that of a Pokemon that can very easily stretch itself to defeat its checks and counters, making it so the list of reliable counters that can beat all sets is small-to-nonexistent. Unlike BW Cottonee who only boasted one set, on the opposite end of the spectrum we can find a Pokemon like SS Genesect. While none of Genesect's sets were ever particularly strong or boasted incredible potential, what mattered was its ability to run virtually any item, any EV spread and any moveset to be able to cover nearly any list of Pokemon you desired. This made it a ridiculously difficult mon to stop, not only for its ability to snatch 3-0s with the right set, but because reading its set at preview was virtually impossible against a player who was capable at hiding it. There are many other examples, like Magearna or Gouging Fire and most SS bans. This fundamentally differs from OU Tiering Policy since in those metagames you have ample tools to scout for its set or to cover the "what if"s scenarios, which makes it very easy to bunch this together with Broken, but it shouldn't, as versatility in sets has been such a monumental factor in banworthy 1v1 Pokemon over the years that the degree of unpredictability has to be analyzed as a standalone factor.
III.) Uncompetitive
These are mons that generally take the game out of the player's hands. This is almost 100% of the time done through luck, with paraflinch or sleep being the general example. It also includes things like forced 50/50s, with something like Cottonee being again a good example, since Taunt would easily shut it down but any non-mental herb Pokemon would have to run the 50/50 on whether you will actually taunt them or just leech seed. The ambiguity between something being uncompetitive because you can't predict its set at team preview or because its luck based should be entirely removed as it runs counterproductive to our discourse.
IV.) Unhealthy
I'm not a big fan of this one and the tiering policy framework states so too, and it's definitely one to be reviewed when going over the policy framework, but in general it's defined as something that isn't necessarily part of the other categories but is still undesirable and reduces skill expression in other way. For those curious for an example
this post is a good place to look, where the SS meta had become so stale and top-heavy and rpspock-ish that it was no longer rewarding to play and build for.
*. ) Necessity
These descriptors are fundamental especially for community-driven discussion, because they are the cornerstone of connecting one's thoughts and opinions to another. If all we used to define Pokemon's unhealthiness in a metagame was the term "broken", people who are accustomed to straight-up overpowered Pokemon like BW Dragonite will have a hard time arguing with anyone about a Togekiss ban, because they share different definitions of the same term.
Now back to our red fat guy, let's go one by one
Broken: I do not think it is reasonable to call Regidrago broken; it is currently sitting at A+ tier with 3 mons above it and 5 mons alongside it and this sentiment has never been loud enough for people to consider drago strictly too strong to defeat. It's Dragon's Maw ability paired with very strong moves and few resists are characteristics that make it strong, yes, but not strong
enough. There's many checks out there and quite a bit of counters, but you will find each set to lose to a decent enough chunk of the metagame by itself. So yeah Regidrago is
not really close to broken.
Unpredictable: There is a degree of unpredictability since it is running a good bit of sets, more now than it used to, but it's still nothing to write home about. The moves it runs are very predetermined, with only a few moves like Breaking Swipe needing to be guessed and stuff like mixed sets having a few more moves to pick from. Other than that, the item pretty much makes the set besides extreme examples; Regidrago's base stats are very low in and of itself, with a meager 100s/50s/80 spread meaning that it really wants the offensive EVs to actually reach the damage it needs to thrive via Dragon's Maw, the 50 base bulk means that it absolutely wants to EV in defenses to make the most of its HP, and the 80 base speed range is very crowded, giving it ample reason to invest in speed. This means you are way less likely to see extremist spreads compared to all rounders, which, while more difficult to accurately pinpoint, is much less likely to affect the game's outcome. As for the items themselves we have Choice Specs, Choice Scarf, Choice Band, Assault Vest and Haban Berry with a 2.8% "other" on ladder stats. It's not an incredibly impressive amount of sets given that most sets will have little leeway in moves and EVs, which leads me to believe Regidrago is
just a decent amount of unpredictable.
Uncompetitive: None unless you care about Scale Shot hits or Outrage confusion Lol!
Unhealthy: This is where the consensus lies, giving arguments like the staleness of the tier and the teambuilding restriction and the coinflip matchups and the 50/50 picks, all of which describe a state of the metagame that is held due to this mon's sheer nature and not due to any of the reasons listed above. As we can see from the Tiering Policy Framework:
When trying to argue a particular element's suspect status, please avoid this category unless absolutely necessary. This is a last-ditch, subjective catch-all, and tiering arguments should focus on uncompetitive or broken first. This is not a thought to be taken lightly, and generic statements like the above I mentioned should be avoided at all costs unless going into very specific detail. As it stands I have seen no arguments made, only statements, and a solid, composite analysis of the metagame staleness, teambuilding structure, picking ideas, matchup analysis,
all with strong examples is mandatory for due process to be made, assuming we care. At the end of the day we can always all express an opinion in unison without argumentation and follow decision akin to a roompoll or a google form, but at that point why have infrastructure in the first place.
I don't have a lot of time in this current moment to do the same and go into specifics of how Regidrago fits in with the 1v1 metagame so I will likely make a follow-up post if there's a need for it and if I have time, but I encourage everyone else to build upon my definitions and do some due diligence about this Pokemon so we can resolve this issue once and for all.
The few thoughts I can spare are that I have found Regidrago to act like pretty much any other mon. It has multiple sets with decently diverse matchup spreads, meaning that at team preview setguessing skill is rewarded still, and picks are not actual 50/50s as implied. Some matchups also depend on rolls and a few on outplays but not at the same level as other mons, but that's to be expected with a mon that runs virtually no status moves. Regidrago vs Fairy being auto-loss nearly always is also a thing but I don't really understand why that's an issue when it's the expected situation with type matchups (for example Spectrier vs Dark types or Sylveon vs Steel types is non-problematic). Teambuilding restriction is somewhat arbitrary as there is a decent amount of checks and counters but I haven't looked into this deeply enough to make analysis.
Generally I struggle to realize how any of the arguments made against regidrago are in any way different from other mons: "Drago + drago counter + drago counter counter is a solved core" wow thats crazy almost like this is how building in 1v1 works; "You either pick drago or into the drago counter" please replace drago with any other mon tell me how it differs; "almost every team has a dragon or a fairy or a steel" if we ban drago and then the three strongest types in the game are still being ran on the majority of teams strictly because they are strong and necessary for each other in general, do we just get to unban drago right away?
Either way, while I am able to be convinced by a decently strong argument, my current stance is
Do Not Suspect.
)
