Separate Tiering of Mega Pokemon

[Antar]

Regarding usage-based tiering, the reasoning for tiering Mega Pokemon with their non-Mega forms rested on a number of good points:

1. We don't tier other Pokemon-specific items separately (Soul Dew, DeepSeaScale, Light Ball Pikachu...), nor do we tier dynamic-forme-changers separately (Relic Song Meloetta, Zen Mode Darmanitan).
   
2. How would you count it? Plenty of Pokemon defer Mega Evolution for a few turns (Sableye, Charizard, Gyarados, Audino...). Does it make sense to not count usage of a Pokemon as Mega when it spends a large amount of its time on the field as non-Mega?
3. What would we do with Pokemon whose non-Mega usage is higher than its Mega usage (Lati@s comes to mind)?

The argument in favor of tiering separately essentially boils down to: Metagross should be allowed in UU. Pidgeot and Beedrill should never have left PU. Doing tiers the way we're doing them now robs many of the lower tiers of needed diversity.

I think the merits of the first three arguments made the decision rather obvious when we made it at the start of XY, but I'm now inclined to revisit the idea, provided we can address and dismiss the three pro-combined-tiering points I raised above.

My take:

1. Precedent is a funny thing, and the truth is that Mega Evolution mechanics are nothing like anything that existed in the game prior. Meloetta and Darmanitan can both return to their original formes. Pokemon-exclusive items can be knocked off. And, the big thing, none of these previous cases has had anywhere NEAR the effect on the metagames as has Mega Evolution. If we're worried about consistency, I'd almost rather change our policies regarding these other cases than force our Mega policy to cohere with precedent.
2. There are two ways we could do this: (a) if it has a mega stone, it's a mega Pokemon. End of story. Intent trumps all else; or (b) actually count the number of turns a Pokemon is in play in each form, and assign usage accordingly. Example: Gyarados switches in, sets up a Dragon Dance, then Mega Evolves on the next turn and is immediately KOed. This would count as 2/3 for Non-Mega Gyarados, 1/3 for Mega Gyarados.
3. For this I have no good answer. Doing 2b might help a little. [Edit: no, I'm an idiot. This would actually make the problem worse.] Or we could decide that a Pokemon cannot be tiered higher than its Mega... but then we're not really tiering them separately, are we?

 

[Aberforth]

Honestly I believe that option 2a would be best with regards to the mega evolution situation, or we would have situations where charizard might receive enough usage in its non mega forms to be counted as ou by itself, as opposed to NU, where it was sitting quite comfortably before it got megas.

The only situations where a nonmega would be tiered higher than that pokemon's mega would be in the cases of scizor, tyranitar and garchomp, but if a pokemon's mega is tiered lower than that Pokemon, we should probably make sure that these Pokemon cannot be brought to the lower tiers at all. Instead, if a mega recieves less usage than its non-mega form, it can be automatically placed in the BL of whatever tier it would be in, to prevent people from bringing it just to use its non-mega form.

The only real issue I have with 2a is the possibility for more than one mega per team causing issues with tiering (I know Tele had a team where he had a choice between mega slowbro and venusaur at some point, for example). But those are very rare instances that I doubt would have much, if any, effect on tiering.

 

[ABR]

I think if we were to tier mega evolutions separately, option 2a makes the most sense. If seems wrong to count some non-mega pokemon like Charizard as having OU usage, because the intent of the player is clearly not to use regular Charizard the entire game. If a pokemon begins the battle as holding a mega stone, the tiering should count that as usage of the mega. As for non-mega pokemon having more usage than their mega counterparts, I'm not quite sure what the right solution is, because this is a rare case. The only examples I could think of are the Lati twins, Garchomp, Tyranitar, and maybe Slowbro. Even if the megas are used less than their non mega counterparts, they would probably be overpowered in the lower tiers anyways so I guess it all depends on whether or not we want to deal with those issues. We would also not be robbing the lower tiers of too many options if we did not allow megas to be below non-megas in usage, because as I said earlier, this is a rare case.

 

[shrang]

We don't tier other Pokemon-specific items separately (Soul Dew, DeepSeaScale, Light Ball Pikachu...)

Um, we DO tier Soul Dew differently?

 

[atomicllamas]

Um, we DO tier Soul Dew differently?

Being banned to ubers is different then tiering differently, if soul dew were ou we wouldn't have regular latis UU and soul dew latis ou

 

[teal6]

I've thought about this for a while, and I am unsure what would be inelegant about the following:

1) count Pokemon+Mega Stone as Mega Pokemon for tiering
2) count Pokemon+no Mega Stone as standard Pokemon for tiering
3) if a standard Pokemon is in any given tier, that is the lowest tier the corresponding Mega Stone is allowed, so you do not end up with UU Mega Tyranitar or Mega Garchomp, yet OU Tyranitar and OU Garchomp. this would just be for cleanliness sake, as it functionally wouldn't really matter if those mons were UU or below or whatever because they cannot be chosen anyway.

When the base game fundamentally changes, as it did with the inclusion of Mega Pokemon, it makes sense for the tiering system on which all of Smogon is built to also change fundamentally.

 

[atomicllamas]

Initially in gen 6 I was very against tiering megas separately, just given that using the mega intrinsically implies you are using the base Pokemon. But after looking at how the tiers have turned out, I kind of think it's a necessity to tier them separately. If you look at BL2 there are 4 flying types, this is partially due to the fact that Pokemon that should be RU are locked away in higher tiers due to their megas (Aero, Diancie, aggron, Manectric should all be RU w/o the existence of megas) and I'm not even including things like Aboma, Sharp, or Absol that can pressure them offensively.

Regarding usage-based tiering, the reasoning for tiering Mega Pokemon with their non-Mega forms rested on a number of good points:

1. We don't tier other Pokemon-specific items separately (Soul Dew, DeepSeaScale, Light Ball Pikachu...), nor do we tier dynamic-forme-changers separately (Relic Song Meloetta, Zen Mode Darmanitan).
   
2. How would you count it? Plenty of Pokemon defer Mega Evolution for a few turns (Sableye, Charizard, Gyarados, Audino...). Does it make sense to not count usage of a Pokemon as Mega when it spends a large amount of its time on the field as non-Mega?
3. What would we do with Pokemon whose non-Mega usage is higher than its Mega usage (Lati@s comes to mind)?

The argument in favor of tiering separately essentially boils down to: Metagross should be allowed in UU. Pidgeot and Beedrill should never have left PU. Doing tiers the way we're doing them now robs many of the lower tiers of needed diversity.

1) I guess the answer is who cares? It's nice to stick with a precedent because it's easier, but it's pretty clear that megas have a far greater impact on meta games than any of the other mentioned items (barring the always banned soul dew).

2) If we do this I think it's gotta be all or nothing. A Pokemon using a mega stone in a format where you use every mon you bring clearly has the intent to mega evolve (let's be real double mega teams are usually ass, if you are comfortable letting one of them not mega then it's probably better off not holding its stone).

3) The megas wouldn't be allowed in the tier below because the base Pokemon isn't. Seems pretty obvious.

I think the merits of the first three arguments made the decision rather obvious when we made it at the start of XY, but I'm now inclined to revisit the idea, provided we can address and dismiss the three pro-combined-tiering points I raised above.

My take:

1. Precedent is a funny thing, and the truth is that Mega Evolution mechanics are nothing like anything that existed in the game prior. Meloetta and Darmanitan can both return to their original formes. Pokemon-exclusive items can be knocked off. And, the big thing, none of these previous cases has had anywhere NEAR the effect on the metagames as has Mega Evolution. If we're worried about consistency, I'd almost rather change our policies regarding these other cases than force our Mega policy to cohere with precedent.
2. There are two ways we could do this: (a) if it has a mega stone, it's a mega Pokemon. End of story. Intent trumps all else; or (b) actually count the number of turns a Pokemon is in play in each form, and assign usage accordingly. Example: Gyarados switches in, sets up a Dragon Dance, then Mega Evolves on the next turn and is immediately KOed. This would count as 2/3 for Non-Mega Gyarados, 1/3 for Mega Gyarados.
3. For this I have no good answer. Doing 2b might help a little. Or we could decide that a Pokemon cannot be tiered higher than its Mega... but then we're not really tiering them separately, are we?

Ahh I didn't even realize our thoughts on #1 are p much identical, lol. But yeah 2a seems much more logical than 2b and I don't think 3 is a real problem. A mega can't be tiered lower than its base for because of the mechanics of mega evolution + it's not like mega latis, mega tar, or mega chomp would be allowed in UU long anyways.

I guess shifting to this tiering paradigm in the middle of a gen seems weird (this is my only concern), but I'm not opposed to it since I think it would have a positive impact on lower tiers. I do demand Diancie is dropped to RU immediately if this is implemented, as it was clearly going to be RU but Gamefreak hates us ;(.

list of likely base form changes

Manectric to RU/NU
Alakazam to UU
Venusaur to UU/RU
Zard to NU
Sableye to UU
Diancie to RU
Altaria to NU
Lopunny to FU
Gardevoir to RU
Metagross to UU

Aero to RU
Abomasnow to RU/NU
Sceptile to NU
Ampharos to NU/PU
Beedrill to FU
Blastoise to RU
Sharpedo to RU
Aggron to RU/NU
Absol to RU/NU

Glalie to PU
Steelix to NU
Banette to PU
Camerupt to PU

none of these seem problematic as far as I can tell, and would probably allow for at least 2 things to drop from BL2 which is positive for PR !_!

 

[Antar]

I guess shifting to this tiering paradigm in the middle of a gen seems weird (this is my only concern), but I'm not opposed to it since I think it would have a positive impact on lower tiers.

We could aim to do it when the next games are released (Pokemon Delta Z or whatever). In any case, we should probably wait until the end of whatever tournaments are going on now.

 

[Fusxfaranto]

I'm not really a big fan of this idea. The only reason to tier megas separately is the idea that certain Pokemon "should" be in a lower tier, but aren't because of their mega-evolutions. It really only even makes sense for Pokemon where their mega is completely different from their normal form, which does not apply to most of them. Additionally, this causes a weird issue where a Pokemon and its mega together have more usage than the cutoff, but individually, neither has enough to make the cutoff, dropping both to the lower tier when it's probably not appropriate to do so (and looking at last month's stats, it looks like this is a realistic scenario for Alakazam).

 

[Bughouse]

A Mega Pokemon is a Pokemon holding a Mega Stone, no more and no less.

Eviolite Chansey/Doublade/Togetic/Porygon2/Gligar/etc are not tiered separately from the same Pokemon holding any other item, even though Eviolite provides a massive effective boost to their stats, and thus their viability, with no drawback.

I don't believe that the forme change is nearly as significant as the OP says, and so I see no reason to make such an important distinction for Mega Stones.

 

[atomicllamas]

I'm not really a big fan of this idea. The only reason to tier megas separately is the idea that certain Pokemon "should" be in a lower tier, but aren't because of their mega-evolutions. It really only even makes sense for Pokemon where their mega is completely different from their normal form, which does not apply to most of them. Additionally, this causes a weird issue where a Pokemon and its mega together have more usage than the cutoff, but individually, neither has enough to make the cutoff, dropping both to the lower tier when it's probably not appropriate to do so (and looking at last month's stats, it looks like this is a realistic scenario for Alakazam).

Should was a bad choice of words on my part, I meant to say would be in a lower tier. And the reason that this is appealing is that these mega Pokemon appear as if they would have a balancing effect on the lower tiers (or at the very least don't look likely to be unreasonable in the tiers they'd likely end up in while increasing diversity).

And it absolutely makes sense to regard them as separate Pokemon, even ones that share the same exact typing are wildly different. Comparing Blastoise to Mega Blastoise is like comparing P2 to PZ, they just aren't that similar in spite of the fact they share typing. We had a thread about tiering basculin and pikachu formes, and why those are tiered together but not Rotom formes, and it came down to different typings (some megas), different base stats (all megas), and significant different abilities (most megas).

Re: Alakazam, who cares? Alakazam drops back to UU and Mega Kazam drops back to BL, both are still usable in OU, no harm done.

Bughouse a mega Pokemon is a Pokemon holding a mega stone + 100 bst + (usually) a different ability + (sometimes) a different typing. That's a lot more than a Pokemon holding a mega stone. Eviolite can also be knocked off and again doesn't change your ability or your typing, and unless choice specs changes your bst, neither does eviolite.

I don't believe that the forme change is nearly as significant as the OP says, and so I see no reason to make such an important distinction for Mega Stones.

Yeah that's why Regular Salamence is banned in doubles and Regular Kanga is on every team.

 

[Zarel]

There are two major arguments in favor of tiering megas separately that I mentioned in the past but haven't been mentioned in this post yet:

1. It makes a tier's banlist clearer.

Tiers currently ban mostly just a list of Pokémon, which are listed in Smogdex and the teambuilder Pokédex. Any ban that isn't a Pokémon is a clause, which are listed prominently in several places. Mega stones are neither a clause nor a pokemon, so they're currently a lot less knowable.

2. It limits how much an upper tier's banlist can affect a lower tier.

When OU bans Moody, it's because Moody is overpowered, and Moody is overpowered in NU, too, so the effects are comparatively minimal.

When OU bans Kangaskhanite, suddenly Kangaskhan falls to NU. Why does NU tiering depend on the whims of an OU council? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Oglemi]

3. What would we do with Pokemon whose non-Mega usage is higher than its Mega usage (Lati@s comes to mind)?

This is the most important question that needs to be answered that I don't think has been yet.

We, in our current tiering model, cannot allow a Mega version in a lower tier if it's base forme gets far more usage to stay in a higher tier, because you can't just start the game with the Mega Pokemon. "Making exceptions" for something like this is also not sufficient in my eyes because then we're just changing our model to place Pokemon in tiers where we think they should be.

I don't have an answer on how to approach this, because I don't think changing our model for tiering Megas is a good idea, but if this change is going to happen, this question is an absolute must to be figured out before going forward.

 

[Zarel]

This is the most important question that needs to be answered that I don't think has been yet.

What do you mean? It was answered in the OP post you quoted and in several other comments in the thread (including the second comment). There seems to be wide agreement simply to special-case it so the mega form can't fall below the non-mega form.

 

[Oglemi]

What do you mean? It was answered in the OP post you quoted and in several other comments in the thread (including the second comment). There seems to be wide agreement simply to special-case it so the mega form can't fall below the non-mega form.

And I said I really don't think special casing it is sufficient because you are not then tiering them separately, you're tiering them separately only when it's convenient to.

 

[Zarel]

And I said I really don't think special casing it is sufficient because you are not then tiering them separately, you're tiering them separately only when it's convenient to.

No, you're just acknowledging that megas are both the mega and the base form in one set. Megas themselves are already a special case, the tiering is designed to reflect that.

I don't see a huge need to special case them, anyway. If the mega is worse than the non-mega, the stone prevents them from holding any other item anyway. But "special-casing" them does make them neater.

 

[tennisace]

I don't see a huge need to special case them, anyway. If the mega is worse than the non-mega, the stone prevents them from holding any other item anyway. But "special-casing" them does make them neater.

How does it make it neater? Here are your options:

a) force people to mega evolve pokemon as soon as they come in
b) allow people to use the base form as long as it's holding a mega stone

Option a is unenforceable on cartridges, and would still give an advantage to Pokemon with a better ability / typing before mega evolving (Garchomp, Slowbro, Gyarados, Alakazam). Option b would be allowing an OU Pokemon in a lower tier, just "without an item", which is the equivalent of letting something like Reshiram down from Ubers only if it doesn't hold an item.

By the way, we're not talking about one edge case here. Here's the list of Pokemon that would be OU, while their mega forms would be UU, calculated by just taking the usage of the Pokemon and multiplying it by the usage of the mega stone:

Garchomp
Latios
Latias
Tyranitar
Slowbro
Gyarados
Alakazam

That's over 1/3rd of currently OU megas (7/18).

 

[ABR]

I think there really is no good reason to rob lower tiers of more options. Many mega evolutions like that of Altaria are so drastic that it would be illogical to keep up our current tiering policy. Mega Altaria would get to be in the tier it belongs in, and regular Altaria would get to be in the tier it belongs in. There really is no downside to this, and the only argument that people are bringing up is "precedent", which, like Zarel said, is irrelevant because mega evolutions are completely different from other pokemon-exclusive items. The only exception to letting mega and non-mega pokemon be tiered separately is when a non-mega pokemon is better (used more) than its mega counterpart. I agree with the notion of "special-casing" pokemon that have better non-mega forms, because a non-mega pokemon with its mega stone can simply not use the mega stone and just play as an itemless non-mega pokemon. It seems like the ideal solution is disallowing mega pokemon from being tiered lower than their non-mega forms, regardless of how unorthodox this is in terms of policy.

 

[Oglemi]

I think there really is no good reason to rob lower tiers of more options. Many mega evolutions like that of Altaria are so drastic that it would be illogical to keep up our current tiering policy. Mega Altaria would get to be in the tier it belongs in, and regular Altaria would get to be in the tier it belongs in. There really is no downside to this, and the only argument that people are bringing up is "precedent", which, like Zarel said, is irrelevant because mega evolutions are completely different from other pokemon-exclusive items. The only exception to letting mega and non-mega pokemon be tiered separately is when a non-mega pokemon is better (used more) than its mega counterpart. I agree with the notion of "special-casing" pokemon that have better non-mega forms, because a non-mega pokemon with its mega stone can simply not use the mega stone and just play as an itemless non-mega pokemon. It seems like the ideal solution is disallowing mega pokemon from being tiered lower than their non-mega forms, regardless of how unorthodox this is in terms of policy.

The problem is you're arguing that it's "illogical" to keep a Pokemon out of a lower tier just because they have a Mega forme that keeps them in a higher tier, yet backing a completely illogical argument for "special casing" the Mega Pokemon that get used less than their base formes.

We do not place Pokemon in a tier just because we want them there, that is completely couterpoint to our entire tiering system, apart from when bans happen.

This is ignoring the fact that changing policy regarding the tiering of Mega Pokemon in the middle of a generation is straight up poor policy making.

 

[Ununhexium]

I don't have a computer so I can't make a long post but can we just make it so a mega can't be a lower tier than its base form but a base form can be lower than the mega?

 

[Antar]

This is ignoring the fact that changing policy regarding the tiering of Mega Pokemon in the middle of a generation is straight up poor policy making.

No one's really neen talking timetable so far. I was saying Z-release at earliest, and we're not even guaranteed another release before Gen VII. The release of a new game is a logical time to do this, assuming there will be a significant number of new megas.

But let's first settle on whether we should and how we should (I'm not 100% sold on the mega stone = mega poke argument), then decide on when we should.

 

[Sanger Zonvolt]

It seems like the ideal solution is disallowing mega pokemon from being tiered lower than their non-mega forms, regardless of how unorthodox this is in terms of policy.

I don't really battle much anymore, but this part of the potential change in policy concerns me. For reference, for the sake of argument, when I refer to a "subset" of a mon, I am referring to a mon plus an item without taking into account moves or abilities.

If we decide to tier Megas as their own mons and not just treat Megas as subsets of the base forms like at the beginning of XY, then that's fine, but then why can't a Mega drop lower than its base form? If a Mega is a truly independent mon and not just a subset, then it should be subject to tier drops from lack of use just like how Kyurem-B can remain OU when another of its forms, Kyurem, has dropped. As far as I can tell, the only counterargument to dropping the Megas to lower tiers when their base forms get more use is that we want to avoid the scenario of people essentially bringing the equivalent to itemless Garchomp into UU and other similiar scenarios. However, in these scenarios, the Mega, which should be treated as its own mon, is now being treated as a subset of the base form, which conflicts with the philosophy of the proposed change in the tiering policy.

Now, the conflict is rather subtle and would be overlooked by many, but this brings up another issue. Using the newer policy, we now have two scenarios:

1. If a Mega's base form does not receive the usage needed to remain in the tier, then its base form will drop to the lower tier but the Mega will remain

2. If a Mega subset of a mon does not receive the usage to remain in the tier but its base form does, then both the base form and the Mega will be excluded from the lower tier.

Note that scenario 1 treats the Mega as a mon and that scenario 2 treats the Mega as a set of a mon. Simple enough, but if Megas by our tiering philosophy are being treated both as their own mons and sets, these scenarios can also be viewed as such:

1. If a mon's Mega set does not receive the usage needed to remain in the tier, then the mon will drop to the lower tier but the Mega set will remain

2. If a mon's Mega set does not receive the usage needed to remain in the tier but the mon does, then both the Mega set of the mon and the mon will be excluded from the lower tier.

In both of these scenarios, the Mega is now being treated as subset. Further, the scenarios state that if the mon has a Mega subset that sees the required usage but also has other, inferior subsets that don't have the required usage, weaker subsets can drop to lower tiers, but if the Mega set sees less usage than other, superior subsets, its not allowed to dropped. If for any mon without a Mega stone, all subsets are treated equally (i.e. both Choice Band Clefable and Leftovers Clefable are OU regardless of one being the superior set) then why are a handful of mons being treated any differently?

Perhaps I'm being too anal about this, but I think whatever policy we use, there should be a consistent stance on how Smogon views Megas. If we view Megas as just sets that the base form can run, then obviously the system shouldn't change. If we view Megas as their own forms, then they should be able to drop to lower tiers regardless of their base forms just like any other mon. Either way, I'm against having a policy with inconsistent philosophical views just for the sake of dropping more mons into the tiers, otherwise we could just as easily unban stuff like Torrent Greninja and Blaze Blaziken if it means adding a handful of mons to lower tiers. If we really want to start tiering Megas as their own mons, then their tiers should be 100% independent of their base forms.

 

[ABR]

Sanger Zonvolt, I think that mega evolutions are much more than different "sets". As the name implies, they are evolutions. We tier Fletchinder and Talonflame separately, so why not non-mega and mega pokemon? I know they aren't quite the same and I certainly do not mean to take the naming as a large factor, but the changes that a mega evolution cause are sometimes extreme enough to be considered entirely different pokemon. I also understand your desire for consistency, and I share this, but I disagree that not allowing megas to fall below their non-mega counterparts is inconsistent. This is necessary to do because, as I and others have mentioned, this would prevent mega forms from abusing their non-mega forms. This is really the only way mega evolutions differ from regular evolutions (disregarding items that is).

 

[Zarel]

How does it make it neater? Here are your options:

a) force people to mega evolve pokemon as soon as they come in
b) allow people to use the base form as long as it's holding a mega stone

Yes, which is why I said that NOT doing that would be neater. Please read my post. >:|

Option a is unenforceable on cartridges

No, it's not. Just autodisqualify anyone who doesn't immediately mega. This is literally how sleep clause works on cartridge.

I was going for b, anyway.

Option b would be allowing an OU Pokemon in a lower tier, just "without an item", which is the equivalent of letting something like Reshiram down from Ubers only if it doesn't hold an item.

Ubers isn't a usage-based tier. It's more like letting Blissey (which can also be an itemless Chansey in our alternate universe) drop down to UU because Eviolite Chansey is OU.

Seriously, does anyone seriously think that, for instance, Mega Latios is okay for UU but itemless Latios is too strong?

The problem is you're arguing that it's "illogical" to keep a Pokemon out of a lower tier just because they have a Mega forme that keeps them in a higher tier, yet backing a completely illogical argument for "special casing" the Mega Pokemon that get used less than their base formes.

We do not place Pokemon in a tier just because we want them there, that is completely couterpoint to our entire tiering system, apart from when bans happen.

This is ignoring the fact that changing policy regarding the tiering of Mega Pokemon in the middle of a generation is straight up poor policy making.

What's illogical is banning mega stones in the first place. Honestly, if you'd banned Kangaskhan to Ubers, I would've been fine with that. But banning Kangaskhanite only is like banning Speed Boost only on a Blaziken.

Either megas are the same pokemon as their base form, or they aren't. If they're the same pokemon, ban Kangaskhan. If they're not, tier them differently.

And yes, megas are special, so you have to use special rules like "if X is OU, then Mega X is at least OU". That should not be a problem. Mega Kangaskhan is Ubers, it should not be used in lower tiers regardless of what item it holds. Garchomp is OU, it should not be used in lower tiers regardless of what item it holds. There's no major inconsistency here.

 

[Sanger Zonvolt]

Sanger Zonvolt, I think that mega evolutions are much more than different "sets". As the name implies, they are evolutions. We tier Fletchinder and Talonflame separately, so why not non-mega and mega pokemon? I know they aren't quite the same, but the changes that a mega evolution cause are sometimes extreme enough to be considered entirely different pokemon.

The name may imply evolution, but the reality is that Mega Pokemon are much closer in mechanics to Darmanitan-Z in the sense that neither is directly placed onto your team and conditions have to be met in-battle before either can be used. Tiering Megas simply because we call it an "evolution" is nothing more than semantics, and in reality Mega Evolution doesn't really have much, if anything, to do with evolution as originally and currently defined: when a species of Pokemon changes into a new species of Pokemon. Mega Charizard-X as far as the cartridge and teambuilder is concerned is still a Charizard, and in-battle Mega Charizard-X is still a Charizard as far as the Pokedex is concerned. At least the Rotom forms can be differentiated from both in-cartridge before battle and on the teambuilder. While I personally do prefer to view Mega forms as sets, I understand why people view them as separate mons nor can I say that it's a "wrong view". My issue is not with the view itself, but how to properly implement such that the philosphy that Megas are indeed separate entities is upheld (assuming anything changes at all)

I also understand your desire for consistency, and I share this, but I disagree that not allowing megas to fall below their non-mega counterparts is inconsistent. This is necessary to do because, as I and others have mentioned, this would prevent mega forms from abusing their non-mega forms. This is really the only way mega evolutions differ from regular evolutions (disregarding items that is).

I understand why people think this is necessary to prevent abuse of certain mons in lower tiers, but this doesn't explain how it is consistent with the philosophy that Mega forms are their own entities separate from their base forms. Withholding a Mega from lower tiers because its base form gets too much usage contradicts the idea that Megas are separate entities whose traits and merits are independent of the traits and merits of other forms that may be of the same species.