• Snag some vintage SPL team logo merch over at our Teespring store before January 12th!

SS Random Battle Suspect Process - Dynamax

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good pro-ban arguments
Similar reasoning for why Dynamax was banned/restricted in OU and other tiers: it makes almost every good sweeper as scary as Sigilyph/Linoone/Xerneas/etc. during gen 7. Like Z-Moves, just because Dynamax can be used by every Pokémon doesn't mean they benefit from it equally, so the argument "both sides can dynamax" isn't really a good argument. It also creates some toxic interactions where the one with the sweeper is almost always at an advantage (ex: should I Dynamax to stop this +1 Zekrom who would sweep my team if he Dynamaxes, only for him to switch out and lose your Dynamax). Dynamax is unfair because it heavily benefits sweepers, and due to the random nature, not everyone would have a good sweeper that can abuse dyamax well.

Good anti-ban arguments
This is what separates RandBats from regular tiers. Bans from regular tiers would completely stop overcentralization/unhealthy mechanics from staying in the tier. The goal of every ban is to have a "fairer tier". If a new threat become broken as a result of the ban, then it is banned as well. This doesn't apply to random battles. A Dynamax ban wouldn't stop the unfairess. There would always be unfairness as one player can have a weak team, while the other would get top-tier threats, and we can't simply solve this problem with a ban like regular tiers. Yes Hawlucha has a lower chance of instantly sweeping most teams without Dynamax, but the chances of me getting a team that can't check a +2 Unburden Hawlucha is still there.

For regular tiers, they mainly revolve around skill, while random battles revolve around skill and luck. This is why this suspect is one of the most subjective ones. Banning Dyamax would make this tier much less reliant on luck, but it doesn't eliminate it. Winning with op Dynamax sweepers is just as valid as winning with op teams without Dynamax. Pro-ban arguments want to make this tier more competitive, while anti-ban arguments want to make unfair Dynamax wins just as valid as unfair wins from op teams or Pokémon.
 
zuloon said:
Ok? If that's what you want then go play literally ANY other tier, where you can make your own team and the higher skilled player is MUCH more likely to win. Clearly random battles are not for you.

Let those of us who enjoy chaos enjoy random battles.

Can't believe you wrote over two thousand words just to make such a ridiculous argument.
Click to expand...

I saw that I got a reply, and I got all excited to have a discussion, and then I see this... content.

First, telling me to go play a different format because I don't like a certain rule that is controversial enough to have a suspect test isn't an argument.

Second, you aren't helping the pro-Dynamax position by suggesting that "chaos" is your reason for wanting it around.

Third, calling my argument ridiculous without actually addressing it has no inherent value.

Here's some advice, because I'm nice.

If you have a preferred outcome, maybe you should advocate for it in a more, ahem, productive way.

Thank you for your courteous response. /s
 
hello fellow randbat mains, im just gonna post my 2 cents below as an avid randbat fan who plays a few thousand games per gen to kill otherwise useless time

i personally think almost every single mon that doesnt set up can viably use dynamax, which makes having trash mons sometimes okay epending on the situation as opposed to previous gens when some godawful mons meant you'd be playing 5v6 regardless of what your opponent has.
i also personally dont like dynamax in other tiers, but in this one it adds a healthy layer of extra strategy which makes it more fun to try to time your dmax well while taking into consideration your opponents.

my take on dmax is definitely favorable, however please do note that i said "that doesnt set up" in the first line of last paragraph, and that's for a big reason, which is many games abruptly end as soon as a set up mon dmaxes and the opponent doesnt have the suitable counter.
there's also the broken mons that dont even need to get past their counters like duskmane which ive gotten as a lead or faced as a lead, and the game promptly ended a few turns later (4 stats set up by turn 3 + dmax ridiculous strength and bulk as well as speed), and mewtwo on a lesser scale, and several others that abuse really good set up moves or weather.

also i want to point out that if dmax get banned, please for the love of god get rid of some covers, which would otherwise be unbreakable, zacian crowned is ridiculous regardless if dmax stays or gets banned.

i think a solid fix would be to keep dmax and remove some of the most broken set up sets, and keep the mons with good (albeit less broken) sets, also get rid of zacian-c, no one loses with it unless they're throwing it around
 
Mariannabelle said:
Second, you aren't helping the pro-Dynamax position by suggesting that "chaos" is your reason for wanting it around.
Click to expand...
I think you're being a little too sensitive. I was simply pointing out the absurdity of your argument.

What are random battles if not chaotic? I really just don't understand why someone would enjoy random battles if they wanted an orderly, predictable experience.

Now, if you had said that Dynamax makes things too predictable/stale for your liking, then yeah I would disagree but I could understand. But as it stands, your argument still just seems ridiculous.

Anyway, you don't have to take everything as a personal attack.
 
Last edited:
Well, here's the opinion of a casual user, that exclusively plays random formats. Focussing only on singles, I've been top 500 in gen 6 & 7, while in gen 8 I have a modest ELO of 2000ish. Essentially, whilst I'm far from an elite player, I'm competent and have plenty of exp.

I've read all the replies in this thread and respect the opinion of everyone on both sides of the discussion. Whilst there have been some good points on the Please Ban side, they haven't changed my opinion. My position is that Dynamax shouldn't be banned. This is based on a subjective feel of battling both with and without dynamax, and not from a 'competitive play pov'.

I understand why people didn't like Dynamax at first - I didn't. As others have mentioned, it takes time to get used to. I think this is partly due to the phenomenon that sometimes new things can be scary or distasteful just because they are new. But the more I've played gen 8, the more fun I have found it to be. It allows us to do things we couldn't do before, and as others have said, brings to the fore Pokémon that in previous gens would be considered as sack fodder at best.

Some claim that Dynamax constitutes and instant win. In some cases it does. But no more so than in previous gens, where Shell Smashers, Dragon Dancers, Z-Clangorous Soul and Geo-Xern have meant the same, as well as some Megas (Mega Kanga before Parental Bond nerf, for example). I don't see that Dynamaxing is all that different. On the contrary, Dynamaxing gives you an answer for someone that Dynamaxes early in a match for the stat boosts, or gets a good set up mon. Granted, you won't always be able to counter a well timed Dynamax, but that's the nature of rand bats. I personally find it refreshing that any mon can Dynamax in any situation. This is far harder to predict than megas (which we knew were going to mega by their level) and predictability is not fun.

At the end of the day, it's randbats, it's not supposed to be the most level, balanced and fair format to play. It's supposed to be fun. The fun comes from sometimes having a bad team and trying to make it work. The fun comes from sometimes rolling the equivalent of a Royal Flush and strolling to victory. The fun comes from the variety and uncertainty. I agree that being swept by Dynamax is not fun, but at least it's over quickly. And in my experience, it isn't more common than getting swept in past gens. There are so many other formats out there for the people that want an even playing field, or a game that's more structured and planned, like chess (since someone used that analogy), so I don't see why we should suffer a Dynamax ban in randbats to make it more predictable.

#savedynamax
 
After more than hundred games of randbats, i don't feel like Dynamax is an issue in random battle format.
While some mons become huge threats due to this mecanic such as Barraskewda, Marshadow, or zeraora, there always have been some mons that were too difficult to handle in random battles previous generation, you just loose the game when you encounter them and there is nothing you can do about it.
On the other side, Dynamax can sometimes help you deal with huge threats by adding some bulk if need be : I've lost less games to belly drum users or quiver dancers than before thanks to dynamax.
Finally, I do think that in most games, choosing the best moment to dynamax your mon requires skills & allows you to stand a chance in match up that seems unwinnable from the start. I've seen some situations where Dynamax was "creative" & allowed some skillfull play.
The skill it requires makes me think about dynamax as any other form of set up, it seems more enjoyable than in non randomize formats

Hence, I will vote No ban but i promote the idea of making changes for certain sets that are overwhelming (hello CB barraskewda, or even Zacian who doesn't even need dynamax to perform).
 
zuloon said:
I think you're being a little too sensitive. I was simply pointing out the absurdity of your argument.
Click to expand...

>you're being too sensitive
>your argument sucks

Pick one.

Tacotaco said:
For regular tiers, they mainly revolve around skill, while random battles revolve around skill and luck. This is why this suspect is one of the most subjective ones. Banning Dyamax would make this tier much less reliant on luck, but it doesn't eliminate it. Winning with op Dynamax sweepers is just as valid as winning with op teams without Dynamax. Pro-ban arguments want to make this tier more competitive, while anti-ban arguments want to make unfair Dynamax wins just as valid as unfair wins from op teams or Pokémon.
Click to expand...

Good post overall, but one thing that's been noted with Dynamax time and time again has been the number of potential abusers in comparison to basic set up sweepers. But now even those set up sweepers can Dynamax. There's a lot of autowin conditions here and not a ton of counterplay that isn't using your own autowin condition. Again, this isn't healthy. But more concerning to me is the fact that a lot of the time the game comes down to whoever got the jump on Dynamaxing first. Banning Dynamax serves to make games less skewed and less centralized on one mechanic.
 
"Whoever gets a hard set up mon with dynamax available wins the match 90% of the time", 1)this is not true :(, you can outplay shell smashers with one sac + dyna max guard and rarely they 6-0, I'm fairly positive they'd 6-0 a lot more with dyna banned, 2)A lot of pokémon in gen8 are set-uppers, if both of the players have em it still comes down to skill, if you're 4-1 but their last is able to dmax and win, doesnt it mean they played their wincon really well, assuring your counters were gone before revealing it? 4-1 is oddly specific too... being 4-1 means you can actually stall the dyna turns and deal with it with your last mon.


I dont agree sorry, i guess i should have used math at my first post. a mon uses a +2 +2 move. An enemy able to take that +2 comes out.

Scenario 1) you dyna and hit him, your usual 80BP move becomes 130BP, most of the time he won't take such a massive boost, even if he takes it he obviously doesnt kill a +100%hp mon, with the check severely crippled and the hard set up mon at +2 and the super common weather/terrain boost game over

Scenario 2) You dyna and he dynamaxes too, again you have a +2 and a big BP boost, You cripple him on the first hit, he hits you back obviously not one shotting except a 4x stab hit. You finish him off, he doesn't have dyna available after that and you have a massive weather or terrain boost, game over

Even if you stall the 1st and 3rd turn it rarely saves the game for you, you still have lost dyna and you're facing a mon that has set up and has weather/terrain boost.

The way to save the game in previous Gens from a set up mon was to take a boosted move with your check/sturdy/sash mon, deal 70-80% dmg back and finish him off with a priority move. This option is almost completely taken away since your counter play will barely deal 50% to a double hp mon.

PS ban zacian-Crowned, it's auto win, +3 behemoth blade one shoots dyna mons that resist it
 
From what I see so far here, most of the complaint has been on how easy it is to sweep a team with Dynamax available. However, from my experience with the ladder, I don't think Dynamax here is the main issue. While mons like Lulicodo, Nasty Plot A-Persian, Togekiss can cause some damage on your team, rarely have I seen them outright sweep a team through Dynamax. However, the core issue here lies with the many broken set up set they give - Quiver Dance Volcarona, DD Zerkrom, DD Zygarde, DD Rayquaza, etc (they used to give Gyarados Max Airstream, but thank God that's no longer a thing) with no counterplay available. Like seriously who think it was a good idea to give Zerkrom Sub Lum berry, Volcarona Roost so that it can set up on literally 90% of the metagame.
This in conjunction with Dynamax create a complete menace - am I supposed to make sure I never use one of my weaker mons to finish something since it is guaranteed that they will bring in something to set up after? Even Uber has now banned the Dynamax of some mons from the list given, and for some reasons they are allowed in Randbats. My opinion is that we should keep Dynamax, but make modifications to some of the set randomized. Dynamax or not, I'm pretty sure there are less than 10 mons that can eat a +1 Bolt Strike/ Outrage to the face, and imagine the type of randomize game where you get a lead Toxapex into sub lum DD Zekrom with no ground type on your team.
 
Just had a problem in a match with dynamax, Encored the opposing ninjask into swords dance. Opposing ninjask dynamaxed and used Max Airstream while still being encored. Kinda broken, maybe remove it from Randoms.
 
My opinion is pretty simple.

Some Pokemons in random where always broken. Dynamax does not change this but might change the pokemon which are broken.
So the question is does Dynamax makes teams even more unballanced as they had always been in randoms. And to be fair I can not see a major difference. It makes games only more unpredictable for me than they had been before, which I rather enjoy.
And one more things Dynamax makes defensive plays much harder, resulting in faster games. Also a benefit for me.
The only problem i see with dynamax is that some moves fail if used on a dynamax pokemon (heavy slam, gras knot etc.) which makes couter play sometimes impossible. But this could be changed if the developers would switch these moves out from most movesets in random battles.
 
First of all, I really like the taste in music on display here.

Alright, then... you may know me from a player of Other Metagames, but I've slowed down a bit lately, and put my focus into Random Battles. And since a suspect was going on, I thought that I may as well throw my hat into the ring, along with the lot of my experience...

So. Dynamax... most of you are innately familiar with its capability as an offensive tool. Let's break that down a bit more in-depth.
Dynamax effectively doubles your bulk and replaces your moves with (mostly) more powerful versions of them. The secondary effects of these moves, as stated earlier, ranging from stat buffs to terrain and weather setting. This all seems great for the person using it, and potentially overpowered.

...But how many of the Dynamax sweeps you are familiar with are directly because of Dynamax? The number may surprise you, when you actually actively start looking for evidence. Let me lead this off with a replay from my suspect games that was almost assuredly won by a proper Dynamax.
https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen8randombattle-1091677204

Disregarding the misplays directly before and after the dynamax from my opponent, all aspects unique to a Dynamax sweep are present here, minus choice lock negation. The aspects are as follows:

- The difference between 100% and 200% HP mattering in surviving opposing attacks
- The power boost from G-Max moves compared to the regular moves securing an important OHKO/2HKO
- The Terrain/weather/stat boosts making a difference in several aspects, tying in with both the above points, along with other utility.

These are all pretty broad categories, but the aspects listed above vary wildly in importance from game to game. You never know who's exactly in the driver's seat until there's a problem staring someone down. And that... could be pretty much anything. That's randoms for you.

To hone in more specifically, something like Gyarados or Eiscue finds themselves much more potent because of Dynamax; the former really enjoys a greater than 50% power boost to its STAB, which makes getting to Moxie much easier, and the latter can renew Ice Face for more blocking of physical attacks, whilst also hammering something with a very powerful Ice attack.

There's plenty of other examples, but only a handful become truly terrifying directly because of Dynamax. The oft-mentioned Zekrom is pretty likely to sweep many teams just fine after a Dragon Dance or two anyways... though it does appreciate not being stuck in Outrage for some of them, This holds true for another, even larger terror, but I'll get to that in a bit. So far from this explaination, Dynamax seems to be far better for sweeping. But there's another side to this coin.

Dynamax is arguably even better at stopping something going out of control. Let's take that Zekrom from earlier that Dragon Danced. Can your regular mons survive that onslaught, even without them Dynamaxing? Probably not. Can a physically bulky Ground-type or a well-placed Max Wyrmwind slow it down? You bet it can! Even in Dynamax duels, only the frailest of mons doesn't get a chance to make a counterattack from a faster (and often stronger) opponent. There's also the strategy of using Max Guard in order to stall Dynamax turns, if the matchup looks real sour. Some matchups (like the one I posted earlier) end up using Dynamax to break walls. An especially cunning player can switch to a resist, or dynamax the wall in response, effectively halting the momentum gained from them breaking the wall in the first place.

Does this sound overwhelming and hard to put into practice? It is. Dynamaxing seems quite simple on the surface, but is actually quite intricate with the best possible use. To get back to more firm grounds, this also stops something like Cloyster from sweeping teams, as while it can't use Dynamax well itself, it is definitly stopped by a strong special attacker having double its usual bulk. There were several silly low effort sweepers like that which can be stopped cold with a good Dynamax. That's pretty nice for a core mechanic.

To end it all off, I'll say that both the intrique of playing Dynamax, andthe wow factor of people looking for the newest generation of Pokemon to hop into via Showdown are the big factors putting me on keeping Dynamax in the random battles format. I understand the decisions of other tiers to ban Dynamax, as it is clearly built for a 3v3 enviornment more than a 6v6 one. But with properly curating this in the coming months, something real good could result from all of this discussion.

P.S. Remember when I said there was another setup monster scarier than Zekrom? Its name is Necrozma-Dusk Mane, and it's a nightmare 90% of the time. There are very few reliable ways to stop it, outside of counters of Corviknight and Bronzong. Even without Dynamax, it can level teams, and with it, it's pretty much guaranteed to live through just about any one hit it could reasonably expect to face. I don't know who on Game Freak or the Pokemon Company decided to give so many legendaries Dragon Dance, but I think it ended up being a mistake. It's arguably scarier than Zacian-Crowned in random battles, which is impressive...
 
Pretty consistently high-ranked and long time randbats player here (although not as good as some of the other players here) First of all I want to share what the most important aspect of random battles (to me) is. Randbats is a tier prone to a lot of variance (obviously) so often times you're going to have games where if your opponent isn't an idiot (which they won't be if they're high ladder) they won't ever lose the match, and you'll have matches where you get a free win as long as you aren't an idiot. This has always been the case, last gen if you got PH xerneas (god bless the AV set lmao), dual dance primal groudon, sigilyph, or something as simple as uncontested webs & rocks with the opponent having no way of clearing them you're just gonna win the matchup almost all the time.

The problem with dynamax for me is that it closes the boundaries for what games are winnable and what games aren't. For example, in gen 7, if I were to play 100 games, I would say that on average 10 would be a free win for me, 10 would be an instant loss, 20 I would have a sizeable advantage but would still need to play well to win, 20 I'd start on the lower hand but could possibly make my way back due to out-plays, and 40 would be relatively even. I think that struck a really good balance and ended up testing your skill in enough games to say it was fair. Furthermore, there was gradual scaling of games, as I pointed out they could be grouped into 1 of 5 different categories. That way, if you won 14/20 where you had a reasonable advantage but not a free win and also won 8/20 where you had a sizeable disadvantage, your ability to play in these different situations was rewarded.

Imagine the games I just described on a line, with the left most end of the line being the free-est wins and the righmost wins being the most unwinnable matches. What I feel gen 8 has done with dynamax is taken all the points to signal boundaries for different types of matches and moved them toward the center, greatly polarizing the average matchup. Before, the percentage markers for each of the 5 "tiers" were (0, 10, 30, 70, 90, 100) whereas now they feel something like (0, 25, 40, 60, 75, 100) (sorry if this didn't make sense). My point is that due to way greater number of potential dynamax sweepers/free wins if your opponent doesn't happen to have a reasonable counter (literally any life orb mon with a boosting move) the percentage of games that are "free" or at least "very tilted in someones favor" have increased and the number of games that feel even aren't. In my eyes, it's gotten to a point where its unhealthy, and want to go back to having a way larger portion of games be "winnable"
 
Scrolling through the reqs thread, I noticed someone saying they were returning to rands just so that they could vote to ban dyna. I've also heard of people doing this from other players in rands. If this is your mindset, can I ask why? Rands is pretty much the only format I play, and I think dynamax is what's keeping this gen fresh and fun. It's not as if you're giving a voice to lower-tier players who couldn't get reqs and oppose dyna, because below 1500 people hardly ever use the mechanic (much less use it effectively).

Maybe I'm exaggerating the amount of people who are doing this in my head, but--if you are one of those players--why do you want to have a say in this decision when it doesn't affect you?
 
Shadowss4 said:
Scrolling through the reqs thread, I noticed someone saying they were returning to rands just so that they could vote to ban dyna. I've also heard of people doing this from other players in rands. If this is your mindset, can I ask why? Rands is pretty much the only format I play, and I think dynamax is what's keeping this gen fresh and fun. It's not as if you're giving a voice to lower-tier players who couldn't get reqs and oppose dyna, because below 1500 people hardly ever use the mechanic (much less use it effectively).

Maybe I'm exaggerating the amount of people who are doing this in my head, but--if you are one of those players--why do you want to have a say in this decision when it doesn't affect you?
Click to expand...
I guess this goes the other way around as well, and there could be people here who don't play rands much and are only here to vote to save dyna. Even if I agree with you on that vote, my question is the same. Why are you here?
 
Shadowss4 said:
Scrolling through the reqs thread, I noticed someone saying they were returning to rands just so that they could vote to ban dyna. I've also heard of people doing this from other players in rands. If this is your mindset, can I ask why? Rands is pretty much the only format I play, and I think dynamax is what's keeping this gen fresh and fun. It's not as if you're giving a voice to lower-tier players who couldn't get reqs and oppose dyna, because below 1500 people hardly ever use the mechanic (much less use it effectively).

Maybe I'm exaggerating the amount of people who are doing this in my head, but--if you are one of those players--why do you want to have a say in this decision when it doesn't affect you?
Click to expand...

There might be people who don't play randoms because the explicitly don't like Dynamax so they stopped playing it, and now are trying to get reqs because they realize they can finally have a chance to play the randoms that they wanted all along.

Side note: Personally I just straight up think Dynamax is an unfun mechanic in general, and it's absolutely the reason I don't even bother playing Gen8 randbats at all. Surprised there aren't more people who just don't like Dynamax.
 
Nuclearstomp said:
There might be people who don't play randoms because the explicitly don't like Dynamax so they stopped playing it, and now are trying to get reqs because they realize they can finally have a chance to play the randoms that they wanted all along.

Side note: Personally I just straight up think Dynamax is an unfun mechanic in general, and it's absolutely the reason I don't even bother playing Gen8 randbats at all. Surprised there aren't more people who just don't like Dynamax.
Click to expand...
If those players are going to become regular rands players if dynamax is banned, then I think that's a valid reasoning. Do you think that's the case for most of them?
 
As I'm nearing the reqs required to vote on dynamax and after being someone who used to enjoy random battles in gen 7, it's becoming apparent to me that dynamax is truly broken. I've been going into random battles as a way to just chill out and take a break from laddering in other tiers and with having dynamax in random battles I can't. When given certain mons such as Mew, Gyarados or any of the powerful ubers I can completely destroy any mon but when my opponent is given any such mon I stand no chance at defeating them. While dynamax for lower tier mons is helpful allowing them to stand a chance against higher tier mons, the higher tier mons are just to powerful and abuse dynamax and make random battles just unfun and unappealing to play anymore. Also, to be honest dynamax takes all the skill involved in random battles out because a person can be ahead of their opponent and all their opponent has to do is dynamax their mon and they can either win the game or come extremely close and make the person fear losing the win. While we had megas and z-moves in previous gens, there was ways to get around them because with z-moves it was a one turn nuke and with megas the mon couldn't hold any item except their mega stone unlike dynamax. Dynamax mons can still hold their items some items losing their effects such as choice items but some keeping theirs such as life orb giving them powerful moves, higher health, and items that can boost their attacks. As much as i find dynamax a fun mechanic it just is to powerful and unpredictable. i vote to ban dynamax in gen 8 random battles.
 
I battled a few more than 60, only counting true tests of dynamaxing (didnt count forfeits without dyna, etc) before gathering info for my comment. My alt was RBDS Bref, years ago I was BREFFFPADL until the bot in Mafia room made me change to Toxic Bref. I play the ladder daily, played Pokemon for 20+ years and would love to weigh in:

I really liked everything Knowka had to say. Daily Rito made me feel unsettled when they said "just clicking a button" so I want to be pro-dynamaxing: It is fun, unpredictable and signature of Gen8. If I had it my way we would open 2 seperate ladders, one dynamaxing and one (gen 8 mons and moves) without. The problem is Gen 8 is lacking variety of moves and had a small dex, only introuducing Pokemon HOME to bring in OP mons, which made dynamaxing paramount for console gameplay. I think the concept of 3 VS 1 raid is challenging for console play but dynamaxing in single battles was absolutely necessary to win in most the 60 battles I recorded.

At 33/60 wins, about 55%, dynamaxing was the win condition for most all, either a massive sweep or a way-out from being overpowered. Out of my 60 Perrserker and Zygarde tied with 3 attempts and my opponents tied at 2 attempts dynamaxing Xerneas. Nonetheless legendaries/psuedos were most often dynamaxed, mons who used shell smash, etc it was tiresome. You largely knew if they were gonna dynamax depending on their stats/remaining health. It was exciting when they used it strangely but more often you knew when it was coming and it mightve meant endgame because most of your team had no chance. I recorded whether it was used by first mon, in the middle, or very last mon and often it was used in the middle of a match to turn the tide or seal the deal.

Before creating RBDS Bref I felt I wanted to fight for Dynamaxing but after studying it consecutively Im worried it can cause too much butthurt. At the same time I REALLY enjoy double battles Gen8 because dynamaxing makes it so interesting. But if our only concern was dynamaxing in singles Gen8 I would ban. Some might understand this: i grew up with siblings and we banned dynamaxing as a house rule. ;)
 

Attachments

Had to stop playing for a bit due to IRL stuff, but figured I'd leave my two (three?) cents as a former frequent visitor to top 50, though I'm definitely a bit washed up at this point. I've read this entire thread, and I'm going to try not to harp on the points for and against that have already been discussed to some length.

1) "It's fun" or "It's not fun" is completely unsubstantial in this context, even when evidence is provided to substantiate the claim. Suspect tests are NOT fun votes. I'm not confident that this should have even been suspect tested in the first place. Other formats made the decision first, and the likelihood of actually reaching a decision based on the merits of the mechanic rather than whether people think it's fun or not is especially low for this format, which, as Bughouse pointed out, is far from an official Smogon format in the first place. At least the GXE requirement is higher to compensate, I guess?

2) It was never really discussed by anyone other than Jiibriil, but whether you like Dynamax or not, I think it's clear that random battles has lost a lot of variance, and I think this is a huge blow to a format that is based on randomness and... variance! It makes little difference that every game is decided by not just a few but a variety of Dynamax abusers when the fact of the matter is that the most viable strategy for anyone to use (by far) is to play around setting one up and sweeping. Your primary win/loss condition is some Dynamaxed mon in each and every single game. This is not even remotely comparable to the effect megas and z moves had in past generations.

3) This leads me to the argument of meta staleness that has cropped up in this thread. Even with a smaller pool of pokemon, it is entirely possible to have an interesting and diverse format. This is especially true in a randomized format where adding new sets to the mix from time to time can keep things interesting. Furthermore, the Pokemon themselves are just vehicles for your discovery of a strategy to use to win the game. Dynamax constricts your options here far, far more than a smaller pool of Pokemon would, and the way this argument gets used in this thread is pretty wild to me. This has the effect of removing some skill from the format that was present in past generations because you only really need to know how to play as and play against one playstyle right now to be effective. There is no strategic diversity in this. There may be a diverse number of ways you end up playing around it, but Dynamax itself is not a strategically diverse mechanic just because it can be used against itself. The looming threat of a massively stat boosted mon that's only around for the short term exerts far more pressure over your opponent for it's offensive capabilities, not defensive ones.

In summary, I trust the powers that be that would make these decisions in the past far more than I do a community suspect test. I do not like the precedent this suspect as a whole sets for random battles. If I end up getting reqs, I will vote to ban.
 
zuloon said:
Guess debates aren't for you either

I'm literally just debating your argument, why are you taking it as a personal attack?
Click to expand...

Hold up. I'm trying to find the debate. Lets see... over here?

zuloon said:
Let those of us who enjoy chaos enjoy random battles.

Can't believe you wrote over two thousand words just to make such a ridiculous argument.
Click to expand...

Nope, not there. How about... there? Is the debate over there?

zuloon said:
You basically wrote a paragraph without saying anything at all.
Click to expand...

Nope... nope I can't find the debate.

Just a thought; if you're gonna call people out for writing their opinions... can you write your own?

Here's the general list of reasons why I believe Dynamax is problematic in all forms of (singles) play:
  • Dynamax creates very flowchart-y games where the match is usually determined on who presses the win button first.
  • Max Airstream, Knuckle, and Ooze alone break far more Pokemon than they fix, and give already dangerous auto-win set up sweepers even more crazy power. (Necrozma DM and Xerneas were so bad they ruined it even in Ubers)
  • Counterplay to Dynamax is limited, usually requiring a sacrifice play or using your own Dynamax. Need I remind you max moves go through Protect for 1/4th damage? Or the moves and effects that don't work on max mons? Or the breaking of Choice locks?
  • Don't even get me started on Ditto.
Here's why I believe it's a problem in Randoms:
  • In a teambuilding format, you can at least recognize which Pokemon is a popular abuser and pack a counter for it. In Randoms, you don't know what you have until you have it, and you don't know what your opponent has until they have it. And there are a lot of potential abusers running around.
  • Rolling teams will always be luck based, but this has never been more true with Dynamax in play, as now non-Ubers can sweep a team lacking a counter to 1 very specific threat.
  • The lack of information in Randoms is crippling for counterplay to Dynamax. I've said this in the past, you are generally able to tell if they're saving their Dynamax for something in the back when they've only got 2 mons left. But with so many potential threats, which one is it? It could be anything. You don't know what it is yet. It could be anything. Heck a Noctowl could blow through a team unprepared for Max Airstream spam.
The arguments I've read for keeping Dynamax haven't convinced me into changing my mind on this, and here's why:
  • "It's fun" has never ever been a deciding factor in anything and is a non starter, end of. Moving on!
  • "Dynamax can check Dynamax". I think this is best described in Zephyr Dragon Lord's post:
    Zephyr Dragon Lord said:
    Dynamax is arguably even better at stopping something going out of control. Let's take that Zekrom from earlier that Dragon Danced. Can your regular mons survive that onslaught, even without them Dynamaxing? Probably not. Can a physically bulky Ground-type or a well-placed Max Wyrmwind slow it down? You bet it can! Even in Dynamax duels, only the frailest of mons doesn't get a chance to make a counterattack from a faster (and often stronger) opponent. There's also the strategy of using Max Guard in order to stall Dynamax turns, if the matchup looks real sour. Some matchups (like the one I posted earlier) end up using Dynamax to break walls. An especially cunning player can switch to a resist, or dynamax the wall in response, effectively halting the momentum gained from them breaking the wall in the first place.
    Click to expand...
    Unfortunately the good that comes from Dynamaxing defensively also confirms a point. That being Dynamaxing offensively is way, way too constricting on the flow of the game. If it's too out of control, a defensive Dynamax on a resist (if you're lucky to get one) is your only hope of tanking a hit. But by the time you've stalled their Dynamax, you're now without your own, and they still have their sweeper. A defensive Dynamax is just not going to be as overall useful as an offensive one. A revenge Dynamax is further evidence to this; you hit Dynamax on your sweeper after they've used theirs, and you roll their team right back.
  • "Banning Dynamax won't solve the problem of auto-losing to unbalanced teams". Of course not. RNG has its place in Randoms, no denying or skirting around that. However, as outlined by jorolelin:
    jorolelin said:
    What I feel gen 8 has done with dynamax is taken all the points to signal boundaries for different types of matches and moved them toward the center, greatly polarizing the average matchup. Before, the percentage markers for each of the 5 "tiers" were (0, 10, 30, 70, 90, 100) whereas now they feel something like (0, 25, 40, 60, 75, 100) (sorry if this didn't make sense). My point is that due to way greater number of potential dynamax sweepers/free wins if your opponent doesn't happen to have a reasonable counter (literally any life orb mon with a boosting move) the percentage of games that are "free" or at least "very tilted in someones favor" have increased and the number of games that feel even aren't.
    Click to expand...
    So it appears to me that this unbalanced teams issue is extending beyond your usual team of Ubers VS Untiereds. And remember that there are a portion of Ubers that can Dynamax on top of this. Speaking of which,
  • "Set up sweepers/Zacian are broken and Dynamax can help deal with them". Zacian is broken no matter what and should probably be looked at afterwards IMO. As for set up sweepers, the problem again is that they can get even stronger with Dynamax in play. They do have counters without it, and they're less specific to boot.
  • "It's all random; there's no guarantee anyone will get what you claim to be broken, so it's useless to craft scenarios". I've quoted Celever before; there's a lot of Pokemon available to abuse, not just the heavier hitters. The stuff I usually highlight are the super problematic ones that can easily be digested as "oh yeah, that's a problem."
I made this post size XXXXXXL on almost accident and it is way too late for me to keep typing. But yeah I'm firmly pro ban. Dynamax doesn't really have a place in any (singles) tier as no matter what other rules you put in place, it remains too good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top