Hi guys,
I put a lot of hours into Advance this season and wanted to make a resource in case anyone liked what they saw. I will not post teams to be copy and pasted - I want this to be a learning tool more than anything, which is why in addition to the teams I used/tested/thought of using, I will also be posting my thoughts on how I look at teambuilding and the metagame as a whole; hopefully that sparks some discussion since many successful players do things differently than myself. I hope other SPL participants will do the same, especially since ADV won't be in WCoP and we have several months before the next big tournament with it, Callous 4.
For newer players: my hope is that this ridiculously long drivel will let you understand how I like to do things, and that that in turn can help you discover your own style. I think it's important to have this out in the open for anyone who's trying to get a grasp on preparing for their own tournament games. It can be daunting when you see some tour players talking about how they perfectly read their opponent's tendencies (I personally find a lot of it to be hot air), and sometimes I'll get PMs regarding teams from less experienced players who are clearly trying to take their cue from that kind of thing - I'll mention a weakness to (insert top metagame threat) and they'll say that their opponent doesn't use it so they're ignoring it. I'm here to tell you that that you do not have to engage in such guesswork in order to succeed - in fact, it is my opinion that such guesswork leads to inconsistency, which is the opposite of what you want. It's the same thing as prediction - no matter how good you are, it is really, really tough to win consistently solely by reading your opponent. I believe the method of focusing on yourself is a more consistent, attainable way to success.
About me: I do not like to gamble in the matchup department - I like to at least try and cover everything to a reasonable degree, because one of the most awful feelings to me is when I don't even have the option of outplaying my opponent because I was excessively weak to a threat. This is not to say that I only like sticking with "safe" options - most of the teams I used are hopefully testament to that. However, there is a fine line between between being too afraid to divert from those overtly safe, standard options and being unnecessarily risky. Some element of matchup will always be present no matter what tier you play; of course you would like to consistently have good matchups, but since it is hard to get a significant natural advantage over a well-built team in Advance, I believe a team should at least be able to play around things. This is a big theme in how I like to approach things - believing in your own ability to play the game as opposed to hoping one of your Pokemon nearly auto-wins against the opponent. The power level is not high enough for this to work at all consistently in gen 3.
I tested every kind of team there is in this season of SPL, but I used SkarmBliss seven times in nine games. This is predictable on paper, but I like them because they work even when you know they're coming as long as you are smart about the specific countermeasures certain good players will bring to attempt to really shut them down, i.e. MagDol. That's why they as well as Tyranitar and friends are the best Pokemon around. As you'll see in the teams section, it wasn't as simple as "SkarmBliss to win" - it was a matter of what was doing best for the team. However, as good as they are, they aren't invincible. They can dance around most things with the right support and good play, but the aforementioned MagDol tends to lock them and their most common lineups (Tar Gar Pert + filler (Dug, Moltres)) down quite hard. They need to be taken into account, lest you get caught unprepared and taken advantage of for a loss you can do very little about due to your lack of tools to deal with them. My preferred method was not to try and play matchup guessing games with my opponent, but to support the SkarmBliss I anchored on with Pokemon that could pose a threat to common anti-SkarmBliss tactics, even without Skarm and its Spikes. Anti-anti-SkarmBliss, if you will. This makes it sound like SkarmBliss was the focal point of my teams each week - it wasn't. They just happened to fill the roles my team needed the best because they are top tier Pokemon. The idea about playing to your own strengths can be seen in trying to support them through their disadvantageous matchups, as opposed resorting to matchup guessing games where you debate on not using them because you are afraid of getting counterteamed.
Of course, I didn't go into each week hellbent on running another SkarmBliss armada - I even tried to shy away from them, if possible, just because it is natural to want to mix it up, but while it's a nice idea to keep your preferred style for later, it's not like just because you didn't use it earlier means your opponent is suddenly not going to be prepared for it in later weeks, especially if you're known for using it. That's why I ended up preferring to use them so I was sound defensively while making up for their potential flaws with the rest of the team. The thing about SkarmBliss is that while you don't need to shoot for autowins with MagDol in order to beat it, doing so consistently is not easy, and that kind of power is what draws me to them. As such, when I was testing other kinds of teams, I would not consider anything that could not reliably beat them - high-risk medium reward stuff wouldn't cut it. SkarmBliss and friends are the gold standard for a reason, and if a team cannot beat them it is not viable. Even if I did not fully expect them from my opponent, it is not acceptable to flail around without recourse against the most common style in the metagame. I do not like losing because I was completely helpless against top threats. This is why I like my teams to have a little bit of everything - I lost count of how many times I said that the goal of my team was to have my cake and eat it too. I want to have good offensive synergy and options to hit the opponent hard, but I also want a backbone to fall back on because Advance does not have such screaming levels of power and speed that you will be able to consistently just outrun and overwhelm everything. I want to be able to handle threats, but I don't want to attempt to wall everything perfectly, either. Not only is that unreliable given the diversity of threats we have, the kind of play those teams require is highly exploitable as well, so I want some flexibility and to be able to hit back.
This brings me to my next point - even though I prefer to use what I believe works best, this also does not mean that I live in a dream world of prep and matchup not existing. I fully recognize the importance of being aware of your own tendencies as well as your opponent's. However, I do not like the approach of over-analyzing your opponent's usage statistics and compromising one's team to try and gain an advantage. This is risky, unreliable guesswork. For example, let's take a statement often made when analyzing someone's usage stats: "x hasn't used y Pokemon yet." Does this mean x is likelier to continue to not use that Pokemon and that should be abused, or are you rolling the dice by assuming they're going to do that? How do you know they won't use it now specifically because they haven't used it thus far? You don't, and that's why I think it's better to not put too much stock in that kind of thing. For my own example: I didn't use a single Suicune or Claydol for my first eight games, then used both in my ninth. Was it more predictable that I would continue to not use Cune/Dol/both, seeing as I hadn't thus far (and don't very often), or that I would bring Cune/Dol/both specifically because I hadn't brought it thus far? I have seen many people argue the latter when talking (usually ex post facto) about how obvious someone's team choice was, and I think that train of thought is ridiculous. There were several other top-tier Pokemon I hadn't used all season, either - most notably Jirachi and Snorlax - who are just as much "not my usual style" and "good for this matchup" which in theory would make it equally obvious I would use them. For that matter, I didn't use a single Dragon Dance Tyranitar, either, or a single Choice Band Metagross. At this point, isn't it more reliable to just prepare for the metagame? While you're at it, wouldn't you want to be good against my usual style, just in case I bring it again? Sure, if there's a tendency you think you can exploit, go for it, but don't (unreasonably) compromise yourself to do so - it's just not necessary and doing so will often lead to frustratingly mixed results if that is the main thing you rely on.
Most of the time, you can never really know why the opponent brought what they did in previous games, which already makes the whole exercise of trying to extrapolate how they're going to tackle you a bit dicey to begin with. There are exceptions of course, like if someone brings Heracross against a known MagDol spammer, or CroCune against someone who likes standard defensive teams, or someone bringing a team they liked against someone. This stuff can be helpful in helping you make an informed decision team-wise; however, getting too caught up in it can definitely burn you. Against an opponent who is reasonably diverse, more often than not you will not be able to reliably, accurately "figure out" (quotations because I view it more as guessing with ex post facto justification) why they brought what they did - like, if someone brought Cloyster offense, was that meant to abuse someone's tendencies (possible) or just a strong team (also very possible)? Again, in some cases it's obvious, like against a MagDol spammer, but in most cases people who brought Cloy offense just brought it because it's a very strong team (as seen in the many times it popped up in the past two SPLs).
The reasoning could be anything from "it's just a team they liked" to "they brought x to counter y that they expected because of prior use of z." The latter operates under the risky assumption that the opponent will try to counter their style the way you expect them to, and as such it is incredibly difficult to consistently accurately predict how they are opponent is going to tackle your style, so if you put all your stock in that then things can very easily go wrong. No matter how logical you might think such a choice would be from them, you can't guarantee they are going to be thinking that way. You don't want to be saying "idk why he brought that, my regular teams destroyed it" after the game as a result of relying on your opponent thinking how you wanted them to.
Again, if it's apparent why your opponent made such team choices, it can be useful in helping you decide what to use, for sure. Facing someone who just goes with what they like? You can either do the same if your team is all-around solid. You want to be careful that their usual style doesn't naturally match up well against yours, because doing otherwise is silly, but the idea is sound. You can also try to get a leg up if what they tend to like has some potentially nasty weaknesses. However, you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket - is it really necessary to do so? Is it really worth it to suddenly be at a needless disadvantage if and when your opponent switches things up, which they are absolutely capable of as a good ADV player? I don't think so. Facing someone who tries to get a leg up team-wise on their opponents? Maybe you should mix it up a bit, but this doesn't mean you have to completely abandon the metagame as we know it. Facing someone who has a defined style often exploited by a certain threat? Go right ahead and bring that Heracross or that CroCune, but keep in mind the importance of the supporting cast, which you will need to handle the rest of the metagame if and when you do not get that matchup where your big guy isn't going to steamroll.
As for abusing tendencies, I'm all for it - for example, if someone rarely/never uses Milotic, it might be a great call to use MixTar, MixMence and/or MixPert. If I have those guys and don't face Milo, I'm happy. However, I'm not going out of my way to make a ridiculous team that relies entirely on not facing Milo at all - I'm using a team that's generally effective, because the opponent could absolutely bring one and it would be stupid to lose to a top metagame threat because I felt I needed to rely on matchup more than my own play. I should be able to be effective even in the face of Milo; this is why I like Cloyster, who can punish Milo with Spikes while avoiding getting trapped by Magneton, dumping on Claydol and even packing offense with boom. Milo Skarm teams can't afford Gengar so Cloy can even run Rapid Spin to reset Skarm's pressure. Have cake, eat too.
So many times over the years I have seen "no way he brings this Poke" only to face it at lead. You can have your preferences on what you'd like to face, of course, but be prepared for anything - this is generally my standard and I think it is reasonable. Being unpredictable is nice, but I don't think the differences in methods used to deal with certain teams are so vast that one needs to pick and choose, so I don't think one needs to sacrifice team quality just to fulfill some sort of self-imposed diversity quota that their opponents might not even take into account. In week one, I was testing a CurseLax team - this is the last thing anyone would expect from me. However, just because it's not expected doesn't necessarily mean it's a good choice, and it consistently faltered. The Hariyama I ended up using was not expected either, but the key difference was that it was far more generally effective.
Relying on this guess-heavy approach too much takes the ability to actually play the game out of your hands, which is not my preference. I think it is best to strike a balance between awareness of tendencies and still making a team that works against the metagame. You can never know when x player will completely surprise you and bring y Pokemon/style that they usually don't. However, you can know that your team covers the metagame at large, which I think is crucial in a best of one environment, especially because a good Advance player can use anything. I prefer this reliance on myself and playing my own game rather than rolling the dice and being reliant on what the opponent does. I'm not saying all my teams are perfectly crafted entities, equal at worst in all matchups, allowing for the sole factor in determining a game's outcome to be my playing - that'd be ridiculous. However, I would never go into a game absolutely praying I wouldn't face something, as I don't believe a good Advance team needs to do that. I'm also not saying that my method is the one correct way - the continued success of players who disagree and succeed with different approaches is testament to that. Finally, not all teams are equal in terms of risk, and I'm definitely not saying you should never take a chance with your teams; I just want to stress the importance of thinking it through.
One last thing I want to say on this subject in case anyone has the wrong idea: I am not accusing anyone in this SPL pool of ruining the metagame with their threat-neglecting cheesy matchup-fishing teams. On the contrary, I thought this year was excellent in that regard, and in fact I'll be talking about some of my favorite teams others used later on. The reason for this lengthy diatribe is because I want this thread to be a resource for anyone willing to learn, and as mentioned earlier, I see a lot of newer players holding themselves back by going about their team choices in such a risky manner, so I thought it would be useful if they could read about what's worked for me. However, my goal is not to inspire a bunch of mini-mes - I want players to shape their own identity. As I said in the previous paragraph, my way is not the only one that works; I have debated this topic with many other successful players who see things differently, and their ways are just as valid as mine.
While the teams I used were for the most part built by me (not about my ego - the competitive move is to use the best team for the job, and if that was someone else's, so be it; I tested many teams from other players, they just didn't happen to feel right), it'd be dishonest to claim that my teams were a product of my effort alone - I was lucky enough to have a terrific crew in my corner, always willing to discuss the 7-10+ teams I rifled through each week (with the exception of the one week where I think I breached 30), listen to my complaints about the metagame/everything being unviable/best of 1, test, and above all reassure me that despite my greatest fears, my opponent would not run more than 6 Pokemon. An infinite amount of thanks goes to ABR, Star and especially Asta, as well as Tony for making sure my head didn't explode and giving me permission to watch a movie instead of building even more teams. Also thanks to the tests I got from the rest of the Ugly Swans - pasy, Sunny and UD - and everyone I played on ladder.
About me: I do not like to gamble in the matchup department - I like to at least try and cover everything to a reasonable degree, because one of the most awful feelings to me is when I don't even have the option of outplaying my opponent because I was excessively weak to a threat. This is not to say that I only like sticking with "safe" options - most of the teams I used are hopefully testament to that. However, there is a fine line between between being too afraid to divert from those overtly safe, standard options and being unnecessarily risky. Some element of matchup will always be present no matter what tier you play; of course you would like to consistently have good matchups, but since it is hard to get a significant natural advantage over a well-built team in Advance, I believe a team should at least be able to play around things. This is a big theme in how I like to approach things - believing in your own ability to play the game as opposed to hoping one of your Pokemon nearly auto-wins against the opponent. The power level is not high enough for this to work at all consistently in gen 3.
I tested every kind of team there is in this season of SPL, but I used SkarmBliss seven times in nine games. This is predictable on paper, but I like them because they work even when you know they're coming as long as you are smart about the specific countermeasures certain good players will bring to attempt to really shut them down, i.e. MagDol. That's why they as well as Tyranitar and friends are the best Pokemon around. As you'll see in the teams section, it wasn't as simple as "SkarmBliss to win" - it was a matter of what was doing best for the team. However, as good as they are, they aren't invincible. They can dance around most things with the right support and good play, but the aforementioned MagDol tends to lock them and their most common lineups (Tar Gar Pert + filler (Dug, Moltres)) down quite hard. They need to be taken into account, lest you get caught unprepared and taken advantage of for a loss you can do very little about due to your lack of tools to deal with them. My preferred method was not to try and play matchup guessing games with my opponent, but to support the SkarmBliss I anchored on with Pokemon that could pose a threat to common anti-SkarmBliss tactics, even without Skarm and its Spikes. Anti-anti-SkarmBliss, if you will. This makes it sound like SkarmBliss was the focal point of my teams each week - it wasn't. They just happened to fill the roles my team needed the best because they are top tier Pokemon. The idea about playing to your own strengths can be seen in trying to support them through their disadvantageous matchups, as opposed resorting to matchup guessing games where you debate on not using them because you are afraid of getting counterteamed.
Of course, I didn't go into each week hellbent on running another SkarmBliss armada - I even tried to shy away from them, if possible, just because it is natural to want to mix it up, but while it's a nice idea to keep your preferred style for later, it's not like just because you didn't use it earlier means your opponent is suddenly not going to be prepared for it in later weeks, especially if you're known for using it. That's why I ended up preferring to use them so I was sound defensively while making up for their potential flaws with the rest of the team. The thing about SkarmBliss is that while you don't need to shoot for autowins with MagDol in order to beat it, doing so consistently is not easy, and that kind of power is what draws me to them. As such, when I was testing other kinds of teams, I would not consider anything that could not reliably beat them - high-risk medium reward stuff wouldn't cut it. SkarmBliss and friends are the gold standard for a reason, and if a team cannot beat them it is not viable. Even if I did not fully expect them from my opponent, it is not acceptable to flail around without recourse against the most common style in the metagame. I do not like losing because I was completely helpless against top threats. This is why I like my teams to have a little bit of everything - I lost count of how many times I said that the goal of my team was to have my cake and eat it too. I want to have good offensive synergy and options to hit the opponent hard, but I also want a backbone to fall back on because Advance does not have such screaming levels of power and speed that you will be able to consistently just outrun and overwhelm everything. I want to be able to handle threats, but I don't want to attempt to wall everything perfectly, either. Not only is that unreliable given the diversity of threats we have, the kind of play those teams require is highly exploitable as well, so I want some flexibility and to be able to hit back.
This brings me to my next point - even though I prefer to use what I believe works best, this also does not mean that I live in a dream world of prep and matchup not existing. I fully recognize the importance of being aware of your own tendencies as well as your opponent's. However, I do not like the approach of over-analyzing your opponent's usage statistics and compromising one's team to try and gain an advantage. This is risky, unreliable guesswork. For example, let's take a statement often made when analyzing someone's usage stats: "x hasn't used y Pokemon yet." Does this mean x is likelier to continue to not use that Pokemon and that should be abused, or are you rolling the dice by assuming they're going to do that? How do you know they won't use it now specifically because they haven't used it thus far? You don't, and that's why I think it's better to not put too much stock in that kind of thing. For my own example: I didn't use a single Suicune or Claydol for my first eight games, then used both in my ninth. Was it more predictable that I would continue to not use Cune/Dol/both, seeing as I hadn't thus far (and don't very often), or that I would bring Cune/Dol/both specifically because I hadn't brought it thus far? I have seen many people argue the latter when talking (usually ex post facto) about how obvious someone's team choice was, and I think that train of thought is ridiculous. There were several other top-tier Pokemon I hadn't used all season, either - most notably Jirachi and Snorlax - who are just as much "not my usual style" and "good for this matchup" which in theory would make it equally obvious I would use them. For that matter, I didn't use a single Dragon Dance Tyranitar, either, or a single Choice Band Metagross. At this point, isn't it more reliable to just prepare for the metagame? While you're at it, wouldn't you want to be good against my usual style, just in case I bring it again? Sure, if there's a tendency you think you can exploit, go for it, but don't (unreasonably) compromise yourself to do so - it's just not necessary and doing so will often lead to frustratingly mixed results if that is the main thing you rely on.
Most of the time, you can never really know why the opponent brought what they did in previous games, which already makes the whole exercise of trying to extrapolate how they're going to tackle you a bit dicey to begin with. There are exceptions of course, like if someone brings Heracross against a known MagDol spammer, or CroCune against someone who likes standard defensive teams, or someone bringing a team they liked against someone. This stuff can be helpful in helping you make an informed decision team-wise; however, getting too caught up in it can definitely burn you. Against an opponent who is reasonably diverse, more often than not you will not be able to reliably, accurately "figure out" (quotations because I view it more as guessing with ex post facto justification) why they brought what they did - like, if someone brought Cloyster offense, was that meant to abuse someone's tendencies (possible) or just a strong team (also very possible)? Again, in some cases it's obvious, like against a MagDol spammer, but in most cases people who brought Cloy offense just brought it because it's a very strong team (as seen in the many times it popped up in the past two SPLs).
The reasoning could be anything from "it's just a team they liked" to "they brought x to counter y that they expected because of prior use of z." The latter operates under the risky assumption that the opponent will try to counter their style the way you expect them to, and as such it is incredibly difficult to consistently accurately predict how they are opponent is going to tackle your style, so if you put all your stock in that then things can very easily go wrong. No matter how logical you might think such a choice would be from them, you can't guarantee they are going to be thinking that way. You don't want to be saying "idk why he brought that, my regular teams destroyed it" after the game as a result of relying on your opponent thinking how you wanted them to.
Again, if it's apparent why your opponent made such team choices, it can be useful in helping you decide what to use, for sure. Facing someone who just goes with what they like? You can either do the same if your team is all-around solid. You want to be careful that their usual style doesn't naturally match up well against yours, because doing otherwise is silly, but the idea is sound. You can also try to get a leg up if what they tend to like has some potentially nasty weaknesses. However, you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket - is it really necessary to do so? Is it really worth it to suddenly be at a needless disadvantage if and when your opponent switches things up, which they are absolutely capable of as a good ADV player? I don't think so. Facing someone who tries to get a leg up team-wise on their opponents? Maybe you should mix it up a bit, but this doesn't mean you have to completely abandon the metagame as we know it. Facing someone who has a defined style often exploited by a certain threat? Go right ahead and bring that Heracross or that CroCune, but keep in mind the importance of the supporting cast, which you will need to handle the rest of the metagame if and when you do not get that matchup where your big guy isn't going to steamroll.
As for abusing tendencies, I'm all for it - for example, if someone rarely/never uses Milotic, it might be a great call to use MixTar, MixMence and/or MixPert. If I have those guys and don't face Milo, I'm happy. However, I'm not going out of my way to make a ridiculous team that relies entirely on not facing Milo at all - I'm using a team that's generally effective, because the opponent could absolutely bring one and it would be stupid to lose to a top metagame threat because I felt I needed to rely on matchup more than my own play. I should be able to be effective even in the face of Milo; this is why I like Cloyster, who can punish Milo with Spikes while avoiding getting trapped by Magneton, dumping on Claydol and even packing offense with boom. Milo Skarm teams can't afford Gengar so Cloy can even run Rapid Spin to reset Skarm's pressure. Have cake, eat too.
So many times over the years I have seen "no way he brings this Poke" only to face it at lead. You can have your preferences on what you'd like to face, of course, but be prepared for anything - this is generally my standard and I think it is reasonable. Being unpredictable is nice, but I don't think the differences in methods used to deal with certain teams are so vast that one needs to pick and choose, so I don't think one needs to sacrifice team quality just to fulfill some sort of self-imposed diversity quota that their opponents might not even take into account. In week one, I was testing a CurseLax team - this is the last thing anyone would expect from me. However, just because it's not expected doesn't necessarily mean it's a good choice, and it consistently faltered. The Hariyama I ended up using was not expected either, but the key difference was that it was far more generally effective.
Relying on this guess-heavy approach too much takes the ability to actually play the game out of your hands, which is not my preference. I think it is best to strike a balance between awareness of tendencies and still making a team that works against the metagame. You can never know when x player will completely surprise you and bring y Pokemon/style that they usually don't. However, you can know that your team covers the metagame at large, which I think is crucial in a best of one environment, especially because a good Advance player can use anything. I prefer this reliance on myself and playing my own game rather than rolling the dice and being reliant on what the opponent does. I'm not saying all my teams are perfectly crafted entities, equal at worst in all matchups, allowing for the sole factor in determining a game's outcome to be my playing - that'd be ridiculous. However, I would never go into a game absolutely praying I wouldn't face something, as I don't believe a good Advance team needs to do that. I'm also not saying that my method is the one correct way - the continued success of players who disagree and succeed with different approaches is testament to that. Finally, not all teams are equal in terms of risk, and I'm definitely not saying you should never take a chance with your teams; I just want to stress the importance of thinking it through.
One last thing I want to say on this subject in case anyone has the wrong idea: I am not accusing anyone in this SPL pool of ruining the metagame with their threat-neglecting cheesy matchup-fishing teams. On the contrary, I thought this year was excellent in that regard, and in fact I'll be talking about some of my favorite teams others used later on. The reason for this lengthy diatribe is because I want this thread to be a resource for anyone willing to learn, and as mentioned earlier, I see a lot of newer players holding themselves back by going about their team choices in such a risky manner, so I thought it would be useful if they could read about what's worked for me. However, my goal is not to inspire a bunch of mini-mes - I want players to shape their own identity. As I said in the previous paragraph, my way is not the only one that works; I have debated this topic with many other successful players who see things differently, and their ways are just as valid as mine.
While the teams I used were for the most part built by me (not about my ego - the competitive move is to use the best team for the job, and if that was someone else's, so be it; I tested many teams from other players, they just didn't happen to feel right), it'd be dishonest to claim that my teams were a product of my effort alone - I was lucky enough to have a terrific crew in my corner, always willing to discuss the 7-10+ teams I rifled through each week (with the exception of the one week where I think I breached 30), listen to my complaints about the metagame/everything being unviable/best of 1, test, and above all reassure me that despite my greatest fears, my opponent would not run more than 6 Pokemon. An infinite amount of thanks goes to ABR, Star and especially Asta, as well as Tony for making sure my head didn't explode and giving me permission to watch a movie instead of building even more teams. Also thanks to the tests I got from the rest of the Ugly Swans - pasy, Sunny and UD - and everyone I played on ladder.
The teams
Watchmen






vs. Conflict
Hariyama is awesome because it absolutely shits on MagDol, allowing me to run Skarm safely. It also easily counters MixTar, which is highly useful since I have Swampert as opposed to the standard Yama team's Milotic. Speaking of that standard Yama team, which can also run SpDef Zap > Milo as zf alluded to in his excellent post, I considered it, as is natural when Hariyama is the focal point. It is a solid team, and it feels wrong to call it slow and weak, but I wanted to be faster and stronger, so there you go. It was mainly a playstyle thing - I preferred to be less reactive and more proactive. This meant my beloved Modest Zap. I also preferred to have a water over Claydol to help against Metagross and Salamence, and it couldn't be Milotic, as otherwise Aerodactyl would rip me apart, so it was good old Swampert. Finally, my handy-dandy physical Tyranitar made the team more confident against CM Jirachi and Celebi while providing the last line of defense against DDers, as it always does. It also makes the team more offensive, as it consistently threatens the opponent's special sponge and proceeds to put a ton of pressure on their team in conjunction with Spikes. Some people said this team struggles with Skarmory, but I don't think so - it has plenty of resilience between WishBliss and RefreshPert as well as a lot of pressure from Knock Yama and Spikes + Modest Roar Zap and 4 attack Tar.
Miles Davis - Bitches Brew






vs. dekzeh
I love this team. It has constant, synergetic offensive pressure with the double mixed attack that instantly threatens a ton of teams, it has the speed to reliably clean up against faster teams thanks to Aero, and it has great defensive synergy without easing up on the gas thanks to the amazing combination of MetaMence. Skarm doesn't just Spike but contributes offense in its own way with Taunt to shut down opposing defensive guys, and even the dedicated wall Blissey has Thunderbolt to assist in beating down opposing Skarm while helping a lot against Suicune. Speaking of Bliss, it goes such a long way since it lets me run an aggressive team without fearing the strong, fast special attackers that most aggressive teams are fearful of. Sing also could've been quite cool here, as sleeping something would've been highly abusable by Blissey's hard-hitting teammates.
Down






vs. pasy_g
Similar idea to the above, except this time the offense consists of the incredibly dangerous BP Zap + Breloom combo. Also makes use of another excellent combo, the lovely triple fight Loom set paired with Pursuit Tar I posted about here. Tar is BlackGlasses to help against SpDef Gar. This also let me run a Blissey set I like quite a lot: SBoiled / SToss / TWave / Counter, with max HP and Defense. I was originally gonna run Roar Zap again but was semi-concerned with Celebi, given Breloom and all, which prompted ABR to make the excellent suggestion of Drill Peck. Toxic Metagross to mess up offensive Swampert. While I liked Meta for its extra offense and mainly its Snorlax checking, I strongly considered Swampert, and still think it's a fine choice as long as you can reliably play around Lax; Pert notably helps pivot around Fire Blast/Brick Break from Tyranitar and Salamence while also assisting against opposing Pert and slowly weakening opposing Skarm. There's always going to be a bit of defensive give and take on this kind of team, but the offense is reliable and powerful enough to make it worth it.
Mamba Mentality






vs. Teclis
Inspired by an old team from my buddy Jirachee. I also wanted to try a SpDef Swampert, inspired by a set Asta used and messed me up with more times than I could count, as an anti-MixPert measure. I knew I would still use Bold, but I wound up getting way too paranoid about tanking opposing Band Salamence and didn't invest quite as much SpDef as I should've. Speaking of, BandMence is such a monster and I really love using him, especially with WishBliss - I've been a huge fan of this combo ever since 2013, when I spammed g80/gene's team to high heaven (second team here). Finally, my trusty 4 attack Tyranitar rounds the team out, providing defensive security while keeping up the offense, although CB was considered and is definitely worthwhile.
Bojack Horseman penultimate episodes






vs. Altina
I like this style of offense a lot, but as I was testing, I got increasingly paranoid of the matchup against SkarmBliss. It just took one Spike for even bulky Dugtrio to be ruined by Blissey and therefore for the entire game to be lost; it is difficult to make absolutely sure you won't allow that Spike to go up before you can get Dug in on Bliss, even with BP Zap providing momentum. (Spin on Starmie doesn't solve anything.) I didn't want to stake the entire game on that, so I decided to use the dumbest Dug of all time - surviving Modest Ice Beam after a Spike. This of course means seriously cutting into Speed...but the benefit is more important than quite literally anything else.
Something else this team makes use of is specially defensive Celebi. It is an excellent special wall, but unlike Blissey, it checks Snorlax and maintains momentum with Baton Pass. Cele also has great synergy with Starmie, as Mie backs it up against the Moltres it can't wall while fully appreciating the benefits of Cele's Leech - for example, while Mie tends to struggle against Skarm on its own, if Skarm comes into Cele's Leech then Mie can come in and reliably keep Spikes off while remaining at full health, crucially out of Dugtrio range. Cele baiting other Dug for my own Dug is also useful of course.
I'd have loved to have run faster, more aggressive Pert and Tar sets, but I felt I needed the defensive security of the tank and four attack sets, respectively.
Tama also used this team in semis against zom.
2004 ALCS: Red Sox vs. Yankees






vs. CyberOdin
Not winning any awards for creativity with this team, but I believe that you can't force that kind of thing, especially not on a weekly best-of-one must-win basis, so rather than bashing my head against the wall trying to make something less inspired work, I tried to optimize something that is as proven as they come. WishBliss usually isn't seen on this team, but as always, it fits really well, reinforcing its already-solid defenses against potentially perilous chip damage. I also got to use my preferred SpDef Gengar, one that eschews +1 Salamence bulk and focuses entirely on SpDef EVs so that it can still outrun +Speed base 100s, making it more of an offensive threat while maintaining its primary defensive purpose.
Pendulum






vs. marcop
This team has a ton of great combinations: WishBliss + CBMence, WishBliss + defensive Meta, Mence + Meta...and that's just with three Pokemon! I also really love the multi-layered physical defense here - as if the aforementioned trio wasn't annoying enough, especially in conjunction with SkarmMag, they're also paired with one of the most oppressive Pokemon for physical attacking teams to deal with, Wisp Moltres.
Now, it's exceedingly rare that I don't use Tyranitar, and that's because I love Sand Stream, which keeps Pokemon like the otherwise-irritating Snorlax in line and really makes Spikes stick. It'll come as no surprise that I was considering Tar here (four attacks, what else? defensive security, offense, etc.), both over Moltres and Magneton (dropping the latter would require Mence to switch to a mix set). However, I decided that as great as that Tar set is, I wanted the team to be faster and stronger; Molt and Mag together allowed for the best form of that. I just had to make sure that I could handle potentially not having sand, and this does.
Toxic Metagross once again to assist with offensive Swampert.
I actually built this team at the very beginning of the season, and in addition to the Tar variants, I even tossed up the idea of a version with Gengar > Magneton (with MixMence > CB), which I still think is worthwhile.
Untitled






vs. z0mOG
I built this team in September; it was originally more of a fun thing with SD Molt + RD King, but it eventually turned into something legit as hell, and I think it's one of my favorite teams ever - the synergy is firing on all cylinders. Now, once again, there's no Tyranitar. Usually, special offense teams lean heavily on Sand Stream because it turns Snorlax from unkillable behemoth to slightly irritating Poke you'll have to hit a few times to bring down. However, sometimes it feels like it's just there to set up sand, and can feel kind of wasteful. With Protect Metagross as the rock resist alongside Wisp Gengar and even Leech Celebi, Lax is handled. We've also got the same Dugtrio as the Starmie team for the same reasons and it still works beautifully, especially with the double BP. As for Kingdra, it is an absolute monster. I like it fast so it's an immediate threat against midrange offense stuff without needing to set up, but it's still got bulk to survive +2 Salamence HP Flying so can safely RD when it's at +1. Lum Berry is the usual item on Dra, but not having to deal with sand is all kinds of useful, especially in that Mence scenario.
Captain America: The Winter Soldier






vs. CALLOUS
A cross between my MagDol team and Star's, blending the delightful Bold Roar Suicune on mine that thwarts Snorlax and CroCune with the Spikes on his. I made the Claydol incredibly fast to help against +Speed MixTar as well as getting the jump on most offensive Suicune. I also used Impish Skarmory to survive CB Metagross' Explosion. My third CBMence + WishBliss of the season...what a combination. Also, my third Tyranitar-less team - in a row, no less. I was definitely feeling the pressure against Snorlax a little more this time around but the team has the tools and then some to be just fine.
So that's the nine. Out of interest, here's the usage from them against the viability rankings through B- rank (as they currently are, they might change after SPL). Again, this doesn't tell the whole story of how I went about things - I tested a lot of teams with many different Pokemon, some of which you'll see in the unused teams section. This is just what I felt comfortable bringing to nine best-of-ones, and the must-win nature of SPL meant I felt I had very little room for error. Having said that, in the end what I brought is the most important part, so let's take a look:
S RANK

A+ RANK



A RANK



A- RANK






B+ RANK

B RANK






B- RANK






Bonus: C ranks used



You be the judge. This isn't a thorough statistical analysis or anything, but my notes: not a single Jirachi is pretty nuts - I actually think it's one of the best Pokemon in the tier and like the teams it tends to be on. Also, zero Snorlax stems from the fact that I don't tend to favor the styles of teams it's used on. Same with Heracross and Gyarados. I do like some Spikes stuff with Milotic, I'm a fan of Jolteon and I absolutely love Flygon, but I just didn't end up feeling anything with them (as much as other teams). I wanted to use Cloy quite a bit, but could never quite make anything as all-around reliable with it as I'd prefer. I have a bit of a reputation for disliking Forretress, so no surprises there. Lastly, I'm not alone in thinking the team styles Porygon2 best fits on tend to be strapped enough for slots these days without it adding the free opportunity for opposing Metagross and Snorlax to come in and apply pressure; I tend to prefer the Cele/Hera + Dug combo if I really want to remove opposing Dug. The ability to so perfectly counter non-CB Salamence is really nice, though, and of course Dug doesn't fit on more physical offense teams. That said, maybe P2 for BL is a discussion we'll have soon.
Unused teams
I have a lot more teams I like than tournament games in which to use them - when I narrowed down each week it wasn't necessarily because I disliked the others (though that certainly happened too), but because I had to pick the team I liked most. Here are some that I would have liked to have been able to bring.
I like this form of physical offense quite a bit. Usually, you'll see an Endeavor Swampert in place of Claydol, but I think Dol does a ton of really terrific stuff here:
- Removing Spikes is so, so, so good for Snorlax.
- It is 3HKOed by HP Grass instead of OHKOed.
- It makes the team go from two Explosions to three.
- It is not Dugtrio weak.
- With heavy Speed investment, it helps against Pokemon that usually threaten this style - it dumpsters MixTar and can blow up EndPert + many offensive Suicunes.
Though not seen as a traditional member of CM spam, I think Zapdos is worth using on it for a few reasons:
- It provides a reliable way of getting Dugtrio in on Blissey.
- It threatens to OHKO Skarmory, preventing those incredibly obnoxious early Spikes.
- It provides an edge in the offense matchup; we all know how excellent it is at beating down Snorlax, and that makes the CMers threaten to sweep at almost a moment's notice.
As much as I love Zapdos, and as great as he usually is on spikeless/mixed offense, sometimes the Blissey factor really gets on my nerves, so I decided to employ Weezing, who lured and Exploded on obnoxious Pokemon like Milotic, Celebi, Zapdos and the aforementioned Bliss. I also liked the extra degree of physical backbone it provided.
My aforementioned MagDol team. I like it because it has genuine pressure right from the start of the game, as opposed to the MagDol teams that go all-in on supporting a sweeper that "just wins." It also has really solid defensive synergy. WishBliss + CBMence, of course. bro fist used it last SPL vs. marcop, and marcop used in turn this SPL vs. Teclis.
If you watch my stuff on YouTube, you'll have seen these in action. They're ultimately quite flawed, but they have some great offensive-defensive synergy combinations and are a hell of a lot of fun. The original idea was that mixed attackers are strong but hate Milotic, so Cloyster sets up on it and doesn't care about Magneton and/or Claydol. I messed around with a Smeargle variant because I liked the idea of its faster pace.
I experimented with many permutations of a more full-blown rain assault, including Heracross, many Jirachi sets and UD's Sub RD Cune, but I didn't manage to flesh those out as much. Zapdos is the more straightforward/consistent approach, but Gengar can cause a lot of havoc as a psuedo-suicide lead with its ridiculous bag of tricks.
Last edited: