Voting no action in the first question. The second question is more along the lines of "if it HAS to be changed, how do you want it to be changed?"
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Announcement np: SV OU Suspect Process, Round 1 - Oops!...I Did It Again
- Thread starter Finchinator
- Start date
- Status
First and foremost,rng.
If any player feels like grinding 200 games to get around top10 like I did,he’s gonna figure out the patterns of each and every optimal counter-tera option.
It’s not like I’m giving the hard speech about what one must do,but like what one always naturally eventually does.
Realistically speaking,if you made a team without in depth consideration of narrowing down the tera weakness ,you might wanna check your team again.
But gen9 has a sort of fresh-started monster pool and that alone makes it too hard for casual players to learn what to spam.
I know,I know,ppl are saying casual players wouldn’t mind the rng.
But the truth is even if you play the 1k meta,ppl still try really hard to win and they talk stuff that makes them sound like dead serious about the game.
This really just comes down to how 1k players are misinformed by their own knowledge,I think the most of ’em actually can seize a higher win rate if they get to preview opposing tera types.
Reserving tera and casting off the fog of war save the fun factor while bring down the rng,case closed your honor
Last edited:
Every time someone mentions Dynamax or SS OU in one of these threads, a poor baby Finchinator dies in its sleep. There is a lot of discussion about what is broken with Tera now or what WILL BE broken with Tera in the future but that is, truly, all meaningless. It has been made perfectly clear that Tera will be revisited in the future, but regardless, that is not how suspect tests should be viewed at ALL. We should not worry about hypothetical metagames that may or may not have broken Pokemon in them. Appealing to past generations is an endeavor completely and utterly meaningless in every way shape or form. Comments about SS OU being not fun are not, in any way, particularly helpful or relevant. SS OU is not bad because it didn't have Tera. Further, saying banning Tera will make the game more stall-heavy or less fast-paced are equally as unnecessary; there are both fast-paced and stall-heavy metagames that do not have Tera. Appealing to these subjective quantifiers misses the entire point of this entire suspect.
Tera is a mechanic unlike any that has ever been seen in the history of this game. It defies any comparison to any other mechanic. Saying "well, it's not as broken as dynamax" misses the fundamentals of what Tera even is. Aside from the STAB boost, Tera is not as cut and dry as "my Pokemon get big and stats go up." It's nuanced, and that is why it may be the most controversial suspect of recent years.
I mean, look at the list of common Tera that Finchinator posted. You have Pokemon with upwards of FIVE or SIX common tera types. I find it baffling that people can look at that list and not feel that the mechanic is wildly unhealthy.
That said, the part that is unhealthy about Tera is NOT the guessing *what* type the Pokemon will be but *when* they will become that type. For this reason, I do not think showing Tera on team preview will accomplish anything at all at fixing what is broken about Terastalization. If anything this just leads to more 50/50s, where you have to guess between move A or move B in order to predict whether or not your opponent will tera. Knowing what type your opponent will tera into doesn't really fix the mechanic very much at all, and this is a point I have not really seen much discussion on despite this option appearing to be the most popular out of the bunch. Do I prefer it to what we have now? Sure, but it's just a band-aid solution in my opinion. I think Freezai says it best in his video, "You aren't going to lose a game because your opponent's Hippowdown had Heavy-Duty Boots instead of Leftovers. Tera on the other hand is really strong and high variance."
A Pokemon's typing is so fundamental to it's identity, that changing it on the fly is more than just a simple buff. Those five listed Tera types for Garganacl? Those aren't just five different *sets,* they are five different *Pokemon.* This is the difference between Tera and other mechanics- it is fundamentally changing the game-state in a completely different way, and any argument that does not honor that fact is doing this suspect test a complete disservice.
In my opinion, the overall best option is the "Only the First Pokemon in your Order Can Tera." This really whittles down the potential surprise factor 50-50s while still allowing players to utilize Tera in the builder. Further, I think this will promote players to use Tera in a more purposeful way. It seems the way most people use Tera now is highly contextual based on the match-up or whatever is happening in the battle. It may be more benficial for offense than defense but I disagree; in my experience it's rare to use a Tera to hard counter and opponent's Tera- the mechanic has far too much variance for that to be a reliable thing anyway. Plus, it being more beneficial for offense isn't in-of-itself a bad thing.
Finally, I want to talk about the argument "eventually the metagame will settle and you'll be able to guess what Tera type your opponent will have based on whats popular." This is a really bad argument and completely misses how metagames evolve. If Tera Normal Dragonite become standard, it will absolutely eventually become the norm to run a Dragonite set that gets the surprise on the usual Normal-type Dragonite counters. It's a vicious cycle. With a mechanic like Terastalization (or however tf you spell it) there really is no room for a metagame to settle.
I really want this mechanic to work because on paper is can lead to some cool things, but gosh in its present form I just do not find it very fun at all, and I highly doubt that showing types on team preview will fix that.
Attachments
Last edited:
Okay, trying to get reqs and learning that getting an 80% glicko is way harder than it looks, I'd like to note something:
A lot of people have noted how powerful espathra and dnite are,in part due to tera typing (though I still contend espathra abuses shed tail much better). But... am I crazy for thinking the unaware defensive mons are good enough to beat those two out? Dondozo hardwalls dnite in my experience, and skeledirge does plenty into it as well.
A lot of people have noted how powerful espathra and dnite are,in part due to tera typing (though I still contend espathra abuses shed tail much better). But... am I crazy for thinking the unaware defensive mons are good enough to beat those two out? Dondozo hardwalls dnite in my experience, and skeledirge does plenty into it as well.
i believe every unaware mon loses to espratha, dnite will lose but i wouldn't expect a priority spammer to mu well into extremely bulky mons like dozo. DIrge loses to band if that's a thing
I don't believe skeledirge does, but I may be wrong, re:espratha. Unless you bring it in after like 2x calm minds, but I don't see how that happens without shed tail, even accounting for tera
Well,this is more of a specific scenario where one Pokemon meets another.
Point is if there really were op comps out there ,they would get banned in the future.
But my biggest concern is that if we don’t let ppl experience the fully informed meta, they might not have the same idea.
What if one learned how to deal with the tera comps unequivocally at ease after they got to see those type choices, one might have a second thought.
There is a blurred boundary inside of ppl’s mind,which they just halfway care about it or halfway don’t know if they care about it.
As far as the pole goes, it’s gonna be more and more about how deeply ppl actually care about it.
Maybe 20%or50% the ones who’s blaming tera for their loses would completely change their opinion after several minor trial runs with adjustment,you never know.
Tera ou changes are not exactly directly interest related to me by definition becuz u know, I basically only grind current ndag.
Not to mention the grind is done,now I just play for fun.
Even if I didn’t have enough time to play gen8 becuz I was so distracted by other things in life,I did have my own objective opinion on gmax issue,.
I was thinking that if ppl must pre-decide which Pokemon to gmax before they queue up,they will feel much better about the whole meta as if they were reducing the overwhelming prediction.
And that way most teams would’ve just shape themselves into a specific pattern for optimization.
Tera is like something in between of mega and gmax,it could be used for approaching the benefits of both of these two ideas .
A straight ban against all megas at gen6or7 would be a overkill for sure,banning all teras could also be one just like that.
The problem of gmax is that it does not so called ‘evolve’ a pokemon,its more like a 3-turn z happy hour plus.
So gamx is more of a really bonkers z move.
But tera does add a sorta kinda ‘evolve’ or ‘variations’ factor to the targeted Pokemon.
Try to imagine the difference between a regular dugtrio getting steel type and an alola dugtrio getting arena trap,they share the same monumental difference against a z happy hour boost.
Last edited:
My opinion on tera has gone in pretty much every direction, but I am going to be voting for either ban tera, or restrict it to 1 mon per team.
With tera, there are 3 questions you have to consider with every game:
1. What is going to tera?
2. When is the opponent going to tera?
3. What is their tera type or potential tera types?
The team preview option handles the third question, and I believe that it is accurate to say that showing tera type at preview is a step in the right direction. So for that reason alone, I'm not against having that option and slightly okay with it being the potential end result. The question after that however is how long should we continue to be in that direction until something else is necessary. The first two questions are arguably the bigger headaches in each game, and is why I'd personally prefer to vote for an option that tackles those. There's not necessarily a wrong answer and that's okay and is why the community is extremely split on this suspect test.
After playing over 150 games of this tier, I think that it's not unrealistic to say that tera closes the gap between lower level players and more experienced players unlike anything we've seen before. Low ladder is actually hard for the first time ever, and I've seen this get said by several people the last week. This tier does have a ton of broken elements that need to go as well, but unexpected tera types and unexpecting timing of tera is ultimately what can surprise people the most, and have the deadliest impact too. I think to a high degree that players can do their best to account for tera types and formulate win paths like normal, but the element of surprise is finally a little too strong and it's really easy to lose off of unexpected turns and tera types. Obviously the tier is still settling down, but it is definitely hard to be forced to constantly adjust game plans and sometimes there's just nothing you can do. That is why I strongly believe some type of action is required at the end of the day.
I think if Tera is a lot easier to predict, then it is fine to keep in this tier. I think team preview is a good step in the right direction, but I think that's mainly short term. It'll work for now because the tier is in its infancy, but long term, some more action will likely be needed because the other unpredictable elements of tera are the bigger factors to handle. That is why I am leaning towards trying out the 1 tera slot per team, because you can still keep the freedom to run whatever set you want and still rely on playing well to tera at the right moment. I think hiding your tera type also rewards creativity in a healthy way. I see it as something similar to running any Z-move you want on 1 mon per team. I also think that it is far easier to counterplay an expected tera mon, and it'll be a lot more natural and something that's not difficult to ask of players.
For now, I'm unsure about the restrictions, but I lean slightly towards the option for 1 dedicated tera mon per team in the first slot per team in order to restrict tera in a way that I find acceptable, both in terms of playing Gen 9 at a consistent high level, as well as maintaining the nature of the mechanic. The latter is subjective, but I understand how people feel about it, and when I see something like Tera Fairy Ceruledge make use of Flash Fire, I think that's really cool, and I think it'd be okay to preserve and encourage that type of creativity in the long run for Gen 9 as a whole. Team Preview may or may not work out in the long run, but I have faith that this option is more likely to work in the long run. That being said, it's still entirely possible for that 1 slot to be overwhelming each game, because of the nature of how game changing a type change mid-game can be. This solution handles the first question at the start of my post, but does not handle the second nor the third, and it may ultimately fail.
I might end up changing my mind and voting for something else, but this has definitely been a unique experience and I'm interested in continuing to see what others have to say. Also just as a reminder, but the council will continue to retest tera in the near future if it does ultimately get banned. We have lots of chances to try it out with the current meta, the Pokemon Home meta, and the DLC meta whenever that arrives. So it's not the end of the world if it doesn't work out this time, and time is our greatest ally in figuring out the answer to deciding what to do with tera. We'll get through this together eventually.
If you made this far, then I hope you have a wonderful rest of the day. If you didn't, then I hope you at least read this last line and have a good day as well :]
With tera, there are 3 questions you have to consider with every game:
1. What is going to tera?
2. When is the opponent going to tera?
3. What is their tera type or potential tera types?
The team preview option handles the third question, and I believe that it is accurate to say that showing tera type at preview is a step in the right direction. So for that reason alone, I'm not against having that option and slightly okay with it being the potential end result. The question after that however is how long should we continue to be in that direction until something else is necessary. The first two questions are arguably the bigger headaches in each game, and is why I'd personally prefer to vote for an option that tackles those. There's not necessarily a wrong answer and that's okay and is why the community is extremely split on this suspect test.
After playing over 150 games of this tier, I think that it's not unrealistic to say that tera closes the gap between lower level players and more experienced players unlike anything we've seen before. Low ladder is actually hard for the first time ever, and I've seen this get said by several people the last week. This tier does have a ton of broken elements that need to go as well, but unexpected tera types and unexpecting timing of tera is ultimately what can surprise people the most, and have the deadliest impact too. I think to a high degree that players can do their best to account for tera types and formulate win paths like normal, but the element of surprise is finally a little too strong and it's really easy to lose off of unexpected turns and tera types. Obviously the tier is still settling down, but it is definitely hard to be forced to constantly adjust game plans and sometimes there's just nothing you can do. That is why I strongly believe some type of action is required at the end of the day.
I think if Tera is a lot easier to predict, then it is fine to keep in this tier. I think team preview is a good step in the right direction, but I think that's mainly short term. It'll work for now because the tier is in its infancy, but long term, some more action will likely be needed because the other unpredictable elements of tera are the bigger factors to handle. That is why I am leaning towards trying out the 1 tera slot per team, because you can still keep the freedom to run whatever set you want and still rely on playing well to tera at the right moment. I think hiding your tera type also rewards creativity in a healthy way. I see it as something similar to running any Z-move you want on 1 mon per team. I also think that it is far easier to counterplay an expected tera mon, and it'll be a lot more natural and something that's not difficult to ask of players.
For now, I'm unsure about the restrictions, but I lean slightly towards the option for 1 dedicated tera mon per team in the first slot per team in order to restrict tera in a way that I find acceptable, both in terms of playing Gen 9 at a consistent high level, as well as maintaining the nature of the mechanic. The latter is subjective, but I understand how people feel about it, and when I see something like Tera Fairy Ceruledge make use of Flash Fire, I think that's really cool, and I think it'd be okay to preserve and encourage that type of creativity in the long run for Gen 9 as a whole. Team Preview may or may not work out in the long run, but I have faith that this option is more likely to work in the long run. That being said, it's still entirely possible for that 1 slot to be overwhelming each game, because of the nature of how game changing a type change mid-game can be. This solution handles the first question at the start of my post, but does not handle the second nor the third, and it may ultimately fail.
I might end up changing my mind and voting for something else, but this has definitely been a unique experience and I'm interested in continuing to see what others have to say. Also just as a reminder, but the council will continue to retest tera in the near future if it does ultimately get banned. We have lots of chances to try it out with the current meta, the Pokemon Home meta, and the DLC meta whenever that arrives. So it's not the end of the world if it doesn't work out this time, and time is our greatest ally in figuring out the answer to deciding what to do with tera. We'll get through this together eventually.
If you made this far, then I hope you have a wonderful rest of the day. If you didn't, then I hope you at least read this last line and have a good day as well :]
Well said, honestly; if one knows the type not much can be said about predicting aside from when theyd tera. Thats really the biggest issue. But thats like predicting a switch which really isn’t that bad outside the fact of you losing a turn when switching into a prediction. While with tera your turn is still active and gaining a no switch benefit with that tera pokemon. The best direction ultimately is probably limit to one tera and revealed type at preview.
Last edited:
Thing is behind screens+shed tail+tera fairy espathra can muscle the skele mu. Unaware isn't that effective because stored power still gets it boost. The max damage is 860 (holy fuck), but with 6 stalled speed boost you get +120, with 2 CM's you get +80, so you're still looking at a near 220 BP move at the minimum.
+2 0 SpA Espathra Stored Power (220 BP) vs. 252 HP / 252 SpD Unaware Skeledirge: 226-267 (54.8 - 64.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
Normally the full stop to this is send out a dark type but you know, suddenly this:
+2 0 SpA Espathra Dazzling Gleam vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Kingambit: 133-157 (32.9 - 38.8%) -- guaranteed 3HKO after Stealth Rock
gets stab and turns into this:
+2 0 SpA Espathra Dazzling Gleam vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Kingambit: 199-235 (49.2 - 58.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO after Stealth Rock
As kingambit, if you switch it into dazzling gleam, you lose. If you go for the iron head and it doesn't tera, you lose. If you sucker punch and it DOES tera (or CM, roost, etc), you lose. The common denominator here is tera, and I didn't mention thats just the fairy version, a fighting version exist too.
Last edited:
While I do agree that espathra is ridiculous with tera, i think that the only thing that would change with tera gone is that you just need to remove dark types to enable it as a wincon. It becomes slightly more manageable, but would probably still be suspect worthy. It’s just a dumb Pokémon in general, especially with screens and shed tail support
L
O
L
I don't think you're being honest.
Comparing a whole combat system, which is a GLOBAL improvement (like physical/special attacks instead of type depending ones) has nothing to see with broken pokemons and abilities that have been ranked uber for that reason.
Banning a pokemon =/= discarding the new gen's system...
The thing is, you know he can.
Just like it could switch out to a ghost typed pokemon.
It's basically a counter like a switch out, without switching.
Keeping the boosts, the main argument against it would be, it's like baton pass.
However, happening ONCE by fight, not being changeable at the very last moment (your typing is set in advance, baton pass let you choose between not only five types but five pokemons which can have two types), makes it definitely less problematic than baton pass.
Come on guys, just play with it. It's not that hard to guess what the enemy is about to do, and counter it in advance. Worst case scenario you loose a turn and counter it afterwards.
That's how pokemon matches always were, they aren't being threatened at all.
While you know the kingambit can tera into that, you do not know WHEN it will tera. It is not your fault if you do not OHKO it, when you expected a tera. This is a mind game.
It is banned from OU so why talk about it here???
While it is less problematic than BP, it is still problematic enough to be banned. A timely failed Tera guess (when and what) could turn the whole game around. (Eg: You have a Chien pao and the enemy has a dragonite that took chip AND still had their Tera. You guessed they would Tera and use sacred sword, and surprise surprise: they didn’t and clicked dragon dance. GG.
Sounds like you see nothing wrong with a setup sweeper able to completely alter its counterplay because whoops, now it's a completely different type from its original and now it's no longer weak to whatever you were hoping to hit it with. There's a big difference between using Close Combat on a ghost type mon (in that case, I'd only have myself to blame) and using Close Combat on a Kingambit only for it to suddenly null it because it went ghost (that can't be held against me). Also, comparing Terastallize to Baton Pass isn't doing your case any favours, as Baton Pass has been repeatedly banned. Anyway, look at this:
Some of these mons have upwards of 5 or 6 viable Tera Types. That is extremely telling. Anyhow, prediction is never gonna be a consistent answer. Especially when your opponent can basically cheat the type chart.Tera Type Index: SV OU
Amoonguss Water, Fire, Fairy
Annihilape Water, Fire, Fairy, Normal, Dark
Azumarill Water
Baxcalibur Fairy, Ice, Dragon
Blissey Fairy, Ghost
Breloom Fighting, Grass, Fire
Chi-Yu Fire, Ghost, Grass, Fairy, Flying
Chien-Pao Ice, Ghost, Fighting, Dark
Clodsire Water, Dark, Steel
Corviknight Ground, Dark, Dragon, Water, Flying
Cyclizar Ghost, Steel
Dondozo Fairy, Grass, Steel, Dark
Dragapult Ghost, Dark
Dragonite Normal, Steel, Fire
Espathra Fairy, Fighting
Garchomp Steel, Ghost, Water
Garganacl Water, Flying, Grass, Fairy, Ghost, Steel
Gholdengo Ghost, Steel, Fighting, Normal, Dark, Flying
Glimmora Ghost, Steel, Grass, Fairy, Flying
Great Tusk Ground, Fighting, Steel, Water, Flying
Grimmsnarl Ghost, Poison, Steel
Hatterene: Water, Flying, Steel
Iron Hands Electric, Fighting, Flying
Iron Moth Poison, Fire, Fairy, Grass, Flying
Iron Treads Ghost, Ground, Flying
Iron Valiant Electric, Ghost, Fairy, Fighting, Poison, Dark
Kingambit Dark, Flying, Ghost, Steel
Meowscarada Grass, Fairy, Dark
Quaquaval Water, Fighting
Roaring Moon Steel, Dark, Flying
Rotom-Wash Steel, Water, Ghost
Scizor Steel, Fire, Electric, Flying
Skeledirge Fairy, Dark, Fire
Slowking Water
Ting-Lu Poison, Steel, Water, Ground, Fairy
Torkoal Ghost, Flying, Fire, Steel
Toxapex Water, Fairy, Grass, Steel, Dark
Tyranitar Steel, Ghost
Volcarona Grass, Psychic, Bug
You may have missed their point, which is (and they can correct me if i misinterpreted their comment) tera being the new gimmick/feature for the gen has no bearing on whether we should keep it or not. It being interesting is not only subjective (though many would say the concept at least is interesting on paper) but also not relevant. What is relevant is if the mechanic is balanced for the game or not. I'd also be careful calling a gimmick "an improvement" or comparing it to the physical/special split as that and this are radically different.
There is a very big difference between switching to a ghost type vs tera typing into a ghost type. Switching to a ghost may block an attack in this case, though you likely won't cause damage doing so. but changing INTO a ghost blocks an attack and lets the tera user bypass the opposing mon as a check, letting the tera mon attack, set up...
I'll be real: none of this makes any sense and I don't know why you are comparing it to baton pass. And even then, whether it is less problematic than BP or not has nothing to do with this discussion.
It's more problematic than you think, given you have to consider multiple factors (will mon in front of me tera now? Is it gonna be tera X or tera Y? Will they expect me to switch and boost or will they attack and expect me to stay in, killing my mon instead). You say "Worst case scenario you loose a turn and counter it afterwards", but mon X isn't suddenly gonna counter mon Y anyways after it changes type. That is kind of the big strength of terastilize: turning checks into victims. Breloom doesn't check dark types if they tera into a fighting resist and counter kill it. Garchomp doesn't handle Volcarona after it turns into a grass type and yawns off earthquakes or stone edges while it sets up to sweep you. Pokemon have counterplay in large part due to the type chart which tera fundamentLly screws with. This sort of phenomenon simply is not balanced.
i agree with your point of home releasing and pokémon becoming overpowered because of terra like pokémon that are held down by their type becoming insane due to being able to terra into something like ghost to have a few immunities and things like terra electric air balloon sub shedinja though i feel like we won’t know for sure. if terra will make certain mons overpowered until home releases i am in support for being able to see terra type during team preview because it helps both parties deal with terra types and will make terra easier to deal with though there is one drawback: terra types that aren’t common being less viable due to being seen at team preview and being countered. though that isn’t to bad. honestly i think it is to early to ban terra because we just can’t be sure if mons will become overpowered due to it.
I'll vote no action for the terastal.
I do not deny the unpredictability of the mechanic : even with all the knowledge we can have from team preview or opponant choices, we'll never be sure in which type a Pokemon will turn for now.
Even so, here's why I confidant about a no-action choice :
- I don't think terastal is uncompetitive at all :
- "What's the tera type ?" : I strongly think this toy changes the way to make a gameplan, or even teambuild. It's true that's 50/50 with dragonite for exemple sucks. However, I understand the guess-work argument but not totally agree with it : and if I don't have to guess right, but just class option terastal to best for worst against me, and make my plan with that in mind ? For exemple, in a endgame scenario in gen8 or gen7 easely in his favor, a good player will usually imagine the worst set possible for him, thinks "if he has that, can I counter it BUT still win against the more basic set ever ?" and make choices with that in mind to secure his game. For terastal types, I think the same logic can be applied : we don't necessary have to perfect guess the type, but to imagine all options and cover for the worst options even if the answers can be differents. The issue, that I understand, is that the knowledge of your opponant team is just really different of what we knew for the 3 last gens : I think make plans REALLY IS more difficult, but not just a wild casino. When I played, if I had to absolutely guess a tera-type, I consider it's just me who was not been good enough. I had to play and plan in a way for not put me in that position. In tiers with far less knowledge (like Draft League or Monothreat, wa have to sort threats and play with that in mind), if I'm in a guess-turn live or dead situation : my plan, my plays or both wasn't good enough at some point.
- I think the suspect is way too early : with how terastal changes our ways to plan, I think one month is way too short to adapt : I know we have really good players and all, but come on I don't think it's even possible to have objectivity (I include myself first lmao) on this. We never had a metagame near as this, never had to make our gameplan with this kind of mechanic in mind, and all of that with broken mons in top of that for more chaos. I think nobody can possibly learn of all tricks on this tera with just one month, it's just nuke all our way of playing the game until now. To plan with such a uncertain factor was NEVER seen before (no teampreview was not as close imo) and we're about to just limit or ban that in one month only : I understand, really understand why, but it's just seems way too fast to me. The fact that we had no suspect on the problematic mons (we all know the names here, the same like 10 broken mons) just to see how it can change things amplify this to me. I don't believe assesments like "an other mon will be problematic" : it may be true, but totally not too. I do not know a thing atm that will have a role that threatening as over9000 e-killer dragonite or espathra : maybe other mon will have this gamebreaking level, maybe not, we have no way to know. Anyway, I never saw a game which decides this quickly, in my quite exterior viewpoint that's crazy. Even a re-suspect after if limitations or ban are appliqued is biased by the fact most of us didn't have the time to fully learn the mechanic : I'm not good enough to learn all the mechanic and a new way to approach a game with broken shits around and all our new toys in just one month, and I think nobody can do that too. Metagames can take months, years to develop, and nobody learn to play Pokemon at good or top level in just one month. It's what tera asks to us imo. Learn to play with different factors. Nobody can fully understand a game in this laps of time. Even in games that have existed for years, player still learns new shits that's so cool. It's literally so sad to force this situation so quickly in my opinion. I do not understand why a tera-suspect 3 weeks after the release can be just towards the mechanic : gen8 is bakery and gen9 pastry, we're all bakers and learning pastry at the moment, and pastry is difficult (oh god this comparaison is horrible).
- "When my opponant will tera ?" : I think tera will force to a pro-active, maybe too pro-active gameplay (if not already the case lmao) : on this point, I understand why a limitation is wished. At the question "when the opponant will tera ?", I don't think "it's random I don't know" is the right answer. It's a story to learn when the opponant will have the more value, OR force him to do this choice : "I need to tera or be put behind". I think we all made at least one game in which we forced our opponant to tera when he had not the maximum value of it. It's forced by pro action, limit the opponant quicky to less choices if he don't want to just lose, forcing him in a certain path. Unfortunately, pro-active gameplay is way more easy (and viable) in HO teams (or certain BO more like O, like future sight bro goes brrbrr in gen8) and I understand why this direction is scary. It's way more easy to avoid crazy life or death 50/50 or guess work if you bruteforce your opponant to make the choice for you. Want to ban it for this reason between all is really fair for me and I trully understand.
- What is uncompetitive exactly ? I think anyway the better player in this metagame, aka the player who will have a better understanding of the mechanic and game will win more anyway. The mechanic may be not healthy, that I understand, mut uncompetitive is a bit langage abuse for me (it's not purely random, like double team ot shits like that).
- Last point : I think GF wanted a more fast-paced metagame. Dynamax was dumb and absolutely not for solo, it was cristal clear : all his mechanics howl "DUO DUO" in our ears from the very beginning. However, I think that's not the case with tera : the mechanic forces progress in a huge level. BUT I see all the other things : defog got thanossed, everyone loves spikes more than raclette, the scald removal actually accelerate games, 8 pp reco etc etc. All of those actions makes sense with the cringe and unfortunate 20 minutes timer. I do not believe they don't care about 6v6 : why defog was given in like all the questionnable mon in USUM in first place ? It's not an argument in the tera action of course, but I think it's a thing to consider. Do we need to stay in our metagame (like proactive BOs in majority in gen9) or just test and accept to play the game they wanted us to play a little longer ?
Oh and if action is needed : showing type.
I personnally think this is a huge chance that we have to test this new way to play, it's one of the biggest gameplay changes in Pokemon history. Warps risks rewards, forces to plan more drastically, encourages pro-activity at crazy levels. Currently, I enjoy this recipe.
Sorry for the chaotic english (french clause ?). I understand why peoples want this mechanic gone. Even if I not have this opinion, I respect that and probably have fun even in a metagame without it, independently of the vote.
Finally, I'll do not bring the topic of new players in my argument : all of that was already discussed and I'm in the "attract new players" camp (french community was really doomed during SS, even the "old players" were damn quicky not invested).
I wrote that with my manner to see and play the game : I respect and consider all other opinions, and think that it's awesome to see so many manners to judge a single game, and that's what makes Pokemon enjoyable.
I do not deny the unpredictability of the mechanic : even with all the knowledge we can have from team preview or opponant choices, we'll never be sure in which type a Pokemon will turn for now.
Even so, here's why I confidant about a no-action choice :
- I don't think terastal is uncompetitive at all :
- "What's the tera type ?" : I strongly think this toy changes the way to make a gameplan, or even teambuild. It's true that's 50/50 with dragonite for exemple sucks. However, I understand the guess-work argument but not totally agree with it : and if I don't have to guess right, but just class option terastal to best for worst against me, and make my plan with that in mind ? For exemple, in a endgame scenario in gen8 or gen7 easely in his favor, a good player will usually imagine the worst set possible for him, thinks "if he has that, can I counter it BUT still win against the more basic set ever ?" and make choices with that in mind to secure his game. For terastal types, I think the same logic can be applied : we don't necessary have to perfect guess the type, but to imagine all options and cover for the worst options even if the answers can be differents. The issue, that I understand, is that the knowledge of your opponant team is just really different of what we knew for the 3 last gens : I think make plans REALLY IS more difficult, but not just a wild casino. When I played, if I had to absolutely guess a tera-type, I consider it's just me who was not been good enough. I had to play and plan in a way for not put me in that position. In tiers with far less knowledge (like Draft League or Monothreat, wa have to sort threats and play with that in mind), if I'm in a guess-turn live or dead situation : my plan, my plays or both wasn't good enough at some point.
- I think the suspect is way too early : with how terastal changes our ways to plan, I think one month is way too short to adapt : I know we have really good players and all, but come on I don't think it's even possible to have objectivity (I include myself first lmao) on this. We never had a metagame near as this, never had to make our gameplan with this kind of mechanic in mind, and all of that with broken mons in top of that for more chaos. I think nobody can possibly learn of all tricks on this tera with just one month, it's just nuke all our way of playing the game until now. To plan with such a uncertain factor was NEVER seen before (no teampreview was not as close imo) and we're about to just limit or ban that in one month only : I understand, really understand why, but it's just seems way too fast to me. The fact that we had no suspect on the problematic mons (we all know the names here, the same like 10 broken mons) just to see how it can change things amplify this to me. I don't believe assesments like "an other mon will be problematic" : it may be true, but totally not too. I do not know a thing atm that will have a role that threatening as over9000 e-killer dragonite or espathra : maybe other mon will have this gamebreaking level, maybe not, we have no way to know. Anyway, I never saw a game which decides this quickly, in my quite exterior viewpoint that's crazy. Even a re-suspect after if limitations or ban are appliqued is biased by the fact most of us didn't have the time to fully learn the mechanic : I'm not good enough to learn all the mechanic and a new way to approach a game with broken shits around and all our new toys in just one month, and I think nobody can do that too. Metagames can take months, years to develop, and nobody learn to play Pokemon at good or top level in just one month. It's what tera asks to us imo. Learn to play with different factors. Nobody can fully understand a game in this laps of time. Even in games that have existed for years, player still learns new shits that's so cool. It's literally so sad to force this situation so quickly in my opinion. I do not understand why a tera-suspect 3 weeks after the release can be just towards the mechanic : gen8 is bakery and gen9 pastry, we're all bakers and learning pastry at the moment, and pastry is difficult (oh god this comparaison is horrible).
- "When my opponant will tera ?" : I think tera will force to a pro-active, maybe too pro-active gameplay (if not already the case lmao) : on this point, I understand why a limitation is wished. At the question "when the opponant will tera ?", I don't think "it's random I don't know" is the right answer. It's a story to learn when the opponant will have the more value, OR force him to do this choice : "I need to tera or be put behind". I think we all made at least one game in which we forced our opponant to tera when he had not the maximum value of it. It's forced by pro action, limit the opponant quicky to less choices if he don't want to just lose, forcing him in a certain path. Unfortunately, pro-active gameplay is way more easy (and viable) in HO teams (or certain BO more like O, like future sight bro goes brrbrr in gen8) and I understand why this direction is scary. It's way more easy to avoid crazy life or death 50/50 or guess work if you bruteforce your opponant to make the choice for you. Want to ban it for this reason between all is really fair for me and I trully understand.
- What is uncompetitive exactly ? I think anyway the better player in this metagame, aka the player who will have a better understanding of the mechanic and game will win more anyway. The mechanic may be not healthy, that I understand, mut uncompetitive is a bit langage abuse for me (it's not purely random, like double team ot shits like that).
- Last point : I think GF wanted a more fast-paced metagame. Dynamax was dumb and absolutely not for solo, it was cristal clear : all his mechanics howl "DUO DUO" in our ears from the very beginning. However, I think that's not the case with tera : the mechanic forces progress in a huge level. BUT I see all the other things : defog got thanossed, everyone loves spikes more than raclette, the scald removal actually accelerate games, 8 pp reco etc etc. All of those actions makes sense with the cringe and unfortunate 20 minutes timer. I do not believe they don't care about 6v6 : why defog was given in like all the questionnable mon in USUM in first place ? It's not an argument in the tera action of course, but I think it's a thing to consider. Do we need to stay in our metagame (like proactive BOs in majority in gen9) or just test and accept to play the game they wanted us to play a little longer ?
Oh and if action is needed : showing type.
I personnally think this is a huge chance that we have to test this new way to play, it's one of the biggest gameplay changes in Pokemon history. Warps risks rewards, forces to plan more drastically, encourages pro-activity at crazy levels. Currently, I enjoy this recipe.
Sorry for the chaotic english (french clause ?). I understand why peoples want this mechanic gone. Even if I not have this opinion, I respect that and probably have fun even in a metagame without it, independently of the vote.
Finally, I'll do not bring the topic of new players in my argument : all of that was already discussed and I'm in the "attract new players" camp (french community was really doomed during SS, even the "old players" were damn quicky not invested).
I wrote that with my manner to see and play the game : I respect and consider all other opinions, and think that it's awesome to see so many manners to judge a single game, and that's what makes Pokemon enjoyable.
I think it's a stretch to say there are 10 broken mons in the meta and that the current state of the meta is because of those Pokemon instead of Terastal. The only mons that are arguably broken regardless of Tera are Chi-Yu (obscenely broken), Cyclizar (debatably broken because of how low-risk and easy to pilot it is with its entire kit), and Annihilape (which might be broken even outside of Tera, but it's hard to say).
A lot of the stronger Tera abusers right now are so good because there are no restrictions, and you can Tera any of your 6 Pokemon. Limiting the number of Pokemon that can Tera to force a dedicated Tera abuser onto your team will weaken many of the top threats and lessen the teambuilding strain seen in the current meta.
The meta will be much better when both players have much fewer opportunities to change their Pokemon's checks whenever they see fit. No other restriction does enough to move the needle in my opinion. The mere threat of Tera right now or in a Tera preview meta leads to very restrictive gameplay. Diversity is not necessarily a good thing since too much of it makes the meta too match-up dependent.
A lot of the stronger Tera abusers right now are so good because there are no restrictions, and you can Tera any of your 6 Pokemon. Limiting the number of Pokemon that can Tera to force a dedicated Tera abuser onto your team will weaken many of the top threats and lessen the teambuilding strain seen in the current meta.
The meta will be much better when both players have much fewer opportunities to change their Pokemon's checks whenever they see fit. No other restriction does enough to move the needle in my opinion. The mere threat of Tera right now or in a Tera preview meta leads to very restrictive gameplay. Diversity is not necessarily a good thing since too much of it makes the meta too match-up dependent.
Last edited:
LOL back at you. No one has ever had to move heaven and earth to preserve the physical/special split. Try again.
Moyashi said everything else I would've otherwise had to say to you.
I still haven't heard a "why" as to diversity of tera types being uncompetitive? Choosing your tera type is strategy. There's no less luck associated with it than having a team that walls another.
As an observer rather than a player in the suspect imo things have so far generally confirmed my suspicions that a tera preview is the best - we're still keeing the more significant benefit people talk about tera having when it comes to teambuilding while removing I would say the majority of complaints regarding the frustration of dealing with Tera.
While people are also having issue with predicting the timing of tera, I'd say much more than that is the issue of what tera type since many mons have a number of viable sets that can act identically until the moment they tera which means it really is a guessing game as the opponent doesn't have information available to them in order to judge a tera in the same way someone could judge a sudden switch or move based on team comp and play behavior.
Giving the opponent information on the team's tera still gives you the entirety of tera to work with as a team building tool but means that players can actually plan around the tera. A tera you know means you have to work around one type counter that doesn't work, a tera you don't know means you have to work around literally every possible counter not working potentially.
It's also for the same general reason going to make predicting the turn of tera much better. You can't guess if an espathra is gonna switch on your Gholdengo because it could be tera fighting or tera fairy (or god forbid dark) but if you know it's tera fairy you can reasonably predict it wont tera, or that it will if it was tera dark.
EDIT:
While people are also having issue with predicting the timing of tera, I'd say much more than that is the issue of what tera type since many mons have a number of viable sets that can act identically until the moment they tera which means it really is a guessing game as the opponent doesn't have information available to them in order to judge a tera in the same way someone could judge a sudden switch or move based on team comp and play behavior.
Giving the opponent information on the team's tera still gives you the entirety of tera to work with as a team building tool but means that players can actually plan around the tera. A tera you know means you have to work around one type counter that doesn't work, a tera you don't know means you have to work around literally every possible counter not working potentially.
It's also for the same general reason going to make predicting the turn of tera much better. You can't guess if an espathra is gonna switch on your Gholdengo because it could be tera fighting or tera fairy (or god forbid dark) but if you know it's tera fairy you can reasonably predict it wont tera, or that it will if it was tera dark.
EDIT:
Imo the luck with tera types is what I mention above, most teams act identical even with several tera types so guessing when they tera is impossible since different types can be in entirely different scenarios and you can't know which it is.
What are the main points around keeping Tera really? I see a lot of counter arguments to pro-ban's points, but nothing really substansial about what makes Tera a good additon to the game.
It just feels like a win more mechanic. Even the defensive utility of it is overshadowed by the fact that players are abusing this same utility mostly offensively.
It just feels like a win more mechanic. Even the defensive utility of it is overshadowed by the fact that players are abusing this same utility mostly offensively.
- Status