A Change in UT

[anoriega94]

I 100 percent agree with everything you just said nubecubed.

To put this in perspective for anyone attacking smogon, this site is meant for people who consider themselves "hardcore" pokemon players. Its for players who enjoy the raw mechanics of the pokemon game but would like to promote the most competitive version of the game that they can. For anyone out there who plays first person shooters like CoD or Halo, smogon would most likely relate to the "MLG" of pokemon. The gamebattles community.

I apologize for even bringing up Call of Duty but sadly, MLG is the top example of a metagame that became so popular that the developers now somewhat cater more towards the competitive community.

So if anything, Smogon just needs to gain more traction and get more people into the competitive environment so that its much more sensible approach to competitive play will be recognized.

The issue is that, until now, many elements of competitive pokemon have been hidden in game such as EVs/IVS ect.

This makes it hard for the recreational pokemon player to get into the competitive scene without the internet. The reason why MLG CoD took off is probably because of all of the youtube support it got from the rise of the video game commentators. So if anything, we all probably owe a bit to the popular youtubers who play pokemon showdown and show their subscribers e.g. Shofu and BlameTruth, regardless of what we personally think their skill level is.

I for one, have not even bothered buying a copy of Pokemon x or y. I am a dedicated simulator player who sees the smogon play style as the premier way to play true competitive pokemon. Not 3v3 singles or 4 pokemon vgc doubles. I dont see how anyone could come here and claim that banning things and what not make the game worse. Every competitive game ever made has metagames with tiering or banning or something of that nature. Because developers cannot play test their game with the small hardcore community in mind. But smogon can.

Examples of metagames with tiers or banning are smash bros games which have competitive tiers (and a ban list of one in ssbb, meta knight), FPS games in which certain guns or items are often banned (Halo even has an MLG playlist in the matchmaking itself), and basically every fighting game ever.

Once again I apologize for bringing up the MLG in these forums. I know a lot of people here dislike FPS games in general.

 

[GravityBlast]

As a 'new user' by the standard of actual posts (yes look i at my count!) I am impressed with the high expectations the leaders of the site set upon the community. I may have no posts to speak of, but I have been lurking around Smogon for a couple years now. My love of Pokemon have been and on again/off again relationship as it was a childhood obession of mine turned adult-life-side-hobby. I've come to really appreciate the community here for the competitive skill, attention to detail (a necessity in Mix/Max strategies), and overall classiness.. hah. Please continue to give the community standards, as leaders of the competitive scene (and arguably one of the only forerunners of a 'competitive pokemon scene' at all) I would expect nothing less of YOU.

 

[LastFootnote]

I'm not claiming that GameFreak is perfect, nor that 6th gen will be perfectly balanced with GameFreak's rules. I'd be really shocked if they didn't miss some really powerful combos. But I'd like to see Smogon throw real support behind playing and balancing a competitive game that starts with GameFreak's rules, rather than completely ignoring it and only caring about the archaic ruleset that Smogon has carried over since 1st gen.

The response that 6v6 is the only "truly competitive" way to play is nonsense. It's the way you're used to playing and nothing more.

As for which format is intrinsically more competitive, 6v6 allows a wide range of playstyles

So does 3v3.

has more emphasis on switching and prediction

More emphasis on switching? Sure, I'll buy that. I don't consider it a plus, though. More emphasis on prediction? No.

is sufficiently complex that a player's win strategy is not immediately obvious upon the battle starting

So is 3v3.

lasts longer and is therefore more hax-resistant

I'll give you this one, but you could easily play best two out of three 3v3 games in the time it takes to play one 6v6 game. That also reduces hax. On a ladder it doesn't really matter if you lose or win a couple of games due to luck. It all evens out over time.

and is less dependant on team macth-up.

The idea that 3v3 comes down to team match-up is a myth. You still have 6 Pokémon; you just choose 3 to use in each battle after seeing the opponent's team. Your overall team can be just as diverse and prepared for threats as it is in 6v6. In a way, it's actually easier to prepare for a few specific threats because you have a sideboard that you can use to carry specialized Pokémon without having to use them in every battle.

In fact, you could even say that Smogon were smarter here, by choosing a more tactically interesting metagame than Game Freak.

That's just your opinion. It's a common opinion on Smogon, but that's because Smogon doesn't currently support any other style of play. I find the 6v6 meta pretty uninteresting, personally.

 

[GravityBlast]

I'm not claiming that GameFreak is perfect, nor that 6th gen will be perfectly balanced with GameFreak's rules. I'd be really shocked if they didn't miss some really powerful combos. But I'd like to see Smogon throw real support behind playing and balancing a competitive game that starts with GameFreak's rules, rather than completely ignoring it and only caring about the archaic ruleset that Smogon has carried over since 1st gen.

The response that 6v6 is the only "truly competitive" way to play is nonsense. It's the way you're used to playing and nothing more.

I agree with you, i see no issues with 3 v 3.. I see it as a just as viable way to play Pokemon. On a side note, i distinctly remember the original battle tower of my most nostalgic Pokemon game Crystal was exclusively in 3 v 3 format. Therefore one might come to the reasonable conclusion that Pokemon could just as easily be played at a competitive level in 3 v 3 format. This might be less a decent example in later gens, but its something to think about. Also when it comes to what is more 'competitive' i find the 3 v 3 to allow for awesome mind-games and a meta-game in itself which consists of picking 3 from your pool of 6 to battle the other players' possible 3 of 6. An example of competitive games that do exactly this are MOBAS: League of Legends, DoTA, SMITE. In my opinion it is quite exciting picking based on the choices by another player... in fact if you could have some kind of picking and banning stage how crazy would that be in Pokemon o.O... that might be a little too out there (maybe some would even say blasphemous or just stupid) but it's an example that even a long time Pokemon fan such as myself has an open mind for battles outside the standard 6 v 6 format.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

I'm not claiming that GameFreak is perfect, nor that 6th gen will be perfectly balanced with GameFreak's rules. I'd be really shocked if they didn't miss some really powerful combos. But I'd like to see Smogon throw real support behind playing and balancing a competitive game that starts with GameFreak's rules, rather than completely ignoring it and only caring about the archaic ruleset that Smogon has carried over since 1st gen.

But here's the question: why? You keep talking about how we're being old fashioned by sticking with 6v6, yet you never really give any reasons to change to 3v3 beside "Game Freak does it." I've said this before, but we are not Game Freak. This is Smogon. Game Freak doesn't cater to primarily competitive players. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't have an active community that constantly engages in competitive discussion regarding metagames and potential changes. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't have a tier organization that gives many Pokemon an environment that they can shine in whereas they would otherwise be overshadowed by something else and may never see use except for novelty reasons. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't constantly update their tiers based on changes in the metagame and the rise and fall in usage of certain Pokemon. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't constantly hold suspect tests for certain Pokemon or strategies that have been declared broken by a sizable portion of the competitive community. Smogon does. Game Freak and Smogon are just so different that it doesn't make sense to conform to Game Freak for the sake of conforming to Game Freak.

Another question: what is it about 3v3 that makes it seem so "official" to you? If I'm not mistaken, aren't 3v3 battles only reinforced in 5th Gen Random Matchup and 6th Gen Battle Spot? You can easily play against friends over Wi-Fi with full teams of 6. This has been the case ever since the first RBY link battles. Just because Game Freak introduced the new Random Matchup feature with its own ruleset doesn't mean we are forced to follow it at all times. You also have to consider reasons why they created this restriction. Perhaps they wanted to discourage stall tactics and make games go quicker? This theory is certainly backed up by the presence of a command timer and a full battle timer. They probably guessed that many players just want to get on Wi-Fi and play a bunch of matches without having to face delays in their games due to a long stall match, so they made a simple change in an attempt to keep things at a quicker pace and reduce the time per match. However, this is not the same case on simulators. For one thing, connections on simulators tend to run quicker than those over Wi-Fi, and the shorter animations (or lack thereof) cause individual turns to run more quickly. Not only that, but we believe in trying to maintain viability of the most types of team styles possible, so it would be quite inappropriate to cause a change like 6v6 -> 3v3 that would further hurt the viability of stall teams.

You also have to learn to appreciate the differences of the two mediums of play. Smogon and Game Freak both have two different rulesets, and this gives players two distinguishable choices when deciding which type of metagame they want to play. There are many, many people who prefer rules like 6v6, no Item Clause, Evasion/Sleep Clause, level 100 matches, and Smogon's particular tiering system. By trying to assimilate Smogon to Game Freak by changing those factors, you take away that choice from players who prefer those factors while doing no one else any favors. Why don't we just let people choose and play with the diverse choices before them? It's not like being different has caused the community to suffer. Believe it or not, many players are attracted to Smogon for such rules as those listed earlier, especially our organized tier system, and this is evidence by the fact that Pokemon Showdown!'s OU ladder alone saw over 1.1 million battles in the month of September alone! If your concern is that we'll become obsolete by not assimilating to Game Freak, then rest assured that it simply isn't happening any time soon.

All that said, I would still like to discuss the competitive merits of 6v6 a bit. noobcubed had a great list of reasons, so I'll address your responses.

The response that 6v6 is the only "truly competitive" way to play is nonsense. It's the way you're used to playing and nothing more.

Actually, the response was that 6v6 is more competitive, not the only truly competitive medium of play. That said, any one bit of evidence to show that 6v6 is even slightly more competitive than 3v3 would be enough to make a point.

So does 3v3.

Not exactly. 3v3 is much more fast-paced than 6v6 due to the smaller team size. In particular, stall teams suffer during a transition from 6v6 to 3v3. Well built stall teams are full of Pokemon that have different support roles and/or form solid cores. Even with access to all 6 teamslots, creating a solid stall team has become harder and harder with each new generation. With access to only 3 Pokemon at a time, it's even harder to cover everything; unless your opponent just didn't build a very solid team, you're going to be very hard pressed to find a 3 Pokemon core that can cover everything your opponent has on their team. Not only that, but one of stall's biggest weapons, hazard support, is heavily crippled in 3v3 matches. With only 3 Pokemon and far less switching involved, there is a much lower ability to deal good amounts of passive damage via hazards over time. The emphasis on offense and low viability of stall makes 3v3 less varied than 6v6.

More emphasis on switching? Sure, I'll buy that. I don't consider it a plus, though. More emphasis on prediction? No.

More emphasis on switching is definitely a plus. It's the biggest thing that separates us from the in-game A.I. The ability to switch in and out intelligently is one of the most important fundamental skills that any competitive player needs to learn. Being able to switch in and out is what keeps your Skarmory safe from the opponent's Heatran so that it can counter your opponent's SubToxic Gliscor later on down the road. It's the entire reason why moves like Stealth Rock and Pursuit are even any good.

So is 3v3.

Eh...sorta. It's true that at the beginning due to Team Preview, you're going to have an equal number of Pokemon to analyze in both 3v3 and 6v6. However, once you find out what your opponent's 3 chosen Pokemon are, it becomes significantly less complex to guess the opponent's general strategy and respond to it simply due to the fact that you're dealing with half as many threats as you would be dealing with in a 6v6 match.

I'll give you this one, but you could easily play best two out of three 3v3 games in the time it takes to play one 6v6 game. That also reduces hax. On a ladder it doesn't really matter if you lose or win a couple of games due to luck. It all evens out over time.

Seeing as how 3v3 matches are primarily enforced on Random Matchup, you can't actually battle the same person again for a 2 out of 3 round. In addition, the same thing can be said about 6v6 matches. In fact, many tournaments require 2 out of 3 in order to further reduce hax, so 6v6 would still have the advantage there.

The idea that 3v3 comes down to team match-up is a myth. You still have 6 Pokémon; you just choose 3 to use in each battle after seeing the opponent's team. Your overall team can be just as diverse and prepared for threats as it is in 6v6. In a way, it's actually easier to prepare for a few specific threats because you have a sideboard that you can use to carry specialized Pokémon without having to use them in every battle.

Team matchup has been a problem even in 6v6 battles for a long time. As more and more powerful threats are introduced, it becomes harder and harder to cover everything you need to. This is why competitive Pokemon has become more a game of checks than a game of counters in recent times, the same reason that stall has been suffering. This is no different in 3v3 battles. What is different is the fact that you essentially come into a game at 3 vs 6. You might know which 3 Pokemon you picked, but until you know for sure what 3 Pokemon your opponent picked, you're forced to act as if you're fighting all 6 of your opponent's Pokemon until you're sure of what you're up against. Chances are that you won't be able to cover everything on the opponent's team with just 3 team slots, so you'll just have to take a guess at what your opponent is using and try to plan accordingly. If you guess right, you could easily defeat the opponent. If you guess wrong, they could just as easily defeat you. This is why team matchup is worse in 3v3 battles, even if just a little. At least in 6v6 battles you know your opponent's full hand from the beginning and are able to use every resource on your team to formulate a method of defeating whatever's in front of you, but 3v3 doesn't have that luxury.

That's just your opinion. It's a common opinion on Smogon, but that's because Smogon doesn't currently support any other style of play. I find the 6v6 meta pretty uninteresting, personally.

It's true that Smogon supports the 6v6 metagame first and foremost (although it's nowhere near the only supported style of play), but that doesn't mean that Smogon players don't have experience in Game Freak's metagames. Many players here have played metagames such as VGCs and 3v3 singles. I myself have played a lot on Random Matchup, and personally I find 6v6 a lot more interesting since I don't feel like I'm forced to bottleneck my team into just three slots in the hope that I have the right Pokemon to cover the right opponents. It is a matter of opinions, but I'd wager that most of the opinions here are from players that have experienced both mediums of play, not from those that have been sheltered into one medium ever since they started playing Pokemon.

 

[tennisace]

That's just your opinion. It's a common opinion on Smogon, but that's because Smogon doesn't currently support any other style of play. I find the 6v6 meta pretty uninteresting, personally.

This is 100% false and in a very roundabout way should bring us back to the original point of this topic, which was to call out uninformed posting in general. VGC is supported by Smogon; there is an official subforum, official analyses, and an official tournament with an actual real life prize for the top x people. The 3v3 battle spot metagame will possibly be supported by Smogon quite soon. If you wish to post about your experiences playing those metagames, you should do it instead of just expressing your discontent with one metagame. The reason the VGC forum (and the GBU forum by extension) are so dead are because people aren't posting in them. You have to be active to have an active forum, since triple posting in a dead forum isn't fun or productive.

This wasn't meant to be a topic about the tiering policies of Smogon. This wasn't meant to be a topic about the benefits and disadvantages of calling one format "official" with whatever definition you want to shoehorn with it. Play whatever format you like most. This topic was made with the sole purpose of saying that the quality of posts in this forum on average wasn't up to par with the standards moderators have set forum-wide. It really has nothing to do with bias as some people have suggested; contentless posts aren't allowed anywhere except possibly Firebot, and even Firebot has standards. If someone posted in the Gogoat thread "Gogoat is the best Pokemon ever!" I would agree 100% with them and if I was a UT moderator I would still delete it, since it doesn't add anything to the discussion.

This thread has long served its purpose: a reminder that even though we may not have 100% complete information on the game, there are still posting standards that must be followed or be subject to moderation. It's pretty simple. If you want guidance on posting, PM a moderator or find a mentor through the Mentor Program that I previously plugged twice and linked to.

 

[Reapehify]

Alternatively, if Nintendo actually wants competitive players to buy its games rather than just playing on simulators for free, it would do well to start embracing Smogon. See how every single point you make can just be turned around by people who disagree with you?

This is a generally all around bloated response to an otherwise down to earth critique. It's childish, nonsensical and pointless. The fact is, if Smogon is representing itself as the premier site for competitive Pokemon and then define 'competitive pokemon' as something entirely different from what Gamefreak puts out than it isn't actually, quote "cutting edge". You can have all the analyzes you want but they don't mean a thing outside your walls if they aren't relevant to Gamefreak. It boils down to this: Gamefreak can survive well on without Smogon but Smogon need Gamefreak and their intellectual property to survive - disclaimer required!

As for arbitrary rules, they are. The tiering of FPS and SSBB were brought up earlier but they are different altogether from the banning done in your fairytale meta. Comparing something like the banning of some weapons or of certain characters is one thing which is entirely different from the banning of move(sets). For example, banning evasion serves no purpose other than to bend the metagame in the favor of the people here at Smogon. Evasion isn't an unfair advantage though because there are moves that specifically deal with it: Hone Claws and Coil, plus never miss moves such as Shock Wave and Aerial Ace. With the addition of something like Topsy Turvy, the same could be said with the Moody ability (and evasion again, as well). Weak moves such as Bullet Punch and Vaccum Wave are popularly used because there is no need for something like Aerial Ace when there is an evasion clause in place. You talk about interesting, but that sounds pretty boring to me. Tiering Pokemon is one thing, but creating heavily complex rules and banning moves you don't like to shape those tiers is something different altogether. Personally I think you'd be able to benefit greatly from taking in what LastFootnote had to say about how things are currently being done here and making some tweaks. No sense in reiterating what he said but I would like to note specifically that (as he mentioned) GameFreak has come a long way from First Gen and the every generation has seen attempts at balancing the game. It's Sixth Gen and they're pretty much there now; add the fact that you have unnecessary rules (for various move(sets)) and it seems like it's time for Smogon to evolve with the game, not against it.

PS. Away from the net, sorry for the tardy timing of the post. As much as this is about quality of post, I would argue a standard of what is acceptable can't really be developed in something such as researching as what is being researched is guided specifically by the past metagame expectations. E.g. you wouldn't be looking to see if Double Team applies to anything bulky because there is an evasion clause in place.

 

[Aerodactyl Legend]

Hide

This is a generally all around bloated response to an otherwise down to earth critique. It's childish, nonsensical and pointless. The fact is, if Smogon is representing itself as the premier site for competitive Pokemon and then define 'competitive pokemon' as something entirely different from what Gamefreak puts out than it isn't actually, quote "cutting edge". You can have all the analyzes you want but they don't mean a thing outside your walls if they aren't relevant to Gamefreak. It boils down to this: Gamefreak can survive well on without Smogon but Smogon need Gamefreak and their intellectual property to survive - disclaimer required!

As for arbitrary rules, they are. The tiering of FPS and SSBB were brought up earlier but they are different altogether from the banning done in your fairytale meta. Comparing something like the banning of some weapons or of certain characters is one thing which is entirely different from the banning of move(sets). For example, banning evasion serves no purpose other than to bend the metagame in the favor of the people here at Smogon. Evasion isn't an unfair advantage though because there are moves that specifically deal with it: Hone Claws and Coil, plus never miss moves such as Shock Wave and Aerial Ace. With the addition of something like Topsy Turvy, the same could be said with the Moody ability (and evasion again, as well). Weak moves such as Bullet Punch and Vaccum Wave are popularly used because there is no need for something like Aerial Ace when there is an evasion clause in place. You talk about interesting, but that sounds pretty boring to me. Tiering Pokemon is one thing, but creating heavily complex rules and banning moves you don't like to shape those tiers is something different altogether. Personally I think you'd be able to benefit greatly from taking in what LastFootnote had to say about how things are currently being done here and making some tweaks. No sense in reiterating what he said but I would like to note specifically that (as he mentioned) GameFreak has come a long way from First Gen and the every generation has seen attempts at balancing the game. It's Sixth Gen and they're pretty much there now; add the fact that you have unnecessary rules (for various move(sets)) and it seems like it's time for Smogon to evolve with the game, not against it.

PS. Away from the net, sorry for the tardy timing of the post. As much as this is about quality of post, I would argue a standard of what is acceptable can't really be developed in something such as researching as what is being researched is guided specifically by the past metagame expectations. E.g. you wouldn't be looking to see if Double Team applies to anything bulky because there is an evasion clause in place.

I probably don't need to really post in the thread, but it should be said that the purpose of Smogon is (and should be) to uphold a healthy and competitive metagame. It should be assumed its "playerbase" will do everything they think is necessary to do so. While I certainly haven't agreed with all the decisions that have been made along the way, it's easy to see why some are there in the first place. Not to turn this into an Evasion thread, but it brings in an uncompetitive and luck based aspect into the game. It doesn't take much to see that. It should mean something if the Evasion Clause had been around for so long.



To actually touch upon the original topic? What can I say. If unsure that your thread/reply is not the best idea, find a way to figure out if it is. Lurk more, do some searches, or even ask questions. I'm sure there are people who would be glad to help. Some even say they are open to assisting, just contact them.

Just make sure whatever you add to any thread can be built off of to move the topic forward.

 

[anoriega94]

The tiering of FPS and SSBB were brought up earlier but they are different altogether from the banning done in your fairytale meta. Comparing something like the banning of some weapons or of certain characters is one thing which is entirely different from the banning of move(sets).

This is the wrong way to look at it. Those "movesets" arent banned in ubers. While most of us at smogon view ubers as a ban list, its still a perfectly viable tier where everything goes. The only reason they dont ban more specific things in other games is they cant. Meta knight in ssbb is just overall too good for the rest of the game and so he was banned. If the competitive metagame had any way to just balance meta knight, they would. Thats what makes pokemon so great. Theres more ways to customize the metagame to attempt to make a perfectly balanced tier with many different viable strategies and pokemon. The point is supposed to be that there isnt one dominant strategy. The point is balance. And the point is competitiveness. Evasion make the game less competitive. While pokemon does have many characteristics that take probability into account, evasion can take things to a whole new level. And we dont want this to be competitive rock paper scissors. We want this to be purely competitive. Probability will still always play a large role in pokemon. Obviously you could prepare a team to get past evasion, but it would limit your team to pokemon that carry stab aerial ace. Imagine an aegislash who has been passed moody boosts from smeargle. resists aerial ace, cant be hit by aura sphere, cant be hit by clear smog, and would kill your pokemon long before you kill it. This would become the dominant strategy in the metagame. Lead with moody smeargle, protect, sub stall to get boosts, baton pass to aegislash. From there, its just keep using moves till you finally hit one.

No one wants to play "competitive" pokemon like that. Its not competitive that way.

P.S. I know there are other moves that pokemon could use that always hit that could take a decent chunk from aegislash, and i know that the strategy is counterable. I just think it make the game more one-dimensional.

 

[Reapehify]

I probably don't need to really post in the thread, but it should be said that the purpose of Smogon is (and should be) to uphold a healthy and competitive metagame. It should be assumed its "playerbase" will do everything they think is necessary to do so. While I certainly haven't agreed with all the decisions that have been made along the way, it's easy to see why some are there in the first place. Not to turn this into an Evasion thread, but it brings in an uncompetitive and luck based aspect into the game. It doesn't take much to see that. It should mean something if the Evasion Clause had been around for so long.



To actually touch upon the original topic? What can I say. If unsure that your thread/reply is not the best idea, find a way to figure out if it is. Lurk more, do some searches, or even ask questions. I'm sure there are people who would be glad to help. Some even say they are open to assisting, just contact them.

Just make sure whatever you add to any thread can be built off of to move the topic forward.

I think this thread is probably more of a possible Godsend than you can imagine. Not only did it start as a way for moderators to address the standard of quality posts but it has become a two-way street for conflict over nature of intent here at Smogon. Conflict is the best possible way to breed positive change; of course it takes a bit more than conflict to breed, just like anything else it takes a pair to breed. Conflicts bed mate for positive change is an open mind, a willingness to consider and evaluate. When you pair up the conflict of beliefs and the willingness to consider and evaluate the beliefs with something other than each its counterpart you get one of the following three examples: (I'm not rambling, I'm making a point here... soon)

1. The conflict of the belief will be ineffective due to strong conviction for the belief (Didn't have an open mind/positive conflict);
2. The conflict of the belief will work and the belief will be discarded and replaced (Didn't have a belief in anything);
3. The conflict of the belief will be sucessful and the belief will be reevaluated (Perfect blend)

These examples are essentially what's possible for Smogon (and for that matter, everything else) to have happen using this thread as a crux for how the community - new and old - feel about how Smogon should shift (or not) for the Sixth Gen. Change isn't always good but I'd like to refer you to Occam's Razor, which essentially states the easier it is to tell the truth, the more likely that that's the true way to tell the truth. Pardon my ironic statement, but if the simplest way is the right way than Smogon has been overshooting more and more the closer we get to today's time.

I never had any intention of making this about an evasion clause but I think that the evasion clause highlights the bulky awkwardness of carrying over past metagame rulings to a new generation. Lets take anoriega's example of Smeargle.

Obviously you could prepare a team to get past evasion, but it would limit your team to pokemon that carry stab aerial ace. Imagine an aegislash who has been passed moody boosts from smeargle. resists aerial ace, cant be hit by aura sphere, cant be hit by clear smog, and would kill your pokemon long before you kill it. This would become the dominant strategy in the metagame. Lead with moody smeargle, protect, sub stall to get boosts, baton pass to aegislash. From there, its just keep using moves till you finally hit one.

So.. you have one or two pokemon with something like stab Aerial Ace and it's a treason? That's bullocks. Both Scizor and Hitmontop learn Aerial Ace and they have Technician to boost it up to a base 90 move. Given their respective base ATK stats that's nothing to laugh at. Flying is almost as neutral as you can get for typing as well. There's also the fact that Substitute doesn't block sound moves which mean something like a Smeargle setting up Moody behind a sub is irrelevant if you have a proper way to deal with it, just like anything else in your current metagame. The ability Scrappy can be used with a multitude of moves primarily Swift/Roar which would hit ghosts as well. You could easily turn a phazer into a phazer for evasion too. It just takes more strategy. As for probability, there is far more probability in the game than you give credit for. When you do calculations on whether or not a pokemon will be OHKO'd and the range for damage output is from, say for example, 92.81 - 101.09, then than is probability on the same level as evasion. Again, switch out Swords Dance for Hone Claws and that evens things up - you could easily baton Hone claws as well.

Look, the bottom line is when you ban something it might very well be broken but that doesn't mean it will stay broken. Around First and Second Gen I can definitely see the need to ban something like evasion because it had no counters. But since Third Gen and on there have been increasingly more counters which you relegate to moot because you would rather outright keep it banned than use the tools Gamefreak gave you to really make it interesting.

 

[LastFootnote]

But here's the question: why? You keep talking about how we're being old fashioned by sticking with 6v6, yet you never really give any reasons to change to 3v3 beside "Game Freak does it." I've said this before, but we are not Game Freak. This is Smogon. Game Freak doesn't cater to primarily competitive players. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't have an active community that constantly engages in competitive discussion regarding metagames and potential changes. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't have a tier organization that gives many Pokemon an environment that they can shine in whereas they would otherwise be overshadowed by something else and may never see use except for novelty reasons. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't constantly update their tiers based on changes in the metagame and the rise and fall in usage of certain Pokemon. Smogon does. Game Freak doesn't constantly hold suspect tests for certain Pokemon or strategies that have been declared broken by a sizable portion of the competitive community. Smogon does. Game Freak and Smogon are just so different that it doesn't make sense to conform to Game Freak for the sake of conforming to Game Freak.

I never claimed that Smogon should conform to GameFreak simply for the sake of doing so. The reason that Smogon should support GameFreak's formats first and foremost is that they are the format that GameFreak is actually balancing. GameFreak absolutely caters to competitive players. Do you think they'd bother tweaking the power and accuracy of so many moves this gen for the casual players? Laughable.

The reason Smogon needs all of its tiers is that the 6v6 system it uses heavily favors some Pokémon over others. I'm not claiming that every single fully-evolved Pokémon is viable under GameFreak's rules, but the majority of them are viable in one of the four battle formats (Sinlges, Doubles, Triples, Rotation) without the need for crazy, hard-to-remember tiers. As for not having a bunch of suspect tests and things mid-gen, that's a combination of logistics issues and wanting consistency.

Another question: what is it about 3v3 that makes it seem so "official" to you? If I'm not mistaken, aren't 3v3 battles only reinforced in 5th Gen Random Matchup and 6th Gen Battle Spot? You can easily play against friends over Wi-Fi with full teams of 6. This has been the case ever since the first RBY link battles. Just because Game Freak introduced the new Random Matchup feature with its own ruleset doesn't mean we are forced to follow it at all times. You also have to consider reasons why they created this restriction. Perhaps they wanted to discourage stall tactics and make games go quicker? This theory is certainly backed up by the presence of a command timer and a full battle timer. They probably guessed that many players just want to get on Wi-Fi and play a bunch of matches without having to face delays in their games due to a long stall match, so they made a simple change in an attempt to keep things at a quicker pace and reduce the time per match. However, this is not the same case on simulators. For one thing, connections on simulators tend to run quicker than those over Wi-Fi, and the shorter animations (or lack thereof) cause individual turns to run more quickly. Not only that, but we believe in trying to maintain viability of the most types of team styles possible, so it would be quite inappropriate to cause a change like 6v6 -> 3v3 that would further hurt the viability of stall teams.

Do you really not know the history here? 3v3 is almost as old as Pokémon itself. It's been around since 1st gen (Pokémon Stadium on the N64). Nintendo's own "Simulators", the console games, have been using it ever since. With the advent of 5th gen, GameFreak abolished the console battling games and the rules therefore migrated onto handhelds. It's not new.

Does GameFreak want to discourage stall teams? Maybe, but I really doubt it. Do you think they'd be creating new moves, etc. that encourage stalling tactics if that were the case (Grassy Terrain, Venom Drench just off the top of my head)? Would they have reduced the power of several of the most powerful moves? I don't think so. As for timers, last I played, the online simulators also had such timers. And what's the in-game time limit for a battle? An hour? I think that's long enough for 99% of 3v3 stall teams to do their jobs.

You also have to learn to appreciate the differences of the two mediums of play. Smogon and Game Freak both have two different rulesets, and this gives players two distinguishable choices when deciding which type of metagame they want to play. There are many, many people who prefer rules like 6v6, no Item Clause, Evasion/Sleep Clause, level 100 matches, and Smogon's particular tiering system. By trying to assimilate Smogon to Game Freak by changing those factors, you take away that choice from players who prefer those factors while doing no one else any favors. Why don't we just let people choose and play with the diverse choices before them? It's not like being different has caused the community to suffer. Believe it or not, many players are attracted to Smogon for such rules as those listed earlier, especially our organized tier system, and this is evidence by the fact that Pokemon Showdown!'s OU ladder alone saw over 1.1 million battles in the month of September alone! If your concern is that we'll become obsolete by not assimilating to Game Freak, then rest assured that it simply isn't happening any time soon.

I never suggested that 6v6 play should be abolished, so let's not pretend that I did. Obviously lots of people enjoy 6v6 or Smogon wouldn't be as big as it is. What I'm saying is that either Smogon should either really support GameFreak's formats as one of their primary focuses OR that Smogon should change their front page and/or "About Smogon" page to make it clear that Smogon primarily cares about its own, self-created format and that the vast majority of their advertised articles, tutoring and mentoring programs, etc. are geared toward that, rather than the official games.

Actually, the response was that 6v6 is more competitive, not the only truly competitive medium of play. That said, any one bit of evidence to show that 6v6 is even slightly more competitive than 3v3 would be enough to make a point.

"Competitive" is a buzzword that doesn't mean anything in the context that it's often used here. Players can be competitive or not. A game is exactly as competitive as the players choose to make it. If you mean "skill-based", say that.

3v3 is much more fast-paced than 6v6 due to the smaller team size. In particular, stall teams suffer during a transition from 6v6 to 3v3. Well built stall teams are full of Pokemon that have different support roles and/or form solid cores. Even with access to all 6 teamslots, creating a solid stall team has become harder and harder with each new generation. With access to only 3 Pokemon at a time, it's even harder to cover everything; unless your opponent just didn't build a very solid team, you're going to be very hard pressed to find a 3 Pokemon core that can cover everything your opponent has on their team. Not only that, but one of stall's biggest weapons, hazard support, is heavily crippled in 3v3 matches. With only 3 Pokemon and far less switching involved, there is a much lower ability to deal good amounts of passive damage via hazards over time. The emphasis on offense and low viability of stall makes 3v3 less varied than 6v6.

No, it doesn't. You keep equating the viability of stall teams (specifically the kind of stall teams you're used to building) with variety of the metagame. You of course completely ignore all of the Pokémon and moves that the 6v6 format itself obsoletes (in part due to the omnipresence of Stealth Rock). Your reasoning that stall becomes less viable when you only have 3 Pokémon in battle also seems to completely ignore that your opponent also has only 3 Pokémon with which to threaten your stall team.

More emphasis on switching is definitely a plus. It's the biggest thing that separates us from the in-game A.I. The ability to switch in and out intelligently is one of the most important fundamental skills that any competitive player needs to learn. Being able to switch in and out is what keeps your Skarmory safe from the opponent's Heatran so that it can counter your opponent's SubToxic Gliscor later on down the road. It's the entire reason why moves like Stealth Rock and Pursuit are even any good.

3v3 has less switching, not no switching. It's still got plenty, trust me. I 100% agree that switching is a vital part of the Singles game. A 1v1 game really would be very dull. But your claim that more switching is better is equally absurd. Let's say GameFreak created an 18v18 format. Here you'd see many times more switching even than in 6v6. The chance that you'd have a hard counter to whatever your opponent brought out would go way up. Would this be a more skill-based format? Probably. Would most of Smogon's players switch over to it? Doubtful. I submit that they'd stick with 6v6 because that's what they've always played and they're resistant to change.

It's true that at the beginning due to Team Preview, you're going to have an equal number of Pokemon to analyze in both 3v3 and 6v6. However, once you find out what your opponent's 3 chosen Pokemon are, it becomes significantly less complex to guess the opponent's general strategy and respond to it simply due to the fact that you're dealing with half as many threats as you would be dealing with in a 6v6 match.

But did you bring the right 3 Pokémon to respond to those threats? The pre-game selection of your 3 Pokémon is a very high-skill decision that is completely absent from the 6v6 format. There is no chance at all in this process; it's all prediction. And I think that you and I can agree that prediction is at the heart of what makes Pokémon great.

Seeing as how 3v3 matches are primarily enforced on Random Matchup, you can't actually battle the same person again for a 2 out of 3 round. In addition, the same thing can be said about 6v6 matches. In fact, many tournaments require 2 out of 3 in order to further reduce hax, so 6v6 would still have the advantage there.

Again, on Random Matchup (a.k.a. a ladder), you don't need a rematch because luck balances out over time. As for most tournaments already using best 2 of 3, my argument still holds. In the amount of time you could play best 2 of 3 in 6v6, you could play best 3 of 5 in 3v3.

Team matchup has been a problem even in 6v6 battles for a long time. As more and more powerful threats are introduced, it becomes harder and harder to cover everything you need to. This is why competitive Pokemon has become more a game of checks than a game of counters in recent times, the same reason that stall has been suffering. This is no different in 3v3 battles. What is different is the fact that you essentially come into a game at 3 vs 6. You might know which 3 Pokemon you picked, but until you know for sure what 3 Pokemon your opponent picked, you're forced to act as if you're fighting all 6 of your opponent's Pokemon until you're sure of what you're up against. Chances are that you won't be able to cover everything on the opponent's team with just 3 team slots, so you'll just have to take a guess at what your opponent is using and try to plan accordingly. If you guess right, you could easily defeat the opponent. If you guess wrong, they could just as easily defeat you. This is why team matchup is worse in 3v3 battles, even if just a little. At least in 6v6 battles you know your opponent's full hand from the beginning and are able to use every resource on your team to formulate a method of defeating whatever's in front of you, but 3v3 doesn't have that luxury.

You talk as if the three Pokémon you and your opponent choose is random. Predicting which 3 Pokémon your opponent will bring and choosing your own 3 accordingly is 100% prediction; no randomness involved.

It's true that Smogon supports the 6v6 metagame first and foremost (although it's nowhere near the only supported style of play), but that doesn't mean that Smogon players don't have experience in Game Freak's metagames. Many players here have played metagames such as VGCs and 3v3 singles. I myself have played a lot on Random Matchup, and personally I find 6v6 a lot more interesting since I don't feel like I'm forced to bottleneck my team into just three slots in the hope that I have the right Pokemon to cover the right opponents. It is a matter of opinions, but I'd wager that most of the opinions here are from players that have experienced both mediums of play, not from those that have been sheltered into one medium ever since they started playing Pokemon.

I too have plenty of experience in both formats (albeit mostly in 3rd and 4th gens; I mostly sat 5th gen out). Let me ask you a question. Did you actually train a team for the 3v3 meta, or did you just train a standard 6v6 team and play that in random matchup?

I think a lot of players on Smogon prefer the 6v6 format, but that's in large part because those that don't like it tend to leave Smogon; there's not much for 'em here. I myself mostly stick around to do and read research. Smogon has the very best research team, bar none!

 

[Arcticblast]

The best way to look at Smogon and evasion is that we're a gaming community who likes to play by our own rules while keeping game mechanics intact. We're trying to create a balanced metagame that doesn't have anything crazy powerful while still being fun to play. As much as we like to think we are (I'm guilty of this as well), we aren't the be-all, end-all of competitive Pokemon. We're basically a club that continues to attract new members.

For what it's worth, nobody actually enjoys playing against Evasion. Search for "Minimize Blissey" and you'll find countless VGC players complaining about how much they hate having to deal with Minimize Blissey.

 

[Reapehify]

I never claimed that Smogon should conform to GameFreak simply for the sake of doing so. The reason that Smogon should support GameFreak's formats first and foremost is that they are the format that GameFreak is actually balancing. GameFreak absolutely caters to competitive players. Do you think they'd bother tweaking the power and accuracy of so many moves this gen for the casual players? Laughable.

Bold is my take on it.

Does GameFreak want to discourage stall teams? As for timers, last I played, the online simulators also had such timers. And what's the in-game time limit for a battle? An hour? I think that's long enough for 99% of 3v3 stall teams to do their jobs.

The timer is 30 minutes with each attack allowed to take a minute, giving you at most 30 turns. Take this as you will, but setting up dual screens and stalling out an opponent with Toxic is most certainly viable in that amount of time. Also note that stall is a tactic that in most cases don't rely on the timer running out, but the amount of time you have overall to accomplish your set up. 30 minutes is more than enough.


What I'm saying is that either Smogon should either really support GameFreak's formats as one of their primary focuses OR that Smogon should change their front page and/or "About Smogon" page to make it clear that Smogon primarily cares about its own, self-created format and that the vast majority of their advertised articles, tutoring and mentoring programs, etc. are geared toward that, rather than the official games.

"Competitive" is a buzzword that doesn't mean anything in the context that it's often used here. Players can be competitive or not. A game is exactly as competitive as the players choose to make it. If you mean "skill-based", say that.

I've been saying this myself, and I think it's a core aspect of the argument being presented against any 'traditionalists'. I use that term loosely to categorize proponents opposed to change.


3v3 has less switching, not no switching. It's still got plenty, trust me. I 100% agree that switching is a vital part of the Singles game. A 1v1 game really would be very dull. But your claim that more switching is better is equally absurd. Let's say GameFreak created an 18v18 format. Here you'd see many times more switching even than in 6v6. The chance that you'd have a hard counter to whatever your opponent brought out would go way up. Would this be a more skill-based format? Probably. Would most of Smogon's players switch over to it? Doubtful. I submit that they'd stick with 6v6 because that's what they've always played and they're resistant to change.

I both agree and disagree. Everything in this paragraph is agreeable with the exception of the example. The example is pretty outrageous. An 18 v. 18 match up would essentially give you access to (potentially) one Pokemon of every type which, to be honest, distorts how the game would be played more than 6v.6 compared to 3 v. 3. Essentially 18 v. 18 would be ALL about set up as the amount of switching would equate to damage done in the long run. If you think Stealth Rock, Spikes, or Toxic Spikes were a factor in 6 v. 6 than they would be all but the crux of a metagame in 18 v. 18. Before I digress though, while switching would be almost the be-all-end-all of such an absurd metagame it is still very important in both 6 v. 6 and 3 v. 3.. This point is covered however so I'll simply quote: "But did you bring the right 3 Pokémon to respond to those threats? The pre-game selection of your 3 Pokémon is a very high-skill decision that is completely absent from the 6v6 format. There is no chance at all in this process; it's all prediction. And I think that you and I can agree that prediction is at the heart of what makes Pokémon great."

You talk as if the three Pokémon you and your opponent choose is random. Predicting which 3 Pokémon your opponent will bring and choosing your own 3 accordingly is 100% prediction; no randomness involved.

Important quote is important because it seems to encapsulate the image given to 3 v. 3 as to why 6 v. 6 is better (along with the other issues addressed, but not as essentially as this point).

The best way to look at Smogon and evasion is that we're a gaming community who likes to play by our own rules while keeping game mechanics intact. We're trying to create a balanced metagame that doesn't have anything crazy powerful while still being fun to play. As much as we like to think we are (I'm guilty of this as well), we aren't the be-all, end-all of competitive Pokemon. We're basically a club that continues to attract new members.

For what it's worth, nobody actually enjoys playing against Evasion. Search for "Minimize Blissey" and you'll find countless VGC players complaining about how much they hate having to deal with Minimize Blissey.

I don't even know how to respond to this... Do you realize that the post is contradictory to itself and also shows exactly why Smogon cannot credibly refute that it makes arbitrary rules for arbitrary reasons?

1. How can you make your own rules and still keep mechanics intact? That's impossible. You are, by definition of making your own rules, changing the mechanics that are intact in your metagame. While intentions may be good they certainly are not pure and that is shown by a whiny community.
2. What difference does it make if people like playing against it? You know what, I don't think I like playing against King Shield Ageislash. Lets ban it, it's annoying and it's crazy powerful and even though there are counters for it who cares? It certainly isn't fun having my Pokemon take a -2 ATK loss; I have to switch my Pokemon while it Swords Dances and gains free set up... and oh no my team sucks because I am never prepared for it even though it's really popular.

Those two reasons are the reasons you just presented as to why Smogon is just in its decision making. When you take a step back, how professional do they really sound? I think they speak for themselves as to why there should be change as to how Smogon works if Smogon is ever meant to be a premier resource outside of Smogon itself.

Edit: I'd also just like to point out that I couldn't find the thread in any search bars, so a link would be lovely. Thank you.

 

[LastFootnote]

I don't even know how to respond to this... Do you realize that the post is contradictory to itself and also shows exactly why Smogon cannot credibly refute that it makes arbitrary rules for arbitrary reasons?

Dude, I don't think Arcticblast was trying to justify Evasion Clause. He was just saying that it's not fun to play against evasion. I don't think Evasion Clause is necessary, but I agree that it's frustrating to face a lucky evasion user.

Also, there is a difference between banning stuff and changing the game mechanics. GameFreak themselves ban event legends, etc.

 

[anoriega94]

Ok, we can argue whether or not evasion and moody should it should not be banned the whole day and not get anywhere. Bottom line is if you don't like the rules, don't play here. It's as simple as that. You can easily go on serebii forums or something and arrange competitive battles with your own rules. All I know is I've been playing here for years. I started on the shoddy battle simulators. And I've always liked the community and the way that it goes about creating a metagame. I enjoy what it has created and I know how much work has gone into it. There's no point in complaining about evasion clause or anything. Banning evasion clause is the same thing as banning meta knight. It still is fair if it isn't banned because everyone can use it but it isn't as competitive and limits you to just that strategy. I guarantee you if meta knight wasnt banned 90 percent of competitive players would use him.

If evasion wasnt banned, every last strategy would be evasion based or counter evasion based. It's more one dimensional like I said and is rather play smogemon on that evasiomon

 

[Arcticblast]

I don't even know how to respond to this... Do you realize that the post is contradictory to itself and also shows exactly why Smogon cannot credibly refute that it makes arbitrary rules for arbitrary reasons?

nope

1. How can you make your own rules and still keep mechanics intact? That's impossible. You are, by definition of making your own rules, changing the mechanics that are intact in your metagame. While intentions may be good they certainly are not pure and that is shown by a whiny community.

None of the rules Smogon uses are unable to be enforced in the game. This is what is meant by sticking to the mechanics of the game. We're not altering the way evasion works, for example; we're simply agreeing that none of us really want to play with evasion boosting moves and not using them in battle.

2. What difference does it make if people like playing against it? You know what, I don't think I like playing against King Shield Ageislash. Lets ban it, it's annoying and it's crazy powerful and even though there are counters for it who cares? It certainly isn't fun having my Pokemon take a -2 ATK loss; I have to switch my Pokemon while it Swords Dances and gains free set up... and oh no my team sucks because I am never prepared for it even though it's really popular.

King's Shield only triggers the drop against contact moves and doesn't block status moves. You used King's Shield against that Talonflame? Cool, it hit you with Will-O-Wisp. You can play around Aegislash (or use some of the Pokemon that just destroy it, like Diggersby or common Fire Blast users). You can't play around evasion. It's a flat boost to your evasion, takes no strategy to use, and provides a boost that can luck its way past an entire team unless you either pack a very situational move/ability or you manage to push your way past it.

Those two reasons are the reasons you just presented as to why Smogon is just in its decision making. When you take a step back, how professional do they really sound? I think they speak for themselves as to why there should be change as to how Smogon works if Smogon is ever meant to be a premier resource outside of Smogon itself.

Pretty sure I just refuted this indirectly by responding to your other arguments.

Edit: I'd also just like to point out that I couldn't find the thread in any search bars, so a link would be lovely. Thank you.

It's not one thread. Go Google it and something should come up.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Wall of Text

I never claimed that Smogon should conform to GameFreak simply for the sake of doing so. The reason that Smogon should support GameFreak's formats first and foremost is that they are the format that GameFreak is actually balancing.

That's actually not a good answer at all. You're saying that we should conform to Game Freak's formats just because Game Freak is trying to balance them? That honestly doesn't make any sense at all. We are in no way obligated to follow their format just because they make attempts to balance them. Your whole argument here is just "give them a chance, and if you don't, you're old fashioned."

But this brings up another big question: why does everyone keep acting like Game Freak is creating balanced metagames? They try to balance out certain things through new mechanics, but the metagames themselves remain unchanged from day one. There are several strategies that even in a 3v3 metagame are obviously more powerful than others, if not outright broken. Don't pretend that there aren't. However, you know what Game Freak does about that? Absolutely nothing. Their initial banlist is literally 660+ BST legends + pixies + a couple of other 600 BST legends (along with a couple of other weird bans for technical reasons or such, namely Chatot and Sky Drop).

GameFreak absolutely caters to competitive players. Do you think they'd bother tweaking the power and accuracy of so many moves this gen for the casual players? Laughable.

Move mechanics are constantly changed. This in no way proves that they're trying to cater to competitive players at all. Do you honestly think that casual players never care about accuracy or power or have their own personal wishlists of future move mechanic changes?

The reason Smogon needs all of its tiers is that the 6v6 system it uses heavily favors some Pokémon over others. I'm not claiming that every single fully-evolved Pokémon is viable under GameFreak's rules, but the majority of them are viable in one of the four battle formats (Sinlges, Doubles, Triples, Rotation) without the need for crazy, hard-to-remember tiers.

If you have a hard time remembering the tiers, we have a database with the Pokemon in each tier listed quite plainly, lol. Besides, you get used to which Pokemon are in which tier very easily by actually playing them. "Hard to remember" is a really lazy excuse for not wanting a tier system.

Also, could you please provide ample examples of Pokemon that are actually good in Doubles/Triples/Rotation battles whereas they would not be otherwise? Because many Pokemon such as Kangaskhan and Musharna are probably going to have a lot easier time shining in one of Smogon's lower tiers than in one of these alternate metagames.

As for not having a bunch of suspect tests and things mid-gen, that's a combination of logistics issues and wanting consistency.

Smogon doesn't have this problem. Yet another thing that makes Smogon and Game Freak different.

Do you really not know the history here? 3v3 is almost as old as Pokémon itself. It's been around since 1st gen (Pokémon Stadium on the N64). Nintendo's own "Simulators", the console games, have been using it ever since. With the advent of 5th gen, GameFreak abolished the console battling games and the rules therefore migrated onto handhelds. It's not new.

I know it's not new, but in no way is it forced. Even in 5th and 6th Gen, you're only forced to play by these rules on Random Matchup and Battle Spot. 6v6 is still very possible, so I'm still not seeing how this can be considered "unsupported." If Smogon played 8v8 or something, you'd have a fantastic point, but that's simply not the case.

Does GameFreak want to discourage stall teams? Maybe, but I really doubt it. Do you think they'd be creating new moves, etc. that encourage stalling tactics if that were the case (Grassy Terrain, Venom Drench just off the top of my head)? Would they have reduced the power of several of the most powerful moves? I don't think so.

To be honest, they also made Defog an unblockable Rapid Spin, crippled permanent weather which both helps stall by weakening Rain/Sun offense while also hurting stall by eliminating effective weather based stall teams, removed two of Steel's resistances, introduced insanely powerful Mega forms for Pokemon like Lucario and Garchomp, specifically created Mega Gengar which breaks stall down the middle by removing the ability to switch out and actually counter the threat, etc. Besides these, none of the perks you mentioned (especially Grassy Terrain and Venom Drench, which are situational at best) can quite measure up to the impact of limiting each player to 3 Pokemon teams.

As for timers, last I played, the online simulators also had such timers. And what's the in-game time limit for a battle? An hour? I think that's long enough for 99% of 3v3 stall teams to do their jobs.

Timers were honesty a small detail, but at any rate, the timer on PS! is completely optional and must be activated by one of the players. In fact, many tournaments don't use it simply because they prefer to give each player as much time as they need (without going completely overboard, mind you).

I never suggested that 6v6 play should be abolished, so let's not pretend that I did. Obviously lots of people enjoy 6v6 or Smogon wouldn't be as big as it is. What I'm saying is that either Smogon should either really support GameFreak's formats as one of their primary focuses OR that Smogon should change their front page and/or "About Smogon" page to make it clear that Smogon primarily cares about its own, self-created format and that the vast majority of their advertised articles, tutoring and mentoring programs, etc. are geared toward that, rather than the official games.

That's just it. Smogon does care primarily about its own formats, and most of the articles and advice you see on this site are geared towards that. We are a site dedicated to promoting competitive battling. We are constantly trying to achieve optimal competitive metagames through suspect testing and updated tiers, and our articles and analyses are designed to help people learn the metagames that we set forth to design. We are always happy for people to come play our tiers and enjoy our metagames, but we are in no way trying to equate ourselves to Game Freak, Pokemon Online, or whatever other game authority with their own rulesets.

"Competitive" is a buzzword that doesn't mean anything in the context that it's often used here. Players can be competitive or not. A game is exactly as competitive as the players choose to make it. If you mean "skill-based", say that.

"Competitive" in this context is almost always used to mean "skill-based." In fact, I have even defined my own use of the word several times before, so there shouldn't really be any confusion at this point.

No, it doesn't. You keep equating the viability of stall teams (specifically the kind of stall teams you're used to building) with variety of the metagame.

If more types of teams are viable and used, then the variety of the metagame will be greater than otherwise. It doesn't take much to see that.

You of course completely ignore all of the Pokémon and moves that the 6v6 format itself obsoletes (in part due to the omnipresence of Stealth Rock).

Then that's the fault of Stealth Rock, not 6v6. Can you give specific examples of Pokemon that are invalidated by 6v6?

Your reasoning that stall becomes less viable when you only have 3 Pokémon in battle also seems to completely ignore that your opponent also has only 3 Pokémon with which to threaten your stall team.

3 Pokemon means less switching around and less hazard damage, less room for certain roles (cleric, spinner, spinblocker, etc.), less room for strong defensive cores, etc. Most stall cores are generally solid with a weakness to only one or two threats, which is perfectly natural since it's impossible to cover everything in the game with just 3 Pokemon. However, it is far easier for offensive cores to cover all defensive Pokemon than it is for defensive cores to cover all offensive Pokemon. There are such things as offensive Pokemon that cannot be countered defensively (and much be simply kept in check as a result), but there is no such thing as a defensive Pokemon that cannot be countered offensively. So yes, offense has a much easier time with just 3 slots than defense does.

3v3 has less switching, not no switching. It's still got plenty, trust me. I 100% agree that switching is a vital part of the Singles game. A 1v1 game really would be very dull. But your claim that more switching is better is equally absurd. Let's say GameFreak created an 18v18 format. Here you'd see many times more switching even than in 6v6. The chance that you'd have a hard counter to whatever your opponent brought out would go way up. Would this be a more skill-based format? Probably. Would most of Smogon's players switch over to it? Doubtful. I submit that they'd stick with 6v6 because that's what they've always played and they're resistant to change.

Red herring, to be honest. 18v18 doesn't exist, so there's no point in bringing up such an extreme example. But a greater emphasis on switching does make the game more skill-based. As long as you see that, then the rest really comes down to opinions over which is more "fun."

But did you bring the right 3 Pokémon to respond to those threats? The pre-game selection of your 3 Pokémon is a very high-skill decision that is completely absent from the 6v6 format. There is no chance at all in this process; it's all prediction. And I think that you and I can agree that prediction is at the heart of what makes Pokémon great.

Nah, prediction is glorified guesswork. Intelligent analysis of risk and reward is a far more important skill.

Again, on Random Matchup (a.k.a. a ladder), you don't need a rematch because luck balances out over time. As for most tournaments already using best 2 of 3, my argument still holds. In the amount of time you could play best 2 of 3 in 6v6, you could play best 3 of 5 in 3v3.

The fact that you have to up the number of matches in 3v3 just to match the balance of hax offered by fewer 6v6 matches says something.

You talk as if the three Pokémon you and your opponent choose is random. Predicting which 3 Pokémon your opponent will bring and choosing your own 3 accordingly is 100% prediction; no randomness involved.

100% prediction is a pretty scary thought, to be honest, because prediction is just educated guessing. Even if you have great prediction skills, you're still hoping that your guess is right, and you're just going to have to take the loss if you guess wrong.

I too have plenty of experience in both formats (albeit mostly in 3rd and 4th gens; I mostly sat 5th gen out). Let me ask you a question. Did you actually train a team for the 3v3 meta, or did you just train a standard 6v6 team and play that in random matchup?

Yes, I have trained teams specifically for 3v3. In fact, I had a very successful "ladder" run with a DrizzleSwim team back on BW, which still proved to be just as broken in 3v3 as it was in 6v6 (maybe even moreso, since you have fewer teamslots to check it). Of course, my record ended up being something like 10-6 even though it was realistically more like 80-6 because of sore losers disconnecting all the time, but that's thankfully been fixed in XY.

So.. you have one or two pokemon with something like stab Aerial Ace and it's a treason? That's bullocks. Both Scizor and Hitmontop learn Aerial Ace and they have Technician to boost it up to a base 90 move. Given their respective base ATK stats that's nothing to laugh at. Flying is almost as neutral as you can get for typing as well.

Aerial Ace/Shock Wave/etc. are downright weak and inferior moves. Period. You can try to dance around that issue all you want, but they are. They're passable at best as coverage moves on Technician Pokemon (bar those that get STAB like Roserade and Scyther), but almost every other Pokemon would much rather be running a more powerful STAB or coverage move. Even with Technician users, the moves are still surprisingly weak. Take, for example, CB Scizor. Even with its great base 130 Atk stat with an Adamant nature, the Choice Band boost, and pseudo STAB due to Technician, Scizor can still only 3HKO the standard Double Booster Thundurus-T 3.78% of the time. Even Stealth Rock only guarantees a 3HKO, while Thundurus-T does a 64.13% minimum to Scizor with an unboosted Thunderbolt. Granted, Thundurus-T does resist the move, but it also has pitiful 79/70 physical bulk. These moves are nowhere near perfect answers, but more on that later.

There's also the fact that Substitute doesn't block sound moves which mean something like a Smeargle setting up Moody behind a sub is irrelevant if you have a proper way to deal with it, just like anything else in your current metagame.

The only good offensive sound moves are Boomburst, Bug Buzz, and I guess Hyper Voice. Boomburst is limited to Exploud, Chatot, and Noivern as of right now, and Noivern is the only one that even looks somewhat OU viable. Bug Buzz has Genesect and Volcarona, and that's about it. Hyper Voice...well, I'm not really sure what uses that besides Exploud and Chatot, which each now have Boomburst. Pyroar I guess? Regardless, none of this matters if the opponent gets enough SpD and/or evasion boosts and you can't break them.

The ability Scrappy can be used with a multitude of moves primarily Swift/Roar which would hit ghosts as well.

Did you research this? What gets Scrappy + Swift? Also, unless I've been missing something all these years, Roar and Whirlwind already affect Ghosts.

You could easily turn a phazer into a phazer for evasion too.

This is actually the one good check on your list, but not every team can afford to run a phazer. In fact, offensive teams rarely do. Phazing moves also do nothing to stop Baton Pass chains, which are some of the biggest benefactors of a repeal of the Evasion Clause out there. Not only that, but you also have to have the right phazer for the right opponent, but again, more about that later.

Again, switch out Swords Dance for Hone Claws and that evens things up - you could easily baton Hone claws as well.

There's a reason why Hone Claw is only used on niche stuff like SubRoost + DTail Kyurem-B and Hustle Durant. If you have another physical boosting move such as Swords Dance, it's going to be superior. Even if you don't, it's usually better to just forgo boosting altogether and run a fourth coverage move/Substitute/something instead of go for that +1 Atk boost.

There's one huge problem with all these "evasion checks." Do you know why you'd be using them? It's not just to keep in check any old legitimate skill-based strategy. You're using them to keep yourself from getting screwed over by the Random Number Generator. You're essentially forcing yourself to use inefficient or completely mediocre strategies just to keep your opponent from winning due to the luck of the draw. Not only that, but how do you know you have the right tools to beat the opponent's evasion move user? One thing I think people keep forgetting is that literally everything in the game capable of learning TMs can learn Double Team. If this were a one or two Pokemon deal, it would be another story, but an evasion abuser could be anything. I mentioned Scizor earlier; just because you toss on an Aerial Ace user doesn't mean that you're safe from everything, as your opponent's evasion booster might be something like Thundurus-T or Jirachi. Tossing on Roar Hippowdon as a phazer doesn't help too much when your opponent is attempting to sweep with Double Team Keldeo or Shaymin. Now, you're probably thinking, "Just run several different countermeasures to evasion," but do you see what you're doing at this point? You're using up multiple team and/or move slots just to stop a weapon of pure hax, which is especially bad considering many of these are mediocre or downright awful outside of stopping evasion. Do you honestly think this is healthy for a competitive metagame?

That isn't to say that I would outright oppose a new suspect test for it, but I'm just giving you a preview of some of the same arguments and complaints you're going to see in such a discussion. I've played in metagames with evasion allowed plenty of times (even a few times in XY) and it hasn't gotten any less luck-based or any more healthy for a metagame.

 

[anoriega94]

Agent Gibbs, thank you for taking the time to write that all. I completely agree

 

[Reapehify]

Dude, I don't think Arcticblast was trying to justify Evasion Clause. He was just saying that it's not fun to play against evasion. I don't think Evasion Clause is necessary, but I agree that it's frustrating to face a lucky evasion user.

Also, there is a difference between banning stuff and changing the game mechanics. GameFreak themselves ban event legends, etc.

But he was. His justification was that people don't like playing against Minimize Blissey and that the public outcry resulted in it (and evasion? Haven't seen the thread.) being banned and a change to the default mechanics being made. The same example can be seen in my whining about Ageislash, which to an extent, I actually find really annoying and not fun to play against. Which leads to how banning something can change game mechanics.

Hate on Minimize Blissey -> Banning Minimize Blissey -> Banning Evasion altogether.

Individual arguments can be made for issues like item and sleep clauses and banning Pokemon with x-sets but I would like to point out in no way that I am focusing solely on evasion it is just one example, which in this day and age, has grown stale in the new metagame. I'm not advocating specifically for evasion to be removed or upheld, I am advocating that as much work has gone into playtesting for any specific generation that work should essentially be hogtied to that generation and that generation alone.

anoriega: We couldn't argue evasion/moody/x-banning all day because if it were a real academic pursuit argument and opinion would be put aside and facts would speak for themselves. Which isn't that what is supposed to be done anyway? Comparing something to Meta Knight and excusing everything by 'that's how it's done, like it or leave' is no different than what Smogon as a community accuses Gamefreak of.

Edit: I have half responded to and been robbed of my reply to you, Gibbs. I will get to that later.

 

[Arcticblast]

I didn't say Minimize Blissey resulted in Evasion being banned; I meant that in general people don't like to play against evasion and Minimize Blissey is an example of one of those evasion users people hate.

 

[noobcubed]

I'm not advocating specifically for evasion to be removed or upheld, I am advocating that as much work has gone into playtesting for any specific generation that work should essentially be hogtied to that generation and that generation alone.

Of course the metagame has changed from the last generation, and the banlist will end up looking quite different to generation V's banlist. However, the rules have to start somewhere, and, considering that many elements of the metagame haven't changed, probably more than those that have (eg, good old Choice Band Scizor is still there, and hasn't changed at all since DPP), it seems fair enough that last generation's rules, particularly those that do not deal with individual Pokemon, should carry over. Considering the large amount of overlap between the gen V and gen VI metagames (in the greater scheme of things, obviously they are completely different to us because we are obsessed with details), it seems more reasonable to assume that stuff that was banned should remain banned, than to assume that it should be freed. Either way, an assumption has to be made, so, while carrying over the previous banlist might not immediately give the best metagame with the most balanced ruleset, it is the lesser of two evils. Don't forget, there can be a suspect test at any time - one of the great things about Smogon's rules over Game Freak's is that they are not set in stone. Evasion and sleep have been nerfed quite severely, and it is quite possible that they will be suspected and even freed. But it is better that they are freed on the basis of rigorous testing than on the whim of a vocal minority.

 

[anoriega94]

Charizard, I don't care what you accuse this community of or what you accuse me of, the fact is that none of your arguing here is going to change anything. The like it or leave comment was just my way of trying to make you acknowledge the futility of all of this. I can absolutely assure you, the standard OU tier will not allow evasion under normal rules this generation. Regardless of these "facts" that you're pointing out.

That's all there is to it

 

[Reapehify]

I didn't say Minimize Blissey resulted in Evasion being banned; I meant that in general people don't like to play against evasion and Minimize Blissey is an example of one of those evasion users people hate.

I know you didn't say that, I did. It was more to show that certain strategies impeded the game as people wanted to play it, so instead of working around the Pokemon they banned the Pokemon to fit their game. In the same way that people think a sleep clause is necessary (which, with the addition of immunities to powder moves for grass and abilities that block grass/sound moves also seems suspect for being old news) they added a clause in for evasion and various other things too. I'm not saying that's not more fun, what I'm saying is the level of competition from banning that is debatable. Also, as have been said before, that the notion of competition is vague and misleading.

noobcubed: The lack of attitude in your post compared to others (mine included) here is a shining quality. Noteable mention.

I really only have one criticism about your explanation and that is that an assumption has to be made. Why? You can think of it as the lesser evil or you can make no assumptions and cover all your bases as the new metagame comes to fruition. It's development goes through hours of playtesting regardless and to create a new set of rules as problems arise makes sense with the continuing rise, fall, and ever increasing diversity of the game. I just think the old adage 'when you assume you make an ass out of you and me' stands true especially in the case of cross generation rulings.

anoriega: Why so hostile and defensive? Are you offended? I don't even know why you're still on about evasion as I repeatedly said it was an example. Take a chill pill, this is a discussion on the ins and outs and no one expects there to be any changes made even if they should be. (Then again that's the problem.) With the advent of X and Y and the addition of new people, something like this is bound to happen because the people coming in are going to expect that things are helping with X and Y Gamefreak style. I think the fact that your bottom line isn't an open mind but 'no matter what you say nothing will change because it simply won't' is sad because it shows that you aren't actually willing to discuss every possibility when it comes to what constitutes a competitive metagame or change in general. Just an FYI though, when one is trying to create change how do you think they go about it? You have to start somewhere, and in a thread directly aimed at 'what is the standard of professionalism and why we are it' I think you couldn't possibly get a better forum. Lastly, if what was being said was so futile, this thread would have died a while ago; instead it is a sea of intense debate on Smogon specific mechanics and rulings and its support of Gamefreak (and if all else fails, their need to change their 'about us' page). So no, it isn't futile; and yes change does come from conflict.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Here's the thing, Charizard6. Everyone has their own opinions about the different changes that we should or shouldn't undergo. To you, it may be obvious that the Evasion Clause is no longer needed and needs to be removed. To someone else, it seems just as obvious that the Evasion Clause is a worthy rule and should remain intact. As much as you may think you are right, many other people think that they are right. Every point you can come up with against the Evasion Clause can be countered by another point for Evasion Clause and vice versa, and that's okay. That's just healthy discussion, but the point I believe anoriega94 is trying to get across is that this is a community-wide issue. We institute clauses and bans with the best interests of our community and metagames in mind. If the vast majority of players find evasion too unhealthy for the metagame, too restricting on teambuilding, too luck-based, etc., then it'll stay banned, and that simply seems to be the case right now.

This isn't to say that a bunch of random players whining about evasion is what causes it to be banned either. As you may or may not be aware of, our suspect process is much more professional and complex than that. We always have a thread dedicated to quality discussion of the suspect. We have a ladder that stays up for weeks and allows all players to experience the metagame with and without the suspect. Then we hold a supsect vote where only the players who have proven their knowledge of the metagame through suspect requirements are allowed to vote. This is probably the best possible way of going about it out there, giving the community plenty of time to put the suspect to the test and then allowing only the most knowledgeable members make the decision. If any ban occurs, it will be because it was tested and rejected by the community, not because of a bunch of whiny players.

 

[anoriega94]

Charizard, that's child's play as far as Internet arguing goes. Escalating an argument and then telling them woah calm down isn't as sly as you think you are.

You basically implied I wasn't trying to have an intellectual debate and that I was just spewing out opinions not backed by anything. Obviously at that point I'm not going to argue and just tell you to leave.

Congrats dude, you have like 3 guys going back and forth with you. You're not changing anything because you haven't changed one mind so clearly you're approach isn't doing anything. Stop kidding yourself. You think you're the first guy to start an argument in the forums about evasion clause? Not even close. I've seen this same conversation for years and I've been around for a decent while. If there was anything id want to put money on with all of the change in this generation, it's that evasion clause will still exist.

You either acknowledge that fact or you dont. If you do, then you are doing nothing but criticizing smogon. In that case you can leave. If you actually think it will change, then you are going about this the wrong way. Youre not the martin luther king jr of the evasion clauseless battle. Nothing you can do will change anything. Either the community will decide it should be gotten rid of or they wont. It happens as a whole.

You seem to think that if you write a good enough argument on these forums that Zarel will descend from poke heaven on an arcanine and thank you as he pulls out a scroll from his robe and crosses out the evasion clause. lol seriously, I dont think you understand how decisions are made in this community.