• ME encounters a spooky skeletal dragon. Watch here as he shouts physics at it, in the hopes of preventing it from KOing itself.
  • All content from the former Roleplaying Games forum has been merged into the Writers' Workshop forum. You can find more information in this thread.

    We hope to see you roleplaying away soon!
  • The World Beyond Restructure is now finished! Check out the update here!
  • It's time for the Writer's Workshop Summer event: our second themed one-shot competition! Check out the sign-up thread here!
  • Hey everyone! The Writer's Workshop is hosting an exciting event, Trainers of Fanfiction! It's a community event focused around your characters!

Smogon (and others') banning of Pokemon; who are they to decide??

Is Evasion truly broken, or are there counters to it that can be used?

  • Yes! Double Team / Minimize is evil, and should be banned forever!

    Votes: 3 21.4%
  • No! There are are 15 moves that counter it (+5 more, depending) and items/abilities, too!

    Votes: 11 78.6%

  • Total voters
    14
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
KYUREM FORMS ERRYWHERE
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
286
Reaction score
0
@Stratago ; that's why I mentioned RMs last in that sentence, heheh. But seriously, considering the amount of backlash they received and with BW2 around the corner, the RMs will hopefully become playable in the near future. Until then, stick to the tourneys and playing with people you know. I know I will.
 
Former Slythe
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
2
As for anyone angry at Smogon for making rules that a lot of people outside their site also use (which maybe just says something about how more enjoyable those rules make competitive play), a majority of people using rules you don't agree with would have been a problem maybe 10 years ago, when it was hard to play a certain videogame with people outside your group of friends, so if they had rules you didn't like, you couldn't do much. However, nowadays we have a much more commonly used Internet, a place that not only has many sites made for talking to people around the world, but also many sites specifically made for talking to other pokemon fans around the world. This means you can easily find people who play with loads of rules, no rules or probably even people who like playing upside down and blind folded while masturbating into a cup of tea, all by just posting in one of the hundreds of sites (filled with thousands of pokemon players) requesting whatever type of battle you want.

So, although finding a match that goes by smogon's rules is easier, complaining about their rules instead of spending a few extra minutes to find a battle that goes against them is just sheer laziness.
 
70% Critical Hit Rate
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
293
Reaction score
0
As for anyone angry at Smogon for making rules that a lot of people outside their site also use (which maybe just says something about how more enjoyable those rules make competitive play), a majority of people using rules you don't agree with would have been a problem maybe 10 years ago, when it was hard to play a certain videogame with people outside your group of friends, so if they had rules you didn't like, you couldn't do much. However, nowadays we have a much more commonly used Internet, a place that not only has many sites made for talking to people around the world, but also many sites specifically made for talking to other pokemon fans around the world. This means you can easily find people who play with loads of rules, no rules or probably even people who like playing upside down and blind folded while masturbating into a cup of tea, all by just posting in one of the hundreds of sites (filled with thousands of pokemon players) requesting whatever type of battle you want.

So, although finding a match that goes by smogon's rules is easier, complaining about their rules instead of spending a few extra minutes to find a battle that goes against them is just sheer laziness.
Thanks a bunch for the input and disturbing imagery.
 
Prayers to Oak Creek
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
5,241
Reaction score
1
As for anyone angry at Smogon for making rules that a lot of people outside their site also use (which maybe just says something about how more enjoyable those rules make competitive play), a majority of people using rules you don't agree with would have been a problem maybe 10 years ago, when it was hard to play a certain videogame with people outside your group of friends, so if they had rules you didn't like, you couldn't do much. However, nowadays we have a much more commonly used Internet, a place that not only has many sites made for talking to people around the world, but also many sites specifically made for talking to other pokemon fans around the world. This means you can easily find people who play with loads of rules, no rules or probably even people who like playing upside down and blind folded while masturbating into a cup of tea, all by just posting in one of the hundreds of sites (filled with thousands of pokemon players) requesting whatever type of battle you want.

So, although finding a match that goes by smogon's rules is easier, complaining about their rules instead of spending a few extra minutes to find a battle that goes against them is just sheer laziness.
Thanks a bunch for the input and disturbing imagery.
I'm going to have to agree, in that you should cool down on the imagery.
 
Former Slythe
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
2
I hadn't had a lot of sleep...anyway my point remains the same.
 
70% Critical Hit Rate
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
293
Reaction score
0
"Why don't you just play Ubers?"
"It's logical for them to ban stuff."
"If you don't like it, find other people to play with."


I get it, okay? You all like Smogon, or whatever. I don't. If my opinion is offensive to you somehow, I'm sorry. Argumentum ad populum does not make Smogon or its rabid followers right. The creation of rules that don't exist just complicates things, and when those rules become so prolific that they start popping up outside of their gaming community - or when its members start acting like they're better than others because they follow special rules - it bothers me.
 
Last edited:
Prayers to Oak Creek
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
5,241
Reaction score
1
"Why don't you just play Ubers?"
"It's logical for them to ban stuff."
"If you don't like it, find other people to play with."


I get it, okay? You all like Smogon, or whatever. I don't. If my opinion is offensive to you somehow, I'm sorry. Argumentum ad populum does not make Smogon or its rabid followers right. The creation of rules that don't exist just complicates things, and when those rules become so prolific that they start popping up outside of their gaming community - or when its members start acting like they're better than others because they follow special rules - it bothers me.
No need to be defensive. When something is popular, it'll be popular, no way around that.
 
70% Critical Hit Rate
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
293
Reaction score
0
"Why don't you just play Ubers?"
"It's logical for them to ban stuff."
"If you don't like it, find other people to play with."


I get it, okay? You all like Smogon, or whatever. I don't. If my opinion is offensive to you somehow, I'm sorry. Argumentum ad populum does not make Smogon or its rabid followers right. The creation of rules that don't exist just complicates things, and when those rules become so prolific that they start popping up outside of their gaming community - or when its members start acting like they're better than others because they follow special rules - it bothers me.
No need to be defensive. When something is popular, it'll be popular, no way around that.
Smogon doesn't seem to think so; when something becomes too popular, they just ban it.
 
Prayers to Oak Creek
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
5,241
Reaction score
1
Smogon doesn't seem to think so; when something becomes too popular, they just ban it.
I remember when I was like that too. It takes a while to understand, but Smogon knows what they are doing. Popularity was never an issue or else Scizor would have been banned. They ban based off of what ruins a healthy competitive metagame.
 
Former Slythe
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
2
"Why don't you just play Ubers?"
"It's logical for them to ban stuff."
"If you don't like it, find other people to play with."


I get it, okay? You all like Smogon, or whatever. I don't. If my opinion is offensive to you somehow, I'm sorry. Argumentum ad populum does not make Smogon or its rabid followers right. The creation of rules that don't exist just complicates things, and when those rules become so prolific that they start popping up outside of their gaming community - or when its members start acting like they're better than others because they follow special rules - it bothers me.
People are not getting offended, you stated your opinion and people responded with theirs. There is the same amount of defensiveness in your posts as most other people's.

If there were no rules implemented, the game would just be filled with the exact same strategies and pokemon ever single match. Yes, some strategies or pokemon are still common, but at least there is still variety by playing with certain restriction.
Remember:
1. Smogon don't force all matches ever to have their most popular rules. They create different rules clauses and tiers based on endless testing and experience. These rules/restrictions are made to be mixed and matched by their community as that community chooses. They could play without the rules or with their own rules if they wanted. OU is the most popular tier as well as other clauses because people enjoyed them to start with, so Smogon tournaments usually use them.
2. The Pokemon Company itself has rules. Even they, the ones who make the games, know that it's unbalanced without certain restrictions. This is why all of their tournaments have certain bans. So saying "adding rules that don't exist in the game mechanics just complicates things" is hardly fair because the people who actually made the mechanics have to tweak them for better competitive play, and the reason they are the way they are in-game is because that's a place of getting people used to the Pokemon world.
 
70% Critical Hit Rate
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
293
Reaction score
0
@ Angad: Scizor may not have been banned over popularity, but what about Salamence? According to the only Smogonner I know who isn't a (complete) jerk, Sally's banishment to Uber came as a result of its huge move pool making it too unpredictable, and as such its presence was 'over-standardizing' competitive play. Apparently 80% of teams used sally and almost 50% had an 'anti-sally' member. That sounds like a ban based on popularity, to me.
Sorry if I come off as bitter, but it just makes me mad that their general answer to dealing with tough Pokemon seems to be to limit or restrict their use.

@ Calcium: You said...
Calcuim said:
They create different rules clauses and tiers based on endless testing and experience. These rules/restrictions are made to be mixed and matched by their community as that community chooses.
...in response to me saying...
Stratago said:
Argumentum ad populum does not make Smogon or its rabid followers right.
And in regards to Nintendo's bans: They made the game, so they're the source. If anyone bans anything, it should be them. I agree that Sleep Clause is lame, but not because of the advantage it presents. I think it makes competition boring. I also agree with the Species Clause, to an extent, but that's because since 'legendary' Pokemon are singular entities story-wise, it makes no sense to have more than one of them on a team. However, if I wanted to make a team of 6 Dragonites, there shouldn't be a reason I can't.
 
Last edited:
70% Critical Hit Rate
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
293
Reaction score
0
The metagame was too focused on using Mence and finding ways to counter Mence. There are usually 50 Pokémon in OU at a time. If they didn't ban Mence, that number would drop to being nothing but Salamence and Pokémon who could check and/or counter Salamence. They banned it so the game wouldn't get overly stale and repetive.
What's wrong with a versatile Pokemon? I think a battle of 6 Salamence vs. 6 Salamence would be interesting, if they were all set up differently. And its popularity would wane on its own, given time. People get sick of doing the same thing, right?

Tsurugi said:
I check Smogon's usage stats on a monthly basis, and I don't recall a point where Mence usage was ever at that point
I'm just saying what he said. I did think that sounded a little extreme, though. I'm not a member nor will I be. I will growl at him about it, though...

Tsurugi said:
Even if those were real stats, it would mean half of all teams needed a way to deal with Mence in order to win, banning Mence is the only way to let that 50% have a chance to win without forcing them to stick a Mence counter on their team.
Salamence counter = any Ice-type attack. Dragon/Flying isn't exactly tricky to deal with. Plus, Salamence itself is anti-Salamence.
 
Former Slythe
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
2
@ Calcium: You said...
Calcuim said:
They create different rules clauses and tiers based on endless testing and experience. These rules/restrictions are made to be mixed and matched by their community as that community chooses.
...in response to me saying...
Stratago said:
Argumentum ad populum does not make Smogon or its rabid followers right.
What? How does that quote have anything to do with argumentum ad populum? You somehow read me saying "the somgon community make rules that their community can use in their own battles if they want" and understood it as "lots of people like the rules, therefore they are right". What happened there? Either you misread my post, or you do not fully understand what argumentum ad populum means (not trying to sound condescending, just my thoughts).

And in regards to Nintendo's bans: They made the game, so they're the source. If anyone bans anything, it should be them.
No, anyone can ban anything as long as its for their battle/tournament, because they want to use what's most enjoyable for them. If someone doesn't like those rules, they don't join and battle someone else who has rules they both agree on. It's not Smogon's fault that other people decided to use their rules for their battles, because they never forced anyone to use them except for people entering Smogon-organised tournaments.
However, if I wanted to make a team of 6 Dragonites, there shouldn't be a reason I can't.
Ok. Do that. Hell, I'd battle you and your team of six dragonites if you want (although I'm assuming this is theoretical). It's just that some other people wouldn't, and if they don't want to battle 6 dragonites it's their right to include a Species Clause in their request/tournament rules because it's more enjoyable for them that way.
 
70% Critical Hit Rate
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
293
Reaction score
0
@ Tsurugi - Most Ice that's worth using is SAtk based (except Ice Shard/Punch/Fang, I guess...), so Sally's Intimidate doesn't really matter in those instances. And if everyone switches Blissey in to deal with SAtkers, doesn't that mean, by the same logic, that Blissey should be banned as well?
That's the problem that tiers create, IMO. Everyone's going to use the strongest Pokemon. Banning the most popular/strongest one just means that everyone will use the next strongest, then the next, etc. It doesn't actually solve anything, and it just seems like an effort to control the competition to me.

@Calcium - By argumentum ad populum, I meant that Smogon members are the ones making the vote. You said "(Smogon) create(s) different rules clauses and tiers based on endless testing and experience." It's like saying, 'Buy this new Metallica album! 100% of Metallica's fans say it's awesome, so it must be!'.
The pitch of most people who support Smogon or disagree with me seems to be 'Smogon tests Pokemon stuff and their members votes things in. Smogon members are all play Pokemon. That many players can't be wrong!' Argumentum ad populum (ad nausdeum).
And yes, the 6-Dragonite team was theoretical. A single Weavile would shred the whole team.
 
Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
772
Reaction score
0
And yes, the 6-Dragonite team was theoretical. A single Weavile would shred the whole team.
Except it wouldn't, would it. Extremespeed, Flamethrower, Fire Blast all could counter it. This is silly....
 
Former Slythe
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
2
@Calcium - By argumentum ad populum, I meant that Smogon members are the ones making the vote. You said "(Smogon) create(s) different rules clauses and tiers based on endless testing and experience." It's like saying, 'Buy this new Metallica album! 100% of Metallica's fans say it's awesome, so it must be!'.
The pitch of most people who support Smogon or disagree with me seems to be 'Smogon tests Pokemon stuff and their members votes things in. Smogon members are all play Pokemon. That many players can't be wrong!' Argumentum ad populum (ad nausdeum).
Although other people may be saying that, it's not the point I'm making (or at least trying to make). I mentioned nothing of the number of Smgon members voting, I'm saying that the group of people who test what pokemon/rules should be in their tournaments or not have been doing it for ages. That doesn't mean they're 100% correct- a perfectly balanced pokemon metagame is near impossible- but they've gotten good at what they do over the years. You may not agree, and neither do a lot of others, but they're just appealing to their community (who even then aren't completely satisfied) by doing what they think is best, and the other people who also enjoy those rules can use them if they want. The rules themselves being right or not have nothing to do with this post, but whoever likes smogon's rules has the right to use them, just like you have the right not to use them.

Seriously though, I still can't understand how these are supposed to mean the same thing:
"(Smogon) create(s) different rules clauses and tiers based on endless testing and experience"
"Buy this new Metallica album! 100% of Metallica's fans say it's awesome, so it must be"/"Smogon tests Pokemon stuff and their members votes things in. Smogon members are all play Pokemon. That many players can't be wrong!"
When did I mention number of members, popularity or voting systems in the arguments of whether they're wrong or right?

And yes, the 6-Dragonite team was theoretical. A single Weavile would shred the whole team.
Damn, could've had a use for my hail team.
 
Prayers to Oak Creek
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
5,241
Reaction score
1
@ Angad: Scizor may not have been banned over popularity, but what about Salamence? According to the only Smogonner I know who isn't a (complete) jerk, Sally's banishment to Uber came as a result of its huge move pool making it too unpredictable, and as such its presence was 'over-standardizing' competitive play. Apparently 80% of teams used sally and almost 50% had an 'anti-sally' member. That sounds like a ban based on popularity, to me.
Sorry if I come off as bitter, but it just makes me mad that their general answer to dealing with tough Pokemon seems to be to limit or restrict their use.
The bolded shows a way of twisting things around so you hear what you want. Everyone that disagrees could easily be labeled a jerk, but beyond that, Salamence was banned because he hindered competitive creativity. Very few (if any) could switch into Salamence safely, and the only pokemon that could check Salamence were taken care of relatively easily. Try naming one Pokemon in generation four that could safely switch into any set of Salamence, or a check that didn't require a team being based around keeping the check alive.
 
Former Slythe
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
2
@ Angad: Scizor may not have been banned over popularity, but what about Salamence? According to the only Smogonner I know who isn't a (complete) jerk, Sally's banishment to Uber came as a result of its huge move pool making it too unpredictable, and as such its presence was 'over-standardizing' competitive play. Apparently 80% of teams used sally and almost 50% had an 'anti-sally' member. That sounds like a ban based on popularity, to me.
Sorry if I come off as bitter, but it just makes me mad that their general answer to dealing with tough Pokemon seems to be to limit or restrict their use.
The bolded shows a way of twisting things around so you hear what you want. Everyone that disagrees could easily be labeled a jerk, but beyond that, Salamence was banned because he hindered competitive creativity. Very few (if any) could switch into Salamence safely, and the only pokemon that could check Salamence were taken care of relatively easily. Try naming one Pokemon in generation four that could safely switch into any set of Salamence, or a check that didn't require a team being based around keeping the check alive.
...dunsparce?
 
Prayers to Oak Creek
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
5,241
Reaction score
1
@ Angad: Scizor may not have been banned over popularity, but what about Salamence? According to the only Smogonner I know who isn't a (complete) jerk, Sally's banishment to Uber came as a result of its huge move pool making it too unpredictable, and as such its presence was 'over-standardizing' competitive play. Apparently 80% of teams used sally and almost 50% had an 'anti-sally' member. That sounds like a ban based on popularity, to me.
Sorry if I come off as bitter, but it just makes me mad that their general answer to dealing with tough Pokemon seems to be to limit or restrict their use.
The bolded shows a way of twisting things around so you hear what you want. Everyone that disagrees could easily be labeled a jerk, but beyond that, Salamence was banned because he hindered competitive creativity. Very few (if any) could switch into Salamence safely, and the only pokemon that could check Salamence were taken care of relatively easily. Try naming one Pokemon in generation four that could safely switch into any set of Salamence, or a check that didn't require a team being based around keeping the check alive.
...dunsparce?
Oh, boy, you got me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top