You can find replays to show anything you want, I can find a shell pass replay sweeping a team if I wanted to and just because it went 6-0 doesn't make it broken. I don't think that it should be banned but if it really needs it, 4 would be fine for the reasons listed by Ramplestilskin, it would still allow BP teams to exist without having the current problem of having the answer to everything that they currently seem to have, 3 wouldn't be bad either but starting at 4 would be a good way to test the waters and to see if they need any more bans, why eliminate a strategy if it doesn't need to be.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Baton Pass - its role in the metagame and possible solutions to nerf full Baton Pass chains
- Thread starter haunter
- Start date
- Status
I've probably been annoying Jukain to death with my posts, but I have to agree with him on this one. I can't even fathom new information coming forth, so arguing against a nerf would simply be a waste of time as every point has been either refuted or shown to not be enough. What ban we should discuss is clearly the cap. If the fact that Haunter openly supported it doesn't show that, I don't know what could.
The number is up to discussion, but 2 completely kills the playing style, so I dislike that, 3 makes it effective as a core, but requires loads of support, 4 lets it do a lot of the same annoying things it does now, just less effectively, and 5 is barely a change. I personally want 3, but would be ok with 4.
The number is up to discussion, but 2 completely kills the playing style, so I dislike that, 3 makes it effective as a core, but requires loads of support, 4 lets it do a lot of the same annoying things it does now, just less effectively, and 5 is barely a change. I personally want 3, but would be ok with 4.
There is a counter to this strategy that has been overlooked in the later posts: infiltrator chandelure. Chandelure, as well as being able to go through substitutes, can also learn clear smog (and haze as well), making it a better counter than haze quagsire.
Chandelure can also OHKO Espeon and Scolipede:
252 SpA Chandelure Shadow Ball vs. 4 HP / 0 SpD Espeon: 296-350 (108.8 - 128.6%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Chandelure Fire Blast vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Scolipede: 528-624 (162.9 - 192.5%) -- guaranteed OHKO
4 Atk Scolipede Megahorn vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Chandelure: 35-42 (13.4 - 16%) -- possible 7HKO
Espeon's stored power does OHKO if it is at +4 or higher statwise, but since Chandelure learns clear smog anyway this won't happen.
The only problem it has is with Sylveon, but Sylveon can do little back.
252 SpA Chandelure Fire Blast vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Sylveon: 118-139 (29.9 - 35.2%) -- guaranteed 4HKO after Leftovers recovery
4 SpA Pixilate Sylveon Hyper Voice vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Chandelure: 75-88 (28.7 - 33.7%) -- 0.5% chance to 3HKO
but overall chandelure hits a tiny bit harder than sylveon. not sure what to do with sylveon.
Chandelure also could hold spooky plate to get that tiny bit more power without life orb recoil or being locked into one move.
Overall, chandy is a counter, but bp still needs to be nerfed.
Chandelure can also OHKO Espeon and Scolipede:
252 SpA Chandelure Shadow Ball vs. 4 HP / 0 SpD Espeon: 296-350 (108.8 - 128.6%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Chandelure Fire Blast vs. 252 HP / 0 SpD Scolipede: 528-624 (162.9 - 192.5%) -- guaranteed OHKO
4 Atk Scolipede Megahorn vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Chandelure: 35-42 (13.4 - 16%) -- possible 7HKO
Espeon's stored power does OHKO if it is at +4 or higher statwise, but since Chandelure learns clear smog anyway this won't happen.
The only problem it has is with Sylveon, but Sylveon can do little back.
252 SpA Chandelure Fire Blast vs. 252 HP / 252+ SpD Sylveon: 118-139 (29.9 - 35.2%) -- guaranteed 4HKO after Leftovers recovery
4 SpA Pixilate Sylveon Hyper Voice vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Chandelure: 75-88 (28.7 - 33.7%) -- 0.5% chance to 3HKO
but overall chandelure hits a tiny bit harder than sylveon. not sure what to do with sylveon.
Chandelure also could hold spooky plate to get that tiny bit more power without life orb recoil or being locked into one move.
Overall, chandy is a counter, but bp still needs to be nerfed.
Here are some decent replays for those of you who asked for proof that 3/4 is just as broken as 6 (there is a quote or two somewhere, but I'm not finding them). If you don't want them, ignore this.
I'm nowhere near a good battler, but I managed to climb the ladder just as easily with 3 BPers.
I know it's a lost cause, but the number is just not fixing the problem (which is Scolipede/Espeon).
This one is my favorite. The guy got mad at me on the ladder then challenged me to battle his all BP counter team.
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113343371
...
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113305312
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113326702
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113349692
There are lots more..
I just want to be heard even though I know everyone is dead set.
The limit is not the best way to do things. Something has to be done about Scolipede and/or Espeon.
I'm nowhere near a good battler, but I managed to climb the ladder just as easily with 3 BPers.
I know it's a lost cause, but the number is just not fixing the problem (which is Scolipede/Espeon).
This one is my favorite. The guy got mad at me on the ladder then challenged me to battle his all BP counter team.
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113343371
...
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113305312
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113326702
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/ou-113349692
There are lots more..
I just want to be heard even though I know everyone is dead set.
The limit is not the best way to do things. Something has to be done about Scolipede and/or Espeon.
Smogon tiers & rules exist to create what the community considers a competitive metagame; however, there will never be any purely skill-based metagame due to in-game mechanics such as min-max damage rolls and critical hits. I believe these inherent dice rolls have set a precedent for what the community considers competitive.
Consider sleep. It has always been a dice roll when the sleeping Poke will wake up, but sleep moves are widely considered competitive. So, instead of banning sleep to discourage luck-based strategies, Sleep Clause exists to prevent that strategy from being abused. Imagine playing a "Sleep Team." Would it be luck-based? Yes; it relies on in-game dice rolls for sleep turns. Would it be competitive? Yes; the advantage sleep brings outweighs the chance of a first turn wake-up, or in other words, sleep is a lopsided dice roll. Would it be fun to play against? No; having a team of sleeping Pokes isn't really playing, is it?
Consider Swagplay. It has always been a dice roll whether the afflicted Poke will break through both paralysis and confusion, but Prankster Twave is still considered competitive, and Confuse Ray isn't even on anyone's radar. So, instead of banning paralysis and confusion moves on Pokes with Prankster (one could still use this strategy with Illumise, Murkrow, or even Mega-Banette) to discourage luck-based strategies, Swagger was banned to keep a few Pokes from abusing that strategy. Remember playing a Swagplay team? Was it luck-based? Yes; it relied on in-game dice rolls to succeed. Was it competitive? Yes; it was such a lopsided dice roll that it had to be nerfed. Was it fun to play against? No; hitting yourself in the face repeatedly ins't really playing, is it?
Now consider Baton Pass chains. It has always been a dice roll whether the opponent lands a stat change-ignoring critical hit, but crits are dice rolls every strategy has to deal with. It has always been a dice roll whether the opponent brings Taunt users and multiple phazers (something the opponent needs to do to consistently beat BP chains) which they brought as specific counters to BP chains, but whether the opponent brings specific counters to your strategy is a dice roll every strategy has to deal with. So is it luck based? Not more so than any traditional strategy. Is it competitive? Yes; this forum has shown BP chains have enough ladder presence that a player either brings the appropriate counters to a BP chain team and steamrolls said team while having a palpable disadvantage to traditional teams or retains their advantage while playing traditional teams and gets steamrolled every time they face a BP chain team. Is it fun to play against? No; a player knows Turn 1 whether they will win or lose to a BP chain team unless that player runs a BP chain team theirself.
TL;DR:
Since BP chains don't rely on unnecessary in-game dice rolls like sleep turns or a Poke breaking through paralysis/confusion, they are not a luck-based strategy, and they are more consistent than traditional strategies; therefore, BP chain teams would overcentralize the metagame if left unchecked. Either BP chains are nerfed, or they become as meta as Gen V weather teams.
If we decide to ban Speed Boost + Baton Pass on a set (I believe this is the second best option to Punchshroom's Baton Pass clause and far, far ahead of the lazy cap idea) then we need to decide where that leaves a certain anthropomorphic chicken :P
Consider sleep. It has always been a dice roll when the sleeping Poke will wake up, but sleep moves are widely considered competitive. So, instead of banning sleep to discourage luck-based strategies, Sleep Clause exists to prevent that strategy from being abused. Imagine playing a "Sleep Team." Would it be luck-based? Yes; it relies on in-game dice rolls for sleep turns. Would it be competitive? Yes; the advantage sleep brings outweighs the chance of a first turn wake-up, or in other words, sleep is a lopsided dice roll. Would it be fun to play against? No; having a team of sleeping Pokes isn't really playing, is it?
Consider Swagplay. It has always been a dice roll whether the afflicted Poke will break through both paralysis and confusion, but Prankster Twave is still considered competitive, and Confuse Ray isn't even on anyone's radar. So, instead of banning paralysis and confusion moves on Pokes with Prankster (one could still use this strategy with Illumise, Murkrow, or even Mega-Banette) to discourage luck-based strategies, Swagger was banned to keep a few Pokes from abusing that strategy. Remember playing a Swagplay team? Was it luck-based? Yes; it relied on in-game dice rolls to succeed. Was it competitive? Yes; it was such a lopsided dice roll that it had to be nerfed. Was it fun to play against? No; hitting yourself in the face repeatedly ins't really playing, is it?
Now consider Baton Pass chains. It has always been a dice roll whether the opponent lands a stat change-ignoring critical hit, but crits are dice rolls every strategy has to deal with. It has always been a dice roll whether the opponent brings Taunt users and multiple phazers (something the opponent needs to do to consistently beat BP chains) which they brought as specific counters to BP chains, but whether the opponent brings specific counters to your strategy is a dice roll every strategy has to deal with. So is it luck based? Not more so than any traditional strategy. Is it competitive? Yes; this forum has shown BP chains have enough ladder presence that a player either brings the appropriate counters to a BP chain team and steamrolls said team while having a palpable disadvantage to traditional teams or retains their advantage while playing traditional teams and gets steamrolled every time they face a BP chain team. Is it fun to play against? No; a player knows Turn 1 whether they will win or lose to a BP chain team unless that player runs a BP chain team theirself.
TL;DR:
Since BP chains don't rely on unnecessary in-game dice rolls like sleep turns or a Poke breaking through paralysis/confusion, they are not a luck-based strategy, and they are more consistent than traditional strategies; therefore, BP chain teams would overcentralize the metagame if left unchecked. Either BP chains are nerfed, or they become as meta as Gen V weather teams.
If we decide to ban Speed Boost + Baton Pass on a set (I believe this is the second best option to Punchshroom's Baton Pass clause and far, far ahead of the lazy cap idea) then we need to decide where that leaves a certain anthropomorphic chicken :P
Couldn't we have a kind of suspect test where we test how BP works with 4 members. If the test proves that BP at 4 members is still too powerful We lower BP to 3 members. It might take a time to actually gather the results and voting period but it's an effective way so we won't have to have a thread dedicated to nerfing BP again.
Please explain to me why Sleep Clause gets to be the sole exception of mechanics changing. Sleep has always been a part of the game, and rather than removing it entirely, a nerf involving the change of game mechanics was implemented, so people wouldn't spam Sleep or anti-Sleep moves / items out of sheer paranoia. Now that Baton Pass has been buffed to the point where it can generate the same kind of problem, I don't see the same kind of Clause being all that farfetch'd. Yes, I get that Sleep Clause is both a mechanics change and a cap at the same time (only one mon forcibly put to sleep per team), but there is no clearcut way on how to implement that kind of restriction on Baton Pass. Since Baton Pass, unlike Sleep spam, requires team effort, and we've never actively restricted the amount of specific Pokemon per team before (edit: different Pokemon, cos' Species Clause is still a thing :/), either a cap (3 BPers per team) or the Clause I suggested (game mechanics change) would be considered, since both cannot be implemented at the same time without invalidating the other. The reason I am not sold on the cap rule is because the optimal number for BPers per team is still up for debate, and it may even be implicitly still broken. Remember the Endless Battle Clause? So many complex bans were implemented but people came up with so many dickish ways to work with what they still have until it was decided that Leppa Berry, the root of the problem, has to go altogether.
Last edited:
Though I've only played pokemon competitively since the end of 5th gen I do have some experience with full BP chains. When i first built my BP team I had never at that point seen or heard of full BP teams. I started with gliscor(rock polish, taunt, subs), mew(w/weakness policy, barrier, amnesia), togekiss(fairy, nasty plot), m-scizor(swords dance) drifblim as my lead(w/weakness policy, unburden, stockpile) and espeon(magic bounce, stored power). This team did quite well for me to start with, definitely not OP, but over time i saw more and more flaws and missed out potential. So I thought switch togekiss with sylveon and though this did help it was never "unbeatable". Then i switched scizor for vaporeon as scizor rarely did anything. Better but still nothing that couldn't be dealt with. I was happy with my team. I didn't feel like i wasn't thinking when i was playing I just felt like i was thinking differently. Biding my time, making crucial switches with no room for error. It was fun. I had been advised by many people to put scolipede on my team for obvious reasons. Now, i had thought of scolipede but passed as i wanted my team to be pokemon i personally liked but eventually i had to give it a try. Scolipede replaced drifblim and shit got real. I was unstoppable. I couldn't believe just how big of a difference this bug made. Even with mew as a big weak point i was still get 6-0's allover the place. Essentially what i'm getting at is that imo scollipede is the pokemon that makes full BP chains so very difficult. Not espeon or sylveon or any other and though it really is a combination of pokemon scollipede is what made this such a problem. What i find so OP about scollipede on a BP team is that normally if you mess up the chain, your done, gg, accept defeat. but with scollipede it is very easy to start all over again and build speed and ideally defense. I love my BP team but even I have to admit that with scollipede its just unfair. I see why banning speed boost scollipede seems unfair as he is viable on his own on other teams but I feel it would be the best solution to this problem. Full BP teams are a legit play style imo. It's a risky play style without scollipede that requires analyses of your oponents team and proper prediction and maintenance of your acquired boosts but i'm sure someone will point out many, many flaws in what i've said.
Unless I'm mistaken, the main reason we could get away with Sleep Clause was because we ripped it from Nintendo's identical clause in the console games. That wouldn't be true for Baton Pass.
Depends on if you count Species Clause or not.
True, but the results of suspect tests have always been up for debate. It might take a bit of research and discussion to find an optimal number, but unless we have more pressing matters to attend to in the way of potential suspects, I think we have plenty of time to thoroughly research the optimal number for such a cap.
So it sounds like you are trying to compare Scolo with Drifblim, which is a really, really awful comparison. Drifblim's only niche in BP is his ability to boost both defenses at the same time, which is not as awesome as you would think it is. As much as I support a scolo ban atm, I don't think your anecdote is the greatest piece of evidence.
I personally think that a complex ban is in order. Say that Baton Pass can be used by a maximum of 3 pokemon in a single team. This would deal a significant blow to the kind of baton pass that we don't want in our battling but would still allow for dry passing, substitute passing and other strategies that, although they rely on baton pass, are not in any way destructive for the metagame. This would allow scolipede to pass boosts and, although a mega garchomp with what is effectively a shell smash boost is powerful, it is a perfectly reasonable strategy that I think is intelligent and can be beaten by a good team and a good player.
I believe that baton pass is healthy for the metagame in small doses and that it's the abuse of it with huge chains that makes it broken and uncompetitive. I should add that I used baton pass chains in B2/W2 with huge successes but I was just testing it out and was not relying on it to ladder. I quickly stopped using it after I saw how uncompetitive it was and I'm opposed to such simple victories, especially because I was the lowest of noobs in B2/W2 and somehow got to about 1500 through BP chains in under an hour.
I believe that baton pass is healthy for the metagame in small doses and that it's the abuse of it with huge chains that makes it broken and uncompetitive. I should add that I used baton pass chains in B2/W2 with huge successes but I was just testing it out and was not relying on it to ladder. I quickly stopped using it after I saw how uncompetitive it was and I'm opposed to such simple victories, especially because I was the lowest of noobs in B2/W2 and somehow got to about 1500 through BP chains in under an hour.
Quick question, what do you consider crossing your fingers for crits? Is that not luck too?
If I don't have a poke at the Team Preview to stop it, I can hope for a crit. Which is entirely luck-based.
But, I can agree that it overcentralizes the game.
There would be no point in opening a "OU (
Just made an account, and figured I'd post my experience on the OU ladder with BP. I was running a very effective HO team, I had a nice offensive core that could blow past many threats. So I get into the high 1700's and I go against my first BP team. I easily lost, as it was my first time and didn't know much about the strategy. Despite some losses here and there to BP pass teams, my team did extremely well against conventional playstyles. But then I reach the 1850's...
BP teams. Everywhere. It got to the point where if I was to have any success at all in climbing the ladder, I'd have to put nasty plot thundurus-i on the team. While this let me beat BP, it made me have to rearrange my whole team. If anyone else has played HO, you'd know that a lot of thought has to go into the synergy of your sweepers. Long story short, thundurus-i made my team worse and less effective against conventional teams. The point is, I am for taking action against BP teams because without the right pokemon(s), its nearly imposible to win, and I was basically required to use said pokemon, despite it bringing down my team as a whole.
BP teams. Everywhere. It got to the point where if I was to have any success at all in climbing the ladder, I'd have to put nasty plot thundurus-i on the team. While this let me beat BP, it made me have to rearrange my whole team. If anyone else has played HO, you'd know that a lot of thought has to go into the synergy of your sweepers. Long story short, thundurus-i made my team worse and less effective against conventional teams. The point is, I am for taking action against BP teams because without the right pokemon(s), its nearly imposible to win, and I was basically required to use said pokemon, despite it bringing down my team as a whole.
And if they double-switch to a mon who could restart the chain (ie Scolipede, Spore Smeargle, or even Espeon/Sylveon if you brought in a Special Attacker/Dragon type), or the mon you switched out of is capable of restarting the chain, then you're back at square one with the advantage to the BP team. And now you have to switch Haze Quagsire in again. Hope he doesn't eat a boosted Stored Power/Hyper Voice!
Hoping for critical hits is not a counter strategy. They are not reliable and are (barring Infiltrator) blocked by subs. In my post I commented on how BP doesn't subject itself to any "unnecessary" dice rolls; everyone has to deal with crits because they're part of the core game mechanics. In my original post, I brought up some strategies that rely on their own extra dice rolls to succeed: Swagplay and sleep spamming. Both Swagplay and sleep spam add another dice roll (hoping the opp is disabled for a turn) to succeed. BP doesn't add any dice rolls. Stat boosting moves, BP, and Sub work 100% of the time, so the luck lies in the BP player's opp not having appropriate counters, which applies to every other strategy.
Also, for data collection purposes, it would be nice to see an "Anything Goes" tier on PS to see if any consistent usage occurs. Maybe a totally haxless tier too.
Postscript: Focus Energy/Superluck +Scope Lens and high crit ratio moves as a counter? Focus Energy Primeape w/ Cross Chop & Stone Edge? Why do so many BP chain members resist FIGHT? :(
But that is an unnecessary dice roll when you're hoping for it to happen? I'm saying that the person on the opposite end of the BP team is having to rely on getting a lucky crit if they want to stop the BP team if they don't have one of the fairly few Pokes that can temporarily stop it.
The "anything goes tier" is Ubers, that exists already. And I can tell you now there won't be any adjustments made to the game mechanics. We just gotta deal with hax. We all deal with it. Sometimes, I feel myself more than most.
Look at your suggestion. . . And tell me where else in OU that would be anywhere near viable. Same goes for Kingra, and Absol. It just doesn't fit in OU.
So, is that your argument ?
You know, Jukain, I really respect you because you posted a lot of usefull things and you are one of the people making this debate walk on. However, this is just the evidence of what I've called "blinding not-fun argument". We don't bother if it's not fun, we only want to make it weaker, because it's too strong. Now, I'm not in favor of a suspect test, because it will continue the debate for a long time, but if it's the only solution to know whether BP can work similarly with 4 users, why not. However I still think we should implement this rule instead of making a suspect with it.
Let's talk about your replays. You know, I watched them carefully. And to me, it only does one thing : supporting my idea. Indeed, you show replays with 4 BP users that's still viable, and where the best player won. Honestly, all your opponents could have won if they played better, but they didn't. At that point, it becomes logic that you won the battle. Those matches weren't autolose neither autowin. Moreover, I didn't see any replay showing that 3 BP users playstyle is still viable. May be because it's not ?
Hoping for crits is not a counter strategy. They are unreliable, and according to you, strategic crits are not a viable strategy in OU.
Team building is (probably more than) half of competitive battling. If a player doesn't bring counters to a popular strategy, they should get ran over by it. BP needs to be nerfed since it requires specific counters to be defeated, and running those counters hinders an otherwise balanced team when competing against other balanced teams; some other high sack strategy like Rollout Shuckle loses to powerful WATER, STEEL, or ROCK moves which a balanced team should have. Sashed Shell Smash leads lose to priority but bodybag the opp otherwise.
Ubers is not an "Anything Goes" tier. It has Species, Sleep, and OHKO Move Clauses. A restriction-free and completely hax-free tier wouldn't be for competitive play, just information gathering purposes. I'd like to see what usage changes without hax. It would help develop actual tiers.
And that isn't a suggestion; it's a question. Earlier in the formation of Gen VI tiers, there were a couple months when Scope Lens + Focus Energy were in vogue for OU. I was seeing if anybody had found a similar set with potential against BP since Primeape loses hard to BP with its lackluster coverage and single, oft resisted STAB. Thanks for your constructive feedback, though.
There actually was a strategy that BP was helpless against - SwagPlay. Funny how both are relatively non-interactive strategies (BP only cares about boosting up until Stored Power/Hyper Voice KOs everything, SwagPlay only cares about Confusing/Paralyzing the opponent until they either kill themselves or they're taken out by Foul Plays) but where BP works by skewing the odds entirely in their favor, Swagplay wins against them by making luck the *only* important factor.
Most pokes that have the Focus energy Gimmick have either better things to run in OU or, just plain don't belong in OU. I didn't say it was a counter strategy. . . That was actually never stated. But I'm saying if I'm up against a BP team and I'm not using my stall team, then I may not have a counter to BP. So if I even dream of having a chance against this BP team, I've got to hope for a crit. And that's just not cool.
Your second paragraph pretty much reiterates what I've been saying since I got here. . . So, no counter argument there.
And your "Anything goes" tier is on wifi. So, have fun I suppose. I see what you're getting at.
I thought it was a rhetorical question. . . That's my bad.
Baton Pass teams are very predictable and they do the same thing every single time. It is a threat in the meta right now. I think that the proper solution is that during the teambuilding process you should have to decide whether your team should have a baton pass counter on it or not. Normally during the teambuilding process one would usually look at their core and add something to counter one of its major weaknesses. I believe baton pass should be treated the same way.
I agree, there's almost always something that threatens a group of a couple/few Pokemon on your team. . .
But there's a difference between Talonflame, or ZardY and BP. BP Threatens EVERYTHING except for a few Pokemon.
I can see a ZardY and see it's going to be a problem that if I play my cards right, I can work around.
BP is not the same. You can't work around it if you don't have the counter.
Since it's fairly prevalent, it will threaten every team, always. So that would require every team to carry a counter if they ever want to plan on pulling a W when facing a BP team.
That is the definition of over-centralizing the metagame. . .
I doubt I need to explain the problem in that. . .
Personally I do not have a problem with Baton Pass. Baton Pass and Espeon (particularly sub Espeon) in conjunction can be annoying, particularly if you've let it set up, but in those cases I can only blame myself for not countering it in good time. I wouldn't support a ban.
That said, I would support a clause similar to the Sleep Clause - you can only use Baton Pass on one Pokémon, making it impossible to create a chain of more than two Pokémon.
That said, I would support a clause similar to the Sleep Clause - you can only use Baton Pass on one Pokémon, making it impossible to create a chain of more than two Pokémon.
Rotosect
Banned deucer.
I hate to be that guy but it's the law of the "next best thing" whenever something gets banned: removing the most dominant threat in the metagame leaves the second best one unchecked and the cycle repeats itself.
If you read through the Swagger suspect test in the VR forum, you'll see people correctly predicting that BP chains would be next on the line, just like SwagPlay teams started to become a serious concern after the strongest Megas and Genesect were no longer around to keep them in check.
I have already mentioned that Rain teams have a very good match-up against BP chains (more specifically, PerishSong Politoed, Tail Glow Manaphy and the Swift Swimmers before Scolipede grabs enough boosts), so I wonder if their, shall we say "popularity", will increase after this stage.
(ew my first post, kill me)
I was actually discussing the whole BP thing with my friends at work the other day, and most of the conversation was "Just run the damned counter to BP" vs "Dude, it's not something you easily prepare for, or even counter". Granted, I've only run into it a FEW times in my OU laddering career, but more often than not, my attempts at stopping the BPers were short lived. But honestly, I don't think this is something easily approachable simply due to the fact that the issues lie in only a few of the BPers in the metagame are even making this a topic. BP before was meh, but you throw in these abilities and suddenly you have a chaotic carnival.
One of the things I actually thought about before was "What if you just ban Magic Bounce + BP on Espy", but then you'll hear the neverending "BUT MUH ESPEON CAN'T BP WITHOUT IT LET ALONE BE USEFUL" (in which case use someone else because Magic Bounce is the only reason he's there what are you doing), and I'm almost certain no one wants to hear that every day for the next 6 months. But it seems that the problem only lies in what, Espeon mostly? (Forgive me, I didn't read all 72 pages of the thread) So it's a mixed bag to me.
Personally, I'm in the middle. Good BP teams aren't flooding everywhere, but since SwagPlay is gone, nothing is stopping it from becoming the next hot shit on a plate. Now that Haze is the only "real" option, I think that by itself slowly seeps it into the centralization bench. And just how many Hazers are you gonna run? They're bound to die eventually, especially if two of the relevant ones are frail as wet paper. (Greninja and Gengar, correct me if I'm wrong though, and I know that there are more bulky ones out there but they aren't named Quagsire and LOL Evolite Golbat?)
I would have to agree with a complex ban here, because outright saying "NO" to Espeon isn't fair at all (Soundproof Mr. Mime can eat one though, I don't give a damn), but I can't sit and be okay with the Boston Baton Passers assisting their whole team to the point where I'm just a living damage calc for half of the squad.
I was actually discussing the whole BP thing with my friends at work the other day, and most of the conversation was "Just run the damned counter to BP" vs "Dude, it's not something you easily prepare for, or even counter". Granted, I've only run into it a FEW times in my OU laddering career, but more often than not, my attempts at stopping the BPers were short lived. But honestly, I don't think this is something easily approachable simply due to the fact that the issues lie in only a few of the BPers in the metagame are even making this a topic. BP before was meh, but you throw in these abilities and suddenly you have a chaotic carnival.
One of the things I actually thought about before was "What if you just ban Magic Bounce + BP on Espy", but then you'll hear the neverending "BUT MUH ESPEON CAN'T BP WITHOUT IT LET ALONE BE USEFUL" (in which case use someone else because Magic Bounce is the only reason he's there what are you doing), and I'm almost certain no one wants to hear that every day for the next 6 months. But it seems that the problem only lies in what, Espeon mostly? (Forgive me, I didn't read all 72 pages of the thread) So it's a mixed bag to me.
Personally, I'm in the middle. Good BP teams aren't flooding everywhere, but since SwagPlay is gone, nothing is stopping it from becoming the next hot shit on a plate. Now that Haze is the only "real" option, I think that by itself slowly seeps it into the centralization bench. And just how many Hazers are you gonna run? They're bound to die eventually, especially if two of the relevant ones are frail as wet paper. (Greninja and Gengar, correct me if I'm wrong though, and I know that there are more bulky ones out there but they aren't named Quagsire and LOL Evolite Golbat?)
I would have to agree with a complex ban here, because outright saying "NO" to Espeon isn't fair at all (Soundproof Mr. Mime can eat one though, I don't give a damn), but I can't sit and be okay with the Boston Baton Passers assisting their whole team to the point where I'm just a living damage calc for half of the squad.
- Status