With just hours before the Calyrex-S suspect test concludes, this is the final post I will be making on the subject matter. As a player, I respect much of what you have to say
Aberforth. However, there were some parts in your post that completely misconstrue what SiTuM and I were trying to get at by showcasing those replays, so allow me to take the time to elucidate some valuable insights:
"First and foremost, the idea that teams have to run 4 pokemon to be solid against Calyrex is farcical. I quoted Manaphy listing 4 combinations of two mons (all involving Yveltal) that should take on most if not all Calyrex running around, the idea that every team requires Ho-oh + Marshadow + Blissey in addition to Yveltal in order to be safe against Calyrex is just not an accurate reflection of the metagame."
Manaphy listed combinations of Yveltal + Marshadow OR Ho-Oh OR Blissey to be the most popular countermeasures against Calyrex-S. The games SiTuM and I posted demonstrated scenarios where these cores failed to do their job functionally because Calyrex-S possessed various tools to overcome its best checks in a vacuum. Never once did we mention that a player needs to run all four (or even three) of those checks to be safe against Calyrex-S, as that does not reflect the metagame. As has been said numerous times on this thread, Calyrex-S forces adverse interactions with its best checks and forces its opponent to design their game plan around what set they lose to the fastest. It is farcical to assume that the replays we picked ignore all player decision-making in the games. Suppose a player is in an optimal position to win with Calyrex-S. In that case, it is because Calyrex-S influences the decisions BOTH players make and why the user is more often than not in an advantageous position. The risk-reward scenarios mostly favor the Calyrex-S user, as evidenced by the 13 different tournament replays we posted. Furthermore, I find it contradictory how you claim people winning with Calyrex-S played "correctly," but when you lose using it, it's because you played poorly.
"Games being decided entirely in the builder is a bad thing for any metagame, and my opinion is that Calyrex's effect on the meta is such that games are decided in the builder less, unless you actively choose to go fishing with a Calyrex set that basically begs for very specific Yveltal as the only counterplay, which in my opinion is very unreliable. If Calyrex was completely useless against common good cores like Ho-oh + Yveltal, it would be down alongside things like Lando-I or Caly-I in viability. Counterplay doesnt mean that a pokemon is invalidated as a threat and cannot win any game, it means that the games will come down to decisions the players make."
We'll have to agree to disagree here. You previously mentioned that you were unsympathetic toward players who ran Fast Utility Yveltal as their only Calyrex-S counterplay.
"My sympathy to people losing because they decided a fast Yveltal with no other form of Calyrex-S counterplay on their team will make them solid against it, followed by running into a Calyrex-S designed to break through Yveltal, is very small indeed."
People who elect to run Fast Yveltal do so because they do not wish to lose the Hyper Offense match-up, which becomes quite tricky when you cannot easily remove a speed control deterrent like Sticky Webs, for example. This is a choice made in the builder. Suppose you think the inclusion of Calyrex-S in the current metagame causes games to be less frequently decided in the builder. In that case, I implore you to check out virtually any game featuring a slower Yveltal as the only defogger vs. Webs HO and see how that match-up goes. (Slow Yveltal teams can't get Webs off and will generally not be able to outlast the offensive onslaught by Webs HO teams). If anything, the inclusion of Calyrex-S results in MORE games being decided in the builder. If you do not run the combination of checks Manaphy listed, you'll ultimately find yourself in unfavorable positions against Calyrex-S.
"I still find SS ubers fun, and despite the quote that Hoenn has seemingly pulled out of nowhere, the general Ubers community is in agreement with me. The idea that SS ubers has become unfun is one that is shared by a relatively loud minority of the Ubers community, and the idea that the meta is solved is one I find almost laughable in its hyperbole. Disable was essentially not used until the start of this UPL, and the Ubers metagame has experienced significant shifts since the Zacian-H ban, and will almost certainly do so again with SCL looming.
I made my personal stance clear on what I am voting and why in my last post, I am making this more to address the arguments made on this page thus far that were based on replays as well as just getting some of my thoughts out.
Also finally, to address a comment BasedWhat made, we will not be banning anything else should Calyrex-S be banned. If the following meta is unpopular and would need tiering action, the only option that would be on the table would be a resuspect of Calyrex to the metagame. Ubers must maintain a high ceiling for acceptable bans, and anything underneath Calyrex would very clearly not reach that threshold"
I probably took offense to this part of your post. As a tier leader, you're conveying only a "loud minority" of users find SS Ubers unenjoyable when this simply isn't true. When the average enjoyability of SS Ubers is ~6.2/10, that is not indicative of an enjoyable metagame in the slightest - it is below average. The metagame is solved; essentially, every viable team combination is well-known at this point, with only minor item variations making crucial differences in gameplay. In an attempt to innovate, players leave themselves wide open to losing to more standard structures. As BasedWhat? mentioned, playing the current generation is like rolling a dice and seeing one of six common structures you'll run into, all of which have fairy sequential and linear gameplay (see the generic Lando/Ogre/Marsh or Caly-S team that is frequently brought so often to tours and ladder). Speaking of BasedWhat?:
"If we need to ban offensive Yveltal and/or Mewtwo next, we'll do that too (obvious hyperbole btw). "
His post was clearly an example of hyperbole. Let's be realistic, and don't expect to see the metagame have any marked shifts with the inclusion of Calyrex-S; it's stale, unenjoyable to many, and solved. The best we can hope for is using an unorthodox item or "creative" mon for the meme culture
Nevertheless, I digress, but for those of you about to make the most pivotal tiering decision in Gen 8 Ubers, here are the quality pro-ban and anti-ban posts you should hopefully base your decision off of:
Pro-Ban: BasedWhat?, Reje, LBN, Manaphy*, Eledyr, Samba adv and myself
Anti-Ban: Fc, Aberforth, Manaphy* (his stance is more pro-ban than anti-ban)
I have significant issues with the posts largely based on replays that were posted by Situm and Hoenn. I'll get to the points I want to make about the replays themselves in a moment.
First and foremost, the idea that teams have to run 4 pokemon to be solid against Calyrex is farcical. Situm quoted Manaphy listing 4 combinations of two mons (all involving Yveltal) that should take on most if not all Calyrex running around, the idea that every team requires Ho-oh + Marshadow + Blissey in addition to Yveltal in order to be safe against Calyrex is just not an accurate reflection of the metagame.
Anyway, the replays that both Hoenn and Situm have chosen are presented in such a way that ignores all player decision making in the games. They are acting like it is Calyrex and Calyrex alone that makes the difference, when in reality it came down to decisions made in the game, which is (IMO) a good thing. Games being decided entirely in the builder is a bad thing for any metagame, and my opinion is that Calyrex's effect on the meta is such that games are decided in the builder less, unless you actively choose to go fishing with a Calyrex set that basically begs for very specific Yveltal as the only counterplay, which in my opinion is very unreliable. If Calyrex was completely useless against common good cores like Ho-oh + Yveltal, it would be down alongside things like Lando-I or Caly-I in viability. Counterplay doesnt mean that a pokemon is invalidated as a threat and cannot win any game, it means that the games will come down to decisions the players make.
For every example of Calyrex breaking through teams, replays can be provided where it is underwhelming, or replays can be provided with other ubers doing similar things (think Kyogre's various sets, or for a more direct example, my Eternatus against Suapah). The replays show Calyrex's highest points without acknowledging that those are not the standard instances, and are instead good showcases of players playing well with a good pokemon (or, in some replays, people playing badly around a good pokemon). The replays also do not convince me that Calyrex exists at a power level above the aformetioned mons, most especially NDM/Xern/Groudon and Kyogre, who all are very dangerous threats even against prepared teams, because this is the power level we choose to play at. Yes, Calyrex wins in most of the replays that were hand picked to show it doing well, but the posts talking about them do not convince me that it is exceptional in doing so, especially in this ubers metagame.
Even in games where Calyrex has arguably the perfect set, it can and will lose depending on player interaction. In my game against Luthier I brought Sash Caly with Disable against a Yveltal that had only one attacking move, and no other ghost resist. He managed to outplay me with his Yveltal and win despite me literally rolling a perfect Calyrex-Yveltal matchup. These are the sorts of games where pro-ban players will point out the ways I could have played better, but the games where Calyrex does win they will pretend that the losing player had no outs because Calyrex was simply too powerful. It's disingenuous and dishonest. Calyrex promotes skillful in game play while (IMO) not being too restrictive on the builder, and this is something I believe is good for the tier. I also just do not agree with the idea that Calyrex is broken, and am thus voting Do Not Ban.
I still find SS ubers fun, and despite the quote that Hoenn has seemingly pulled out of nowhere,
the general Ubers community is in agreement with me. The idea that SS ubers has become unfun is one that is shared by a relatively loud minority of the Ubers community, and the idea that the meta is solved is one I find almost laughable in its hyperbole. Disable was essentially not used until the start of this UPL, and the Ubers metagame has experienced significant shifts since the Zacian-H ban, and will almost certainly do so again with SCL looming.
I made my personal stance clear on what I am voting and why in my last post, I am making this more to address the arguments made on this page thus far that were based on replays as well as just getting some of my thoughts out.
Also finally, to address a comment BasedWhat made, we will not be banning anything else should Calyrex-S be banned. If the following meta is unpopular and would need tiering action, the only option that would be on the table would be a resuspect of Calyrex to the metagame. Ubers must maintain a high ceiling for acceptable bans, and anything underneath Calyrex would very clearly not reach that threshold.