Z Moves Megapost
with your host MaceMaster
Fun
Let's be real: Z moves are fun. Like, really fun. Imagine: Your opponent selects Zygarde, and you've sent in Tapu Koko. Your opponent experiences a rush of dopamine as he believes that the game has been won. Little did he know that you were using Fairium Z. Zygarde's health bar drops to zero instantaneously. Those are the moments I live for. However, they can also be not fun. Think about this: You send in your Magearna against Kyurem-B. You can taste victory. Suddenly, Kyurem's sprite is enveloped in an aura, and your stomach drops. "Kyurem-B used Tectonic Rage!" Fuck. Not so fun. You know what the best part of Z moves is?
Barbaracle. Just
Barbaracle. This brings me to my next point...
Diversity
Pokemon like Barbaracle are some of my favorite parts of 1v1. In what other metagame can Barbaracle hold a niche in a meta with behemoths like Mega Metagross? If it wasn't for my heat mons, I honestly don't even know if I would like 1v1 all that much. It's so rewarding to innovate. With this, we have to ask ourselves a couple of questions, however: "Where do Z moves stand in regards to innovation?" and "is more diversity better?" In regards to the first question, it can definitely be said that Z moves increase the number of viable Pokemon in 1v1. I'll tell you right now that if Z moves didn't exist, Salazzle, Zygarde-10%, Clefable, Barbaracle, Thundurus-T, Ninetales-A, Keldeo, Entei, Volcarona, Umbreon, Carracosta and Blissey wouldn't be ranked. In regards to whether this is a good thing, however, we enter an area of opinion. In one train of thought, more viable Pokemon means a less centralized metagame. Another idea, however, is that more viable Pokemon means more things you have to prep for, and therefore more things your team loses to, adding an element of uncompetitiveness.
1v1 as a Competitive Metagame
Lately, 1v1 has been becoming increasingly mainstream. There's been drastically more tournaments, and a revival of the analyses. With this, along with the considerations of Z moves' place in 1v1, it is important to define whether 1v1 is, and should be: a balanced and stable metagame like OU, or a laissez-faire tier for fun like AG. Some common arguments for 1v1 being uncompetitive are that it is a glorified game of rock-paper-scissors, and that is too dependent on luck. The luck dependency is definitely worse than 6v6, but is exaggerated. A crit or freeze can absolutely win you a game in 6v6. Why its
less luck-dependent, though, is because the crit has to be at precisely the right moment whereas in 1v1, you either get a crit or don't. By the nature of 1v1, short battles, and in tournament play, best of 3-9 scenarios, these issues are somewhat mitigated, however. By amassing a large quantity of battles, the hax sort of just equals out. I don't know myself, but here's the implications if 1v1 was decided to be either fun or competitive. 1v1 for fun: Z moves are more fun than no Z moves. Banning them would be controversial, which is to say that they aren't considered to be obviously broken, and thus we let Z moves stay. 1v1 for competitiveness: How fun, enjoyable and rewarding the meta is isn't taken into account, and we ultimately decide to either ban or to not ban Z moves.
Hard Counters, C-Teaming, The Playerbase, and Lures
When Kyurem-B was suspected, the primary reason was as follows: Kyurem-B has a number of hard counters that is all but zero, and its sets beat radically different things from each other. Because of this, paired with the fact that all of its sets are indistinguishable at team preview, it can be argued that there is no way to reliably beat Kyurem-B unless you use certain Mega Metagross, SpD Magearna, Terrakion or Jirachi, resulting in a decrease in the importance of skill in the metagame. If we didn't have Z moves, would Pokemon like Kyurem-B still be a problem? Although it could be argued either way, I'm inclined to say yes. Looking at Kyurem-B's less common/lure sets (everything but Icium and Scarf), only three of the twelve sets utilize Z moves. Additionally, the other Pokemon that emulates the uncompetitve manner of Kyurem-B best, Charizard with its split Mega Evolutions, by nature of the mechanic, uses Z moves 0% of the time. Another thing to talk about is distinguishing between lures and c-teaming. Lures are a permanent fixture of a team, designed to fool opponents into picking the wrong 'mon while patching up the weaknesses of the team, while c-teams are active efforts by players to 3-0 someone else's team, thus getting a free win. C-teams are quite simply uncompetitive. C-teaming exists as a result of 1v1's small playerbase, which like it or not, is a reality. The ultimate thing to be considered with these ideas is whether or not Z moves contribute to the uncompetitiveness of the meta in the aforementioned regards and also whether or not these factors make 1v1 a meta "for fun" or "for competitiveness."
"Slap On a Z Crystal"
One thing that I've heard a lot is that Z moves are mindless, outclass other items, and dumb down the meta. I fervently disagree with this mindset. Let's take a look at a resource: the
Sets VR. You'll find some Pokemon that use only Z moves, some that would never consider using Z moves, but for the most part, what you'll find is Pokemon who can perform moderately well with or without Z moves. Straight off the bat we can say that Z crystals do not outclass other items. As for the other points, stupid people will be stupid people. Every good player ever does not mindlessly slap Z crystals on their Pokemon. If someone does do this, that's their problem, and even if we ban Z moves, they will continue to be bad players. One other thing to talk about here is whether or not Z moves are overcentralizing. Looking back at the sets VR, excluding Mega Evolutions, you'll find that Z moves make up about half of the viable items in the meta. I do not see this as a problem, but for the sake of a fair analysis, I've included this idea.
As a Game Mechanic
One argument I've seen for not banning Z moves is that they are equivalent to a game mechanic.
Quantum Tesseract had some really good thoughts on this, so I'm just gonna quote part of his post here:
Z moved are a mechanic, just like stealth rocks in gen 4 for singles or Mega Evolutions in gen 6, and its one we have to live with bar the most extreme circumstances. Banning items at all is supposed to be a big step; while form changing mega items are treated the same way as pokemon due to their mechanic, it does (and should) take something on the level of focus sash or past gen soul dew to cause it. You could treat it as a move ban, which I suppose is fair, but those have just as stringent conditions. By and large, we tier Pokemon. This means that the first resort is to ban abusers, and only proceed onwards after that has failed. Suspect Tapu Koko, or Mimikyu, or whichever mon you think is actually broken when using zmoves. If the community doesnt find them broken? C’est la vie.
I agree with most of this, but want to talk more about banning the users versus the mechanic some more. If something is going to be banned because it is overpowered, I definitely agree that the users, not the mechanic should be banned. However, this isn't about overpowered. This is about uncompetitive. If Z moves are uncompetitive, they should be banned outright instead of banning their individual users, as only one of them (in my opinion, of course) is actually broken.
The Meta Without Z Moves
What exactly the meta will look like after Z moves are banned cannot be said with any certainty. There certainly will be drastic changes to what's more or less viable, but that's not what I'm concerned about right now. What I'm concerned about is if certain Pokemon could become over or underwhelming without Z moves. In particular, I'm scared of Mega Gyarados and Zygarde. With Z moves gone, Koko, Lele and Mimikyu are sure to be far less viable. These three Pokemon are some of Mega Gyarados' best checks. While Gyarados' checks simply become less viable, Zygarde actually loses a lot of checks. While it can't brute past Magearna anymore, previously good checks like Swords Dance Mimikyu. I don't think that either will end up being broken, but if Z moves are banned, 1v1 will enter a completely new era, and the meta will have to be built from the ground up again.
Diversity Part 2
Previously, I talked about diversity in the manner of the number of Pokemon that are viable. Now I would like to talk about it in the manner of the number of sets that are viable. The thing that is causing me the most anxiety in regards to Z moves being banned is losing set diversity. Back to the
Sets VR, you'll see that most non-mega Pokemon have at least one viable Z move set. The fear here is that the meta could become one-dimensional without Z moves. Here's some examples of Pokemon that would suffer not in viability, but in set diversity: Magearna (Fairium, Specs->Specs), Tapu Koko (Electrium, Fairium, Specs->Specs), Dragonite (Flyinium, Dragonium, Band->Band), Magnezone (Electrium, Specs, AB, Steelium->Specs, AB), Snorlax (Normalium, Curse->Curse), Primarina (Waterium, Specs, Fairium->Specs), etc.
Conclusion
Before we decide whether or not Z moves are broken, we need to decide what 1v1 is really about. When it is time, I encourage everyone to really think about what they want from 1v1. I myself don't know if I want them banned yet. If/when Z moves are suspected, I believe that it needs to be a long suspect. The meta will change in ridiculous ways with Z moves gone, so I think that we should let the meta develop during the suspect. One option, although some upper people might not be too excited about, I think would work remarkably well: we have two suspect ladders up at the same time (one with and one without Z moves). In order to vote, you'd have to get reqs on both ladders to demonstrate that you understand what the new meta would be like. I hope my post exposed you to some new perspectives. Thanks for reading.