Ally Switch

kamikaze

The King Of Games
is a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
There has been some recent discussion on Ally Switch, but we have an ongoing suspect so in the interest of not letting discussion going off topic in the suspect thread we have decided to make this thread as an avenue to discuss Ally Switch.
Ally Switch's priority has been increased to +2 and its distribution increased significantly in USUM with the introduction of it as a Move Tutor. Some believe this has caused it to become a problem when it wasnt one previously

Feel free to discuss the move Ally Switch's distribution, features, and its interaction in the metagame.

Keep in mind that there is no guarantee that the Council will even vote on this. Once again, this only has a separate thread because of the ongoing suspect and there being serious discussion on it and should not imply anything else.
 
Last edited:

GenOne

DOU main. GMT-7. PS!: GenOne
is a Community Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I think only time will tell if this move is a problem or not - it probably hasn't seen enough use yet to warrant a ban.

That said, it just makes for a really unfun game. There's no skill involved in guessing correctly against a 50/50 coinflip, and it can easily become insult to injury in a game that's already prone to hax and rng. Bulky Ally Switch users (or users with good resistances) like Cresselia and Rotom-W are just a pain to fight. You try to HP Ice a Salamence, only for Cresselia to bust out Ally Switch and take 0% from it. The next turn, you make a hard read and HP Ice the Cresselia, only for it to not use Ally Switch. Having fun yet?

I would not miss this move at all if it were to dissappear somehow.
 

n10siT

Hoopa can do anything!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
here are some logs of me poorly getting my point across but namely Nido-Rus saying some great things about ally switch after he beat me with it: https://pastebin.com/RdkJ6cv4

my thoughts on Ally Switch are very well put by GenOne ^, i don't know if it's fair to say that Ally Switch is uncompetitive (did you know this isnt a fucking word) in the traditional sense that we say stuff is: the argument for most things being uncompetitive is that they are directly too powerful or too good, or lack sufficient counterplay (see gravsleep, mega kangaskhan). ally switch doesn't lack counterplay in the way we usually think about it, which is in teambuilding. i use fire types to beat ferrothorn and then preserve those fire types in games so i can defeat ferrothorn, right? ally switch just forces you to think about more stuff each turn, which i think you can argue is good and bad, depending on how difficult you think it is to make the correct play any given turn (hint: its hard).

my early only-mostly informed opinion is that i would like to see ally switch removed from the metagame, but i am definitely okay until waiting maybe after spl when we see ally switch in (possibly the best) action possible.
 

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I don't know under what grounds Ally Switch could possibly be removed other than "it's not fun to play against." I think Doubles should definitely try not to ban it.

Obviously the mechanic itself is not broken. The mechanic of hitting something you don't want to hit is well-known in doubles already from Follow Me and Rage Powder as well as to a lesser extent Ally Switch. Furthermore, Follow Me is obviously a better move and Rage Powder is at least somewhat of a better move (ignored by some foes at least). And Ally Switch did already have a decent user or two or three in gens 6 and 7, in Hoopa-U, who now would even use it as Z-Ally Switch, Mega Gardevoir, Mew, and Cofagrigus. The real difference now is that so many mons have Ally Switch... To the point where some of the mons who get it can be quite effective with it despite it not being as good of a move as Follow Me or Rage Powder.

Still, the coinflips being described are ultimately prediction coinflips, not RNG coinflips. And the mechanic itself is not broken. So what to do?

To me it seems if the wide distribution of the move overall is causing problems, a ban on the move may become necessary, but that would be very, very unfortunate. If instead, it's really just that something as bulky as Cress is the problem, then I think Cress (or whatever other mon) ultimately would have to come under suspect, just as it was Jirachi that got suspected, not Follow Me. But, yes, if it gets to the point where you'd need to be suspecting a handful or more Pokemon... then the move would have to go instead to keep parsimony in the banlist.
 

TGMD

ƧÏÐÈ¥¯ÏĈ¼Á°¿±³´µ¶·¸¹º»ŤûŠť²ØéŋŌ
is a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
In the current metagame, ally switch is pretty gnarly, my dudes. +2 prio means u can essentially force a coinflip in any scenario, which is unskilled and just isn't healthy. There are many battles I have played in the current metagame where I lost to this move because my opponents optimal play was to force luck. Bughouse is wrong imo, it doesn't matter what type of coinflip it is, it's still a random 50/50 coin that can be thrown out and flipped at any time, and is therefore luck :]
 

Mr.GX

Mew Mew
is a Tiering Contributor
Ally Switch effectively makes Pokemon a gamble. When every game can be turned into a 50/50, I wouldn't call it fair. And I don't want to be forced to run a bunch of spread-moves just to counter Ally Switch, considering how most of em have shitty accuracy. Oh, and I don't even wanna imagine Cresselia + Snorlax.
 

Fran

formerly Frania
is a Tiering Contributor
DPL Champion
Hey while i just want to speak for myself i think my position is a representation of the view of the majority of the best and most achieved doubles tournament players. this season i have really well and while speaking with other successful, good players we reached a conclusion that ally switch in extremly uncompetitive and needs to go. why do i mention my results? Its because the only guys opposing the quick ban are people who don't accually compete in doubles, who dont mind loosing one of every couple games to some conflips. This is a very basic case of an move that has no merit out of surprize factor or leading on into 50 50s. Everyone who cares about having consistant results would never want to play in an environment where one of these things can decide some of their matches. To make it more specific: this season i worked really hard and im very proud of my results that got me into the Doubles Invitational in the first seed. I (and obviously im not alone on this) i concider this the most imortant circuit event of the year and after putting it a lot of work to get here i like to believe that we deserve to play in the most competitive and fair environment possible. Now over time the surprize factor, over time it no longer will be relevant as everyone is going to be awere of the ally switch users, so we will be able to bring the move to its basic form: pure 50 50s.
Like on the gif above you can pretty much tell: either Demantoid volt switches into landorus-t and ice punches the rotom expecting the ally switch or he goes for ice punch on lando and volt on rotom. How was the player supposed to cover both options? You really can't blame Level 51 for taking advantige of the underused to this point mechanic, but he was in bad postion if he couldn't force the 50 50 (assuming Demantoid knew that rotom got ally switch. You can assume he would, even if you let them replay this game from that crucial turn he still would have to get the better gues) and after the turn the momentum completly shifted, making him the winner. I think this example (almost) perfectly showcases the randomness factor that the move provides and that has no place in any competitive game.

The move holds no other, competitive merit, that doesn't rely on predicitions games, giving us no reason to keep it in. it doesn't influence the game in any postivie way (unless you hate competition and would rather play a lottery) and i can't imagine why would you want to keep it, when it has very negative effect on some.

Finally i have one more example of my match https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen7doublesou-335859 where after a good fight i managed to pull out my win condition and get the position i wanted and that resulted in me executing my gameplan and winning. Now just imagine the metagross decided to drop some coverage move and run ally switch instead (objectivly bad and inconsistent decision) at turn 9 he could easly turn the game around and take the win. Could anyone possibly argue that result would be fair in any way? miltankmilk is a good player so i wouldn't ever expect him to try to trade his coverage for the option to make a game a bit more random and prediction based but clearly this showcases how in a metagame with ally switch you need to hope that your opponent has the 'right' set or anything can be turned into shitty 50 50s if he wants to.

I would really want to see it gone as soon as possible, so preferably in a quick ban, whenever council find the time. We have the Doubles Inviational happeninig (supposedly the most important circuit event of the year) and games beeing affected every other series and its only fair to the players that you guys deal with it before more games get ruined (you acted on very short notice with the discussion and opening the new threat and thank you for that). Personally me and my r2 opponent agreed on not brining ally switch in our matches and i would recomend that to anyone who wants a clear series.
 
Last edited:

MajorBowman

wouldst thou like to live fergaliciously?
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
I take a pretty big issue with the post above, both in content and in presentation. The tone of the entire post is "I'm really good and this is my opinion, anyone that disagrees is wrong." This is a very arrogant way to go about presenting an argument as it tries to invalidate any dissent right from the get go. Contrary to what the post implies, some of the "best and most achieved doubles players" don't see Ally Switch as some destructive force set on "ruining" tournaments. (Ruining? Come on, isn't that a little dramatic?)

Ally Switch is not a new move. It existed on decent Pokemon in Gen 6 and people didn't use it or think it was busted because it really isn't that good. It creates 50/50s, sure, but it's not like those don't already exist. I'd argue that Ally Switch isn't even a 50/50 and puts the user at a disadvantage since losing the "50/50" means you wasted a turn with one of your mons and likely either lost or took a bunch of damage with the other, and there are usually ways to cover both the use and non-use of Ally Switch in a given turn. For example: if the Ally Switch user has the choice to either 1) use or 2) not use Ally Switch, these are the possible outcomes:

A) Ally Switch is used -> opponent does not expect it
B) Ally Switch is used -> opponent expects it and makes decisions accordingly
C) Ally Switch is not used -> opponent does not expect it
D) Ally Switch is not used -> opponent expects it and makes decisions accordingly

In scenario A, the Ally Switch user pulls it off and the Ally Switch partner likely sets up does some damage without taking much in return. This is a positive for the Ally Switch user. In scenario B, the Ally Switch user just wasted a turn with one Pokemon and likely had something bad happen to their other Pokemon. Definitely a negative for the user. Scenario C is pretty neutral and is just another turn. Scenario D can be a positive for the Ally Switch user, but it can also end up being a net neutral as well. It's hard to make blanket statements about stuff like this without knowing exact situations.

However, the likelihood of all these scenarios occurring are not all equal. Scenario A can only occur if the opponent of the Ally Switch user is completely unaware of Ally Switch being an option. As soon as Ally Switch is clicked once, the threat of it remains for the rest of the game and the opponent will naturally be making sure their plays from that point onward will work in either the presence or absence of an Ally Switch. At some point some 50/50s may arise as they do naturally in a lot of games, but I think that implying every turn that has the possibility of involving Ally Switch devolves into a 50/50 is inaccurate. A lot of plays are identically effective regardless of Ally Switch (spread moves, field moves, switches). This swings the balance in favor of the player not using Ally Switch, especially when considering the possibility of a wasted turn by the Ally Switch user. If someone gets caught by an Ally Switch then oh well, they got outplayed. I really don't see it any differently than attacking into a double protect, a choice was made and the opponent took advantage of it.

If we're going to make the excuse that so many things get Ally Switch now that it's too unpredictable, it's our business as people playing this tier to know what Pokemon have access to what moves. In the same game as the gif contained in the post, Level 51 ends up winning because he reveals Wide Guard Aegislash at the very end. Just like Ally Switch on Rotom, that's something we have to consider when we're playing against something that can carry a certain move. I see no difference between 51 revealing Ally Switch and Wide Guard other than people are mad about one and not the other.

Frankly this all just feels like a knee jerk reaction to one set that a lot of people wish ended differently. There really hasn't been any evidence put forth as to why Ally Switch should been banned except Level 51's one relevant use of Ally Switch in that set. The replay frania posted literally has nothing to do with Ally Switch and is instead just him flexing a replay in which he won but "omg what if he had Ally Switch I could have lost!!!" The fact of the matter is that Ally Switch is just another support move like Wide Guard or Trick Room or Taunt or whatever that can influence the flow of a game to one person's benefit. If Ally Switch develops into some unstoppable force later down the road then maybe I'd be more open to this argument, but I really don't see that happening. The hype will die down and people will stop freaking out about the new scary monster under the bed, waiting in earnest to steal away their hard-earned wins.
 

marilli

With you
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Former Other Tournament Circuit Champion
I don't have a time to write an essay but I wanted to get my thoughts out here quick.

I don't think ally switch is "really isn't that good" but i agree with majorbowman's approach above heavily. It's not a stupid 50-50 because you can either click it or you don't. Next thing you tell me is that smogtours is right that every turn in doubles is a 50-50 because you could either protect or you don't. We need to look at how much effective Ally Switch is at generating win percentage than throwing up your hands and proclaiming that it's a 50-50. In some instances, access to ally switch turns an otherwise losing position into a heavily advantageous one. Sometimes it's still a losing position but there's a bit more uncertainly involved. Sometimes there's a move that covers both options and it's a losing move either way, so you don't get any advantage for a precious moveslot. And you have to realize that there are plenty of moves that can do exactly this. You have to recognize that in the end, we are playing Pokemon - a guessing game at its core. And I find it very strange that you deem it to be 'ruining games' when it's not. In many cases there's a safe play that covers many options - and it's up to you which ones you cover and which ones you don't. For instance in above scenario, Volt + Ice Punch onto the Rotom, or the HP Ice + Ice Punch on separate targets, would be a much safer play that covers the ally switch options (but of course as some moves that you lose to, if your opponent goes for a hard read - as it is the case with many Pokemon match positions). Alternatively, we could compare to other moves available in Pokemon and see if this is too outrageous of an advantage. Immediately see that if Rotom had a bit more health, Electroweb + Protect is a much more surefire way of generating win % without any silly 50-50s. And there's many other Pokemon that could generate the same 50-50 without the move ally switch in that same scenario.

I think it's not a fad, and it'll eventually stay in the meta, but I don't think it's this some force of nature that pulls out 50-50s in every scenario or something every player will be forced to bring to up their odds, the way Swagger was. If it becomes too dominant council will most definitely be on alert, but I don't think a quickban is necessary here. And if it is dominant I think it will show in the winrate in how strong of a move Ally Switch is, not some silly "too much rng" argument.
 
Last edited:

GenOne

DOU main. GMT-7. PS!: GenOne
is a Community Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I didn't articulate myself super well in my original post, and I'm starting to see a lot of people just pick on the phrase "50/50" (it has literally been tossed around 19 times in this thread so far). I regret typing that, since it was shortsighted on my end to word it like that, and just wasn't the right way to put across what's on my mind about the move. So, I'm gonna take a second swing at this.

First of all: obviously it's too early to ban this move or anything like that, so I just want to nip this in the bud before people imply I'm saying otherwise. The move just got its Move Tutor distribution recently, and aside from a few Invitational matches we haven't seen it used in high level play yet.

Second of all. and more importantly, I do see a few potentially unhealthy aspects to Ally Switch. I'm not saying they warrant any action against the move now, I'm just saying there are a few potential trends to watch for:

Ally Switch is the new Follow Me, and some bulky AF Pokemon get it now

Follow Me and Rage Powder aren't considered broken or bad for the meta, mainly because the distribution is limited to basically Amoonguss, Togekiss, Clefairy, and some other Pokemon nobody uses. Yet Jirachi was banned earlier in Gen 7 because its good bulk, combined with its excellent defensive typing, made it too good at its job (to the point where Fire-types and Ground-types were nearly mandatory on teams).

In USUM, Ally Switch's expanded distribution included really bulky Pokemon like Cresselia, as well as decently bulky Pokemon with specifically good defensive typing, like Bronzong (Steel/Psychic) and Rotom-W (Water/Electric with Levitate). These Pokemon can spam Ally Switch (or bluff it) to tank attacks that a specific partner doesn't want to. As one example, Cresselia or Rotom-W can use Ally Switch to protect a Mega Salamence, Zygarde or Landorus-T while they set up a Dragon Dance or Swords Dance.

In essence, Ally Switch accomplishes the same thing as Follow Me, just in a slightly different way. It is objectively worse than Follow Me from the user's end, since it can be countered by a hard read from the opponent. From the opponent's end, Ally Switch doesn't present any new 50/50s that redirectors like Amoonguss can't already pose with Rage Powder / Protect mind games. So in essence, it's a weak arguement to say that Ally Switch itself is broken if you're currently OK with Rage Powder and Follow Me being allowed.

The distribution of this move was really wide though, and it included a lot of highly viable Pokemon as well as a lot of Pokemon with defenses comparable to Jirachi's. We'll need to see more matches with Ally Switch in action to know if there are any Pokemon that make it a problem, and it's very likely if we get to that point that we'll be more likely to question the Pokemon rather than the move. All I'm saying here is Ally Switch's new distribution is comparable to a bunch of new Pokemon getting Follow Me, and Jirachi is proof that redirection can be unhealthy when the right (or wrong?, idk) Pokemon is using it.

Ally Switch is also a pseudo-Protect that doesn't burn out

Follow Me and Rage Powder serve one purpose, and serve that purpose well. Ally Switch can be used as a "fake" redirection move, but can also be used as a panic button on more offensive Pokemon like Stakataka, Mega Gengar, or any number of Pokemon with exploitable weaknesses to single-target moves. Unlike Protect, which has a good chance to fail if used consecutively, Ally Switch can be used endlessly. Pokemon with flexible third slots like Mega Gengar particularly worry me, because they can use both Protect and Ally Switch in the same set to bypass Protect's burnout (or to save Protect for a spread move like Earthquake). Some offensive Pokemon, like Mega Metagross, have good defensive typing AND can use Ally Switch as a panic button, making Ally Switch a pretty good two-for-one move.

This is all in theory, anyway. It goes without saying we need a bigger sample size of competitive matches with offensive Pokemon using Ally Switch before any conclusions can be made.

New toy fatigue / variable overload

This isn't a valid argument in terms of Ally Switch's role in competitive play, but I'm just going to address what I feel might be an elephant in the room: there are so many teambuilding variables to account for in Gen 7, and it's getting really fatiguing to account for all of them.

I might catch some flak for going here, but I'm gonna do it anyways. (And as a disclaimer: I've really enjoyed Gen 7. It's the first meta I actually entered from the beginning, whereas Gen 6 to me felt like I was always playing catch-up with more experienced players that actually knew what they were doing.)

Sometimes it can be really fucking tiring to build teams that account for:
  • everything that mattered in XY and earlier, plus:
  • the terrains
  • Marshadow
  • an absurd speed creep in the metagame
  • the fact that there are 802 Pokemon to account for now, and
  • on top of all this, you throw something like expanded Ally Switch distribution into the mix.
Like idk, maybe it's a matter of "git good" or whatever, but at what point is it going to be acceptable to just say that there's a lot going on in this game now and it's tiring to keep pace with the changes? Even if a game is technically balanced, that doesn't matter if people stop having fun playing it, or if the barrier for entry becomes too complex for a sufficient amount of new players to replace the old ones that eventually outgrow mons and leave. I'm not saying I'm at that point personally (if I was, I probably wouldn't have wasted my time writing this post) but I've seen a lot of people say they miss the older generations and I feel like this overload of variables to account for might be a factor.

All I'm saying is yeah, maybe sometimes some people do take an overly strong "kneejerk" stance to something new - but maybe sometimes there's a reason for it that goes beyond people caring about Smogon politics and goes into whether or not they're still having a good time playing this game.

And with all that said...

Having talked myself through the pros and cons of Ally Switch in writing this post, I'm not still entirely convinced it's as bad as I thought it would be. I do still think it's worth keeping an eye on, but it's not a super, super broken move. Time will tell.
 
Follow Me is restricted to a handful Pokemon. Most of them screams "Follow Me" user. There are exceptions such as Lucario and Volcarona but they are rare or rarely use Follow Me,

Protect/Detect gets less and less likely over time. You can play smartly to increase your win chance.
 

DeagleBeagle

Banned deucer.
"Ally Switch is not a new move. It existed on decent Pokemon in Gen 6 and people didn't use it or think it was busted because it really isn't that good."

Not true, and it is obviously a good move otherwise no one would be complaining about it. +2 priority, has high potential to really mess up what the opponent was going to do, etc. Your comment on Ally Switch I think is one that doesn't speak from experience, as your reasoning is false respectfully I needed to say that.

Ally Switch was not used much before, because all the Pokemon that got it were sucky, like Beheeyem. It also was underexplored and seen as a noob move, one of those moves that almost never got someone to lose a match since all the people who used it tended to suck. So they never thought much of it, and it also did not have +2 priority. I guess it is fine to have opinions, but I feel that people should have more experience before they start talking about the history of Pokemon and spreading opinions about things that might mislead people.

I take a pretty big issue with the post above, both in content and in presentation. The tone of the entire post is "I'm really good and this is my opinion, anyone that disagrees is wrong." This is a very arrogant way to go about presenting an argument as it tries to invalidate any dissent right from the get go. Contrary to what the post implies, some of the "best and most achieved doubles players" don't see Ally Switch as some destructive force set on "ruining" tournaments. (Ruining? Come on, isn't that a little dramatic?)

Ally Switch is not a new move. It existed on decent Pokemon in Gen 6 and people didn't use it or think it was busted because it really isn't that good. It creates 50/50s, sure, but it's not like those don't already exist. I'd argue that Ally Switch isn't even a 50/50 and puts the user at a disadvantage since losing the "50/50" means you wasted a turn with one of your mons and likely either lost or took a bunch of damage with the other, and there are usually ways to cover both the use and non-use of Ally Switch in a given turn. For example: if the Ally Switch user has the choice to either 1) use or 2) not use Ally Switch, these are the possible outcomes:

A) Ally Switch is used -> opponent does not expect it
B) Ally Switch is used -> opponent expects it and makes decisions accordingly
C) Ally Switch is not used -> opponent does not expect it
D) Ally Switch is not used -> opponent expects it and makes decisions accordingly

In scenario A, the Ally Switch user pulls it off and the Ally Switch partner likely sets up does some damage without taking much in return. This is a positive for the Ally Switch user. In scenario B, the Ally Switch user just wasted a turn with one Pokemon and likely had something bad happen to their other Pokemon. Definitely a negative for the user. Scenario C is pretty neutral and is just another turn. Scenario D can be a positive for the Ally Switch user, but it can also end up being a net neutral as well. It's hard to make blanket statements about stuff like this without knowing exact situations.

However, the likelihood of all these scenarios occurring are not all equal. Scenario A can only occur if the opponent of the Ally Switch user is completely unaware of Ally Switch being an option. As soon as Ally Switch is clicked once, the threat of it remains for the rest of the game and the opponent will naturally be making sure their plays from that point onward will work in either the presence or absence of an Ally Switch. At some point some 50/50s may arise as they do naturally in a lot of games, but I think that implying every turn that has the possibility of involving Ally Switch devolves into a 50/50 is inaccurate. A lot of plays are identically effective regardless of Ally Switch (spread moves, field moves, switches). This swings the balance in favor of the player not using Ally Switch, especially when considering the possibility of a wasted turn by the Ally Switch user. If someone gets caught by an Ally Switch then oh well, they got outplayed. I really don't see it any differently than attacking into a double protect, a choice was made and the opponent took advantage of it.

If we're going to make the excuse that so many things get Ally Switch now that it's too unpredictable, it's our business as people playing this tier to know what Pokemon have access to what moves. In the same game as the gif contained in the post, Level 51 ends up winning because he reveals Wide Guard Aegislash at the very end. Just like Ally Switch on Rotom, that's something we have to consider when we're playing against something that can carry a certain move. I see no difference between 51 revealing Ally Switch and Wide Guard other than people are mad about one and not the other.

Frankly this all just feels like a knee jerk reaction to one set that a lot of people wish ended differently. There really hasn't been any evidence put forth as to why Ally Switch should been banned except Level 51's one relevant use of Ally Switch in that set. The replay frania posted literally has nothing to do with Ally Switch and is instead just him flexing a replay in which he won but "omg what if he had Ally Switch I could have lost!!!" The fact of the matter is that Ally Switch is just another support move like Wide Guard or Trick Room or Taunt or whatever that can influence the flow of a game to one person's benefit. If Ally Switch develops into some unstoppable force later down the road then maybe I'd be more open to this argument, but I really don't see that happening. The hype will die down and people will stop freaking out about the new scary monster under the bed, waiting in earnest to steal away their hard-earned wins.
 

MajorBowman

wouldst thou like to live fergaliciously?
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Your comment on Ally Switch I think is one that doesn't speak from experience, as your reasoning is false respectfully I needed to say that.

I guess it is fine to have opinions, but I feel that people should have more experience before they start talking about the history of Pokemon and spreading opinions about things that might mislead people.
I used Ally Switch more than anyone else in this tier in Gen 6, so do some research before you go around calling people uninformed. I cheesed a bunch of games with Ally Switch Mew + setup and it was fun but inconsistent. It is because I speak from experience that I can confidently say Ally Switch is no more than a one off gimmick that doesn't even always work the first time. But please, go on about how I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm sure your vast experience and knowledge of the "history of Pokemon" in this tier far outweighs mine.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top