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.
This is the thread where you get to argue whether Mega Kangaskhan is broken. Please make sure to actually read the arguments others present for and against its brokenness and respond accordingly, or introduce new points; do not simply rehash an opinion. A sheer volume of people saying one thing or another will change nobody's opinion so make sure you're actually doing something to make people think. Thank you.
Note that your participation in the metagame discussion thread and this suspect discussion thread is crucial for being selected as a suspect test voter. I've seen some excellent points being introduced in the other thread, so don't be afraid of repeating the same points to facilitate your argument here. No hostility or ad hominem attacks allowed; treat every participant with respect. The voting will begin on June 3, so make sure you immerse yourself in these discussion threads before the voter pool has been selected.
One of the things I think people should keep in mind is how often they use typical methods of keeping Kangaskhan at bay on both the Kanga-free and the Kanga-inclusive ladders. A lot of these are used not because they beat Kangaskhan in particular (with the possible exception of my favorite set ever, Rocky Helmet Amoonguss, but that's complicated), but because they're useful in a plethora of situations. The big question here is: does Kangaskhan really put as much of a strain on team building as some people think it does?
As for the secondary question, it is incredibly difficult to tell if kanga actually restricts team building because the majority/most of the "well known" doubles players are just using teams they built prior to the suspect test. In order for us to be able to tell if kanga is as un/healthy for the meta as we've made it out to be, we'd either need to make new teams or have a much longer duration for lack of a kangashanite. As it is now the teams that were kanga less before suspect are still effective so ehs.
I'd like to address the point people are making about "banning kangaskhan to increase diversity" or whatever the fuck the kids say these days:
It's ridiculous to think that anything less centralized than what we have could come from an arrangement such as Mega Pokemon. If we were to take 27 random Pokemon or however many it is from the S, A, and B ranks, and tell you you're only allowed to run one of them per team, would you expect all 27 to remain in S, A, and B? Of course not! So it's ridiculous to think that even slight differences in viability wouldn't be ridiculously exaggerated with such an arrangement as this, nor is it sane to think that banning kanga will cause all megas to live together in happy unison. As it is, Kangaskhan is less used of a Pokemon than Charizard.
This is just one flaw with a usage-based argument. Another problem is the fact that usage does not correlate to power. A pokemon being used a lot simply means it's good and fits on a wide variety of teams, not that it's always the strongest Pokemon or a team's sweeper. Typically, there are a lot more choices for viable attacker Pokemon than viable glues, which are the Pokemon that end up being used the highest. Take a look at, for example, BW OU. Rotom-W was often #1 in the usage statistics. Would any non fuckwit call it the most threatening Pokemon in BW OU? It simply fit on so many teams...which Kangaskhan is great at doing since it doesn't have a specific typing or move or ability or ANYTHING that competes for a role, it's a ridiculously generic bulky attacker.
Furthermore, if Kangaskhan is being used a lot, don't you ever think it might be your own fucking fault? There are a great deal of viable Mega Pokemon than Kangaskhan, but I rarely see the people who bitch about Kangaskhan using them. I've never even made a single good team with Mama myself, and I'm still doing just fine when it comes to competitive battling. The proper way to get people to start being creative isn't to ban the thing they use as a crutch; they'll just find some different crutch and keep using copy/paste teams. We can't legislate creativity, there's no point in trying, so if you want to ban Kangaskhan just because you see it a lot, you're only setting yourself up to want to ban Sylveon just because you see it a lot.
Finally, y'all damn punks don't even know what a centralized metagame looks like. Back in DPP OU, the metagame was still fun and interesting even though we had more than a year of 30+% Scizor. I could think of other examples but I can't be arsed to. There are so many interesting, different, unique teams I see people testing out every day, we're not even fucking close to the point where you could call this metagame solved or centralized. So please drop it.
tl;dr: please don't employ a usage based argument itt
I agree with Artcicblast that teams will remain the same because people check Kanga the same way they check every other physical attacker. Will-O-Wisp is not going away because Kanga isn't here, Ghost-types still have heck of a utility, and Terrakion/Keldeo are still kickass (as well as the many other base 100+'s) The only time I have ever seen anyone have to go out of their way to check Kanga is that lol-icious Rocky Helmet Amoonguss set.
Also remember this is Doubles, where two Pokemon can target Kanga. The first thing a Double player learns when facing Kanga (or any other mon ever) is to protect with the obvious target and crippling it with the other. Kanga ain't use no spread moves.
so i've already got reqs, and all I saw on the ladder was the meta is extremely boring. I used my Kanga Sylveon team but just put Infernape > Kanga. Faster fake out, better move pool. It was really just boring, idk what it was about kanga but the ladder is even more enjoyable with Kanga. At the end of the day I don't really see Kanga as a problem that needs to be removed, I feel it's healthy for the metagame in nearly every way possible.
Ok, at least to me, Mega Kangaskhan is not broken. By my personal definition, something is "broken" when it either is A. Over-centralizing B. It restricts teambuilding a ton. Both of these can come from a Pokemon being so utterly strong, that it does these things (Over-centralizes the metagame or restricts team-building a ton) Of course, there are some exceptions (Such as Mega Gengar in OU, who by itself wasn't broken, but could easily remove key threats and allowing for other Pokemon to sweep) but I feel as in Kangaskhan's case, these seem to be the main arguments for it being broken, so I'm going to base my arguments/observations off them.
Ok, firstly, I feel as though the "over-centralizing" argument isn't a very good argument. Kangaskhan is not, in my opinion, over-centralizing. Looking at the SPL statistics, Mega Kangaskhan is only #4. Not the usage of something that's "overcentralizng" imo. Charizard is a #13, Mawile is at #15, while Tyranitar and Gyarados sit at #6 and #15, respectively, though their Mega Evolutions are not always used. I also agree a ton with Pwnemon that there are a ton of other viable Mega Evolutions out there. The four previously mentioned Mgea Evolutions, as well as Garchomp, Venusaur, Scizor, Gardevoir, Pinsir, Abomasnow, Manetric, etc etc... With so many viable Pokemon that are easy to do well with, there is no way Mega Kangaskhan is over centralizing the metagame in any way.
Next, there's the argument of restricting Teambuilding. While I feel this is a better argument, I still don't feel like it proves Khan is broken. I mean, the standard Fake Out/Return/Sucker/PuP isn't all that hard to wall, and the Pokemon that do wall this are usually very common (Landorus-T, most Ghost-types, etc.) I also feel as though Khan suffers from vulnerability to attack control (Intimidate, Will-O-Wisp) and Speed control if decides to forgo Sucker Punch (Thunder Wave, opposing Tailwind, etc). Speaking of forgoing the normal spread, many people like to use this to say that Khan was broken. Coverage moves such as Ice Punch and Crunch can, in fact, beat its normal counters. However, losing Fake Out means no immediate priority/no flinch, losing Sucker Punch means no priority and vulnerability to Speed control, while no Power-Up-Punch can leave Khan open to Steel-type Pokemon, and it also means he has no way to boost his stats.
Overall, I don't really see Khan as broken. As a ladder player, I may not have the best insight, but this is how I'm feeling about Mega Khan atm. Overall, Mega Khan is healthy for the metagame and actually makes it more enjoyable. :)
Honestly, Mega Kangaskhan has its fair share of checks in Doubles 6v6. The real reason that Kangaskhan was a problem in the OU metagame was that it dominated singles because there is one target. But in doubles, Kangaskhan is still limited to taking out one threat per turn if it can even do that... With Pokemon like Terrakion, Conkeldurr, Breloom, Keldeo and any Fighting type with access to a powerful Fighting STAB can break through its bulk. Here are some useful calcs:
252+ Atk Life Orb Mienshao Drain Punch vs. 4 HP / 0 Def Mega Kangaskhan: 343-406 (97.4 - 115.3%) -- 81.3% chance to OHKO
252+ Atk Conkeldurr Drain Punch vs. 4 HP / 0 Def Mega Kangaskhan: 288-338 (81.8 - 96%) -- guaranteed 2HKO (Revenge with Mach Punch)
(252 Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Return vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Conkeldurr: 253-301 (61.1 - 72.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO)
252 Atk Terrakion Close Combat vs. 4 HP / 0 Def Mega Kangaskhan: 390-462 (110.7 - 131.2%) -- guaranteed OHKO
252 SpA Choice Specs Keldeo Secret Sword vs. 4 HP / 0 Def Mega Kangaskhan: 414-488 (117.6 - 138.6%) -- guaranteed OHKO
I just suggested 4 different ways to kill a Kangaskhan, with common Pokemon that all have other uses in the metagame. Kangaskhan is not overcentralising in the Doubles metagame. The calculations show that many viable Pokemon can easily OHKO Mega-Kangaskhan. I think the reasn Kangaskhan has been suggested for suspect test is because people feel that because Singles banned it, for being overcentralising then shouldn't doubles follow suit? But the simple and resounding answer is no.
Oppurtunity Cost: I'm pretty sure that you can't just dump Kanga on any team and call it a day. Even if you can, you should think about other megas. Sure Kanga might hit hard, but would you benefit from boosted heat waves from charizard's drought? Or maybe you might benefit from a pokemon like mega gyarados who still hits hard but has a better typing to support your team. These factors should be taken in mind when choosing a mega for your team.
Mega Kanga attracts WoW users and Intimidate users because of how much easier the battle gets if you reduce Kanga's damage output. Most teams use Mega Kanga for power, so you should be wary of that.
Fighting Types do pretty well against Kanga, so if your team is weak to it, you can probably afford to get a hitmontop or terrakion to make your team less weak to kanga
I'm just going to put my point out there which is what I will base my vote on if I end up voting for a ban.
What I've always loved about Doubles is the intense mindgames and power based around 1) Using Protect and 2) making proper switches. If you perform these two steps safely and to perfection you can literally flip the table completely in momentum. Protect is a semi-shaky way of doing, but switching is the one that is more consistent. What Kangaskhan comes around and does though, is that it prevents switching mindgames much too well. Unless you have two Ghost-types with WoW on your team or the combination of a Mawile and a WoW Ghost-type, a perfectly played opposing Kangaskhan effectively will make the better out of your switch. Even Terrakion on the switch has a chance to get knocked out by PuP + Sucker in the case of not switching an Intimidate user in as well.
Fake Out / Return forces switches, PuP takes advantage of switches, and that is why one set can be so diverse. Also can we just keep the freaking "there are two mons on the field" argument the fuck out of this, because in practice, Mega Kangaskhan with a partner is much more threatening than a Mega Kangaskhan check and its partner...
to sum it up, I like switching mindgames in Doubles, and well played Kangaskhans diminish the impact of proper switching.
I could come up with a nice essay on my personal opinions, but I'd prefer to save time by just commenting on what has been said.
As a disclaimer (before you see how biased this looks x_x) I'm not heavily against banning Kanga or anything of that sort, I just haven't seen any really good arguments (in my eyes at least) as to why we should ban it.
This is a pretty good question. As for personal experience I have not had any problems with certain team options/concepts being "unusable" (unless they are complete trash like Magikarp but you get what I meant) just because MKanga exists. In fact, I think MKangaskhan has a more positive effect on teambuilding, forcing players to build bulkier teams and not just spam Deoxys-A, which is a very good thing. Plus the typical Kanga counters you see (Ghost-types, Fighting-types, Rotoms) are highly viable picks anyway, though I will agree that more defensively orientated Ghost-types do become less useful without Kanga in the tier (but with Kangaskhan-Mega around they are hardly required on a team either).
Furthermore, if Kangaskhan is being used a lot, don't you ever think it might be your own fucking fault? There are a great deal of viable Mega Pokemon than Kangaskhan, but I rarely see the people who bitch about Kangaskhan using them. I've never even made a single good team with Mama myself, and I'm still doing just fine when it comes to competitive battling. The proper way to get people to start being creative isn't to ban the thing they use as a crutch; they'll just find some different crutch and keep using copy/paste teams. We can't legislate creativity, there's no point in trying, so if you want to ban Kangaskhan just because you see it a lot, you're only setting yourself up to want to ban Sylveon just because you see it a lot.
A good point. Everyone uses Landorus-T, Rotom-W, and Heatran as well. That doesn't mean they are the best choices for a team either. Really I see these threats as sub-optimal in many situations, as since they are common and everyone knows what they do, almost any well built team will be ready for them. The way I see it, using less known or new/innovative ideas on your teams is more effective than just going standard. It keeps you less predictable and comes with some extra surprise value to boot.
The way I see it, Kangaskhan is used a lot because top players and common team builds utilize its offensive pressure and Fake Out support, and a lot of the lesser players just go along with it. Mawile-Mega, Charizard-Mega-Y/X, Venusaur-Mega, Gengar-Mega, Lucario-Mega and Blastoise-Mega are all very solid mega Pokemon and imo are heavily underused. That doesn't prove Kanga isn't worthy of a ban or anything along those lines, but I agree that if your only argument against Kangaskhan is that its overused, I'd suggest you use other Megas that are perfectly viable (many of which can counter the typical Kangaskhan sets) and hopefully get people to start using them instead of pushing for a ban =/
I agree with Artcicblast that teams will remain the same because people check Kanga the same way they check every other physical attacker. Will-O-Wisp is not going away because Kanga isn't here, Ghost-types still have heck of a utility, and Terrakion/Keldeo are still kickass (as well as the many other base 100+'s) The only time I have ever seen anyone have to go out of their way to check Kanga is that lol-icious Rocky Helmet Amoonguss set.
Also remember this is Doubles, where two Pokemon can target Kanga. The first thing a Double player learns when facing Kanga (or any other mon ever) is to protect with the obvious target and crippling it with the other. Kanga ain't use no spread moves.
Lolk makes a strong point in the prediction involved around Kangaskhan. From my experience, Kangaskhan-Mega creates a lot of complicated situations (even on turn 1 you may be struggling to decide who to Fake Out, or even whether to PuP your partner on a possible double Protect) that can work against you as much as they can work for you. The fact Kangaskhan rarely has Protect (a very common "safe" move in the realm that is doubles) means that one bad/risky call with it can quite possibly result in Kangaskhan becoming crippled or taking heavy damage. The general point I'm making here is that Kangaskhan needs support to actually function as a sweeper, which any other typical sweeper (CharX, DD Mega TTar, SD Scizor, DD Gyarados, Belly Drum Azumarill) needs. The biggest argument you could really make is that Kangaskhan can also support its allies with Fake Out, allowing it to fill two useful roles in one slot (and I suppose that it hits really hard without boosts, but so does Mawile-Mega, Charizard-Y, Lucario-Mega, and more or less every other offensively built Mega Pokemon). I will agree that its ability to perform several different roles does make it a very useful and powerful choice for almost any team, but that alone does not make something overpowered (if it did, we'd have banned Landorus-T, Rotom-W, Togekiss, and a good few other threats by now).
What I've always loved about Doubles is the intense mindgames and power based around 1) Using Protect and 2) making proper switches. If you perform these two steps safely and to perfection you can literally flip the table completely in momentum. Protect is a semi-shaky way of doing, but switching is the one that is more consistent. What Kangaskhan comes around and does though, is that it prevents switching mindgames much too well. Unless you have two Ghost-types with WoW on your team or the combination of a Mawile and a WoW Ghost-type, a perfectly played opposing Kangaskhan effectively will make the better out of your switch. Even Terrakion on the switch has a chance to get knocked out by PuP + Sucker in the case of not switching an Intimidate user in as well.
Fake Out / Return forces switches, PuP takes advantage of switches, and that is why one set can be so diverse. Also can we just keep the freaking "there are two mons on the field" argument the fuck out of this, because in practice, Mega Kangaskhan with a partner is much more threatening than a Mega Kangaskhan check and its partner...
to sum it up, I like switching mindgames in Doubles, and well played Kangaskhans diminish the impact of proper switching.
The big issue here is that playing Kangaskhan perfectly is ridiculously difficult due to the fact it creates a ton of mind games on both sides (having no spread moves will tend to make that happen). I also think the means that are required to counter Kangaskhan are greatly exaggerated here. Steel-types can often set up on it and with proper support even beat it one-on-one since Power-Up Punch is really weak (though I'd recommend things like Scizor and Mawile-Mega that aren't weak to it), one properly utilized Ghost-type can usually do the trick (bar Crunch but that will cost Kanga its priority, making it far less threatening), any Faster Fighting-type can beat it before a PuP and even at +2 Sucker Punch won't be OHKOing Fighting-types:
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Terrakion: 153-180 (47.3 - 55.7%) -- 75.4% chance to 2HKO (pls attack this one I'd love to steal that +2 boost :3)
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Keldeo: 153-180 (47.3 - 55.7%) -- 75.4% chance to 2HKO
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mega Lucario: 154-183 (54.8 - 65.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mienshao: 210-247 (77.4 - 91.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
Yeah I guess you can't take +2 Sucker Punches multiple times but if you are giving Mega Kanga 2 or 3 PuP opportunities per match you've either made some really bad calls or don't have a very solid team. Plus when the Fighting-type of choice puts Kanga in that "switch or stay in and risk getting OHKOd" situation you can potentially kill a switch in with a good play.
The "ways to beat Kanga" list doesn't even stop here. There's WoW, TWave or Trick Room, Intimidate, etc, all of which slow it down considerably if not outright cripple it. Any good team should have 2 of these at the least (regardless of whether Kanga exists or not).
I also don't really understand this "Kanga ruins switching" concept. Switching is naturally a play that will have risk involved (and Protect is the "safe" play last I checked, unless Mega-Pinsir or something is on the field) since if an opponent were to properly predict a switch it would be incredibly costly (for instance I once used Drill Run on a Cresselia and hit the predicted Heatran switch in which won me the game). Regardless of that, a ton of the other typically offensively built Mega Pokemon, Substitute Heatran, and countless others can potentially force switches and then take advantage of them; I don't really see how Kangaskhan ruins switches differently than any of those do. Basically what I've picked up from this is that Kangaskhan applies a lot of offensive pressure which makes it impossible to safely switch into or safely counter or something like that (which makes sense I guess but I wouldn't really consider it a good enough argument for a ban). Sorry if this came out rude/harsh (not my intent if it did) but I just don't exactly get the point you're trying to make (and would really like it if you could explain it a bit more?).
pwne edit: dont put your opinion in hide tags unless you're too bitch to stand by it nollan edit: or maybe also if its really really long =/ nollan edit: also pwnemon sux
Kang can fit in almost any team, just like rotom-W because both of them have only one weakness. Having a team that has defensive synergy is in my opinion very important, as it allows you to switch in and out more frequently.
Even though Kang has good offensive + defensive potential, I think that its greatest strength lies in Fake Out (+Scrappy). Only Kang, Medicham and Blastoise have access to Fake Out when it comes to megas.
Blastoise is relatively slow and its Fake Out doesn't hit hard.
I have been using Mega Medicham for reqs on suspect ladder and it just felt like a different version of Kang because it doesn't need to setup with PuPs and still hits hard. However even with 252 HP EVs it is relatively frail, although STAB Drain Punch is nice.
Now imagine Kang without Fake Out....what a shitty mon it would be.
In my opinion unboosted Kang hits moderately hard and has moderate defenses, not high enough for ban. If you let it PuP to like +3 you are just bad lel.
I agree with whissp, kang is a great mon, but definately not ban worthy. The amount of intimidators in the tier are high, and fighting type moves are common. I find that getting PupP boosts are hard if the opponent puts on enough offensive pressure. Again, on my team i replaced kanga with megacham, the difference it has made has been mainly posistive, hitting tran hard and killing pesky hitmontops have been very valuble, something kang can only do with boosts.
Ive also found no positive change in the meta, yes, lando can run knock off>superpower, wow big dif, but i havent felt like a huge threat had suddenly disappeared. In other suspect ladders in different tiers you can really feel the difference and your team feel a lot more free. I am just not feeling much different with my team, i prefer more mega kanga teams as there are less tr teams, which imo, are a lot scarier (never said broken). Kanga is a big threat, but i dont see it is broken. I would rather see sleep clause reinstated than kanga gone. At least i see more con-ban arguments
Time to bandwagon =]
I've regurgitated arguments about Intimidate / WoW not really being counters to Kangaskhan plenty already so here's a new slant I'm going to come from.
Kangaskhanite is not inherently broken. It is however, easy to make broken. Kangaskhan on it's own does not break well constructed teams. You can romp straight through shit ones and the odd mediocre ones but it is highly likely that a good player has something in store for Mega Kangaskhan. The trouble is that it's ridiculously easy to weaponise. Thanks to it's great bulk it's really hard to take down and this bulk can be added to by using partners with Intimidate and Pokemon utilizing Light Screen and Reflect (hugely underrated moves btw). On my super secret test alt I decided to run a Kanga plus screens team with a Klefki set I put together. I found that even teams with several checks and counters were really easy to crumble when khan had that little bit extra bulk and some Safeguard support. A personal favorite set of mine is Deoxys-A that outspeeds Choice Scarf Landorus-T. When paired with Mega Kangaskhan it's very difficult to switch into both threats at the same time. Some of Deoxys' opportunity cost is also alleviated somewhat by Khans cantankerous Fake Out which is a real pain in the arse to face.
Other obvious strats include sleep spam, redirect moves and a defiant partner but you can work this shit out for yourselves and I'm bad at posting stuff like this OK.
Anyway I kinda struggle to get my points across in a well worded and convincing way so here's the tl;dr
REMOVE KHAN remove khan
You can employ a fuckton of strats and mons to make khan broke whereas over mons require more #skills
Ok, so I had not played for a little while prior to this test, so experiences with Kanga are not as fresh in my mind as they will be once the ladder goes back to having it again. As such I don't have too much to say yet regarding whether or not it is directly broken in battle situations. With that said, I think I can comment a bit on one of the more meta effects of brokenness: teambuilding. If a Pokemon is broken, it will almost always have a direct effect on team-building. This is not a necessary condition for brokenness, but it is a clear and common symptom thereof. As such, you would frequently expect that the removal of a broken threat would have an effect on teambuilding. Maybe this means not having to pack something niche for it. Or maybe it means having to pack something niche for a new threat that was overshadowed before, but now comes into its own. But you expect something.
In my opinion, I don't think we really experienced any of that here. The kind of team I would look at to play in the Kanga meta is not all that different than the kind of team that I would look at to play in the no Kanga meta. The things that would be used to handle Kanga are still good, and there are not really any Pokemon that suddenly become especially viable because of its absence. Sure, a few Pokemon will rise in usage to fill its spot, but when looking at the teams I had from the past, I don't think any of them really need much adjusting for the new meta, with obvious exception of needing to remove Kanga from some of them. Things like Wisp and Intimidators are always useful, and the fact that Kangaskhan is gone does nothing to change that.
Obviously though, this does not mean that Kangaskhan is not broken. It could very well be the case that the closest things it has to good checks are still good in their own right without it, but that it simply is broken in spite of these Pokemon. As I started off by saying, I have not played for a bit prior to this test, so I want to wait for the secondary ladder to really make a firm judgment on that. However, when it comes to the few factors that can be analyzed simply by looking at the kinds of teams that I used now and in the past, the initial signs seem to be pointing away from brokenness.
Yes you need to argue to vote because suspect tests typically attract a bunch of people who don't give two shits and just steal a team, grind it, and vote to get TC and we wanted to avoid that
Yes you need to argue to vote because suspect tests typically attract a bunch of people who don't give two shits and just steal a team, grind it, and vote to get TC and we wanted to avoid that
I'm in the same boat actually, I prefer lurking to posting, and I've definitely not seen enough M-Kangashan on the doubles ladder prior to the test to make up my mind. So in short, I'm just waiting for more experience with it to put forward an argument rather than arguing purely on theorymon for the sake of being able to post reqs.
I personally think that Kanga is not broken. Pwnemon(or someone else) already stated the many counters that Kanga has, and I don't think they're hard to fit on a team. Even little checks can come in and destroy Kanga. Sometimes, you can take by bringing something like Latios or Deo-A, but that may not always be possible. I find Kanga useful for support so I can get a sub up or TR up. Kanga is still a great mon, but in my eyes it is not banworthy.
I could come up with a nice essay on my personal opinions, but I'd prefer to save time by just commenting on what has been said.
As a disclaimer (before you see how biased this looks x_x) I'm not heavily against banning Kanga or anything of that sort, I just haven't seen any really good arguments (in my eyes at least) as to why we should ban it.
This is a pretty good question. As for personal experience I have not had any problems with certain team options/concepts being "unusable" (unless they are complete trash like Magikarp but you get what I meant) just because MKanga exists. In fact, I think MKangaskhan has a more positive effect on teambuilding, forcing players to build bulkier teams and not just spam Deoxys-A, which is a very good thing. Plus the typical Kanga counters you see (Ghost-types, Fighting-types, Rotoms) are highly viable picks anyway, though I will agree that more defensively orientated Ghost-types do become less useful without Kanga in the tier (but with Kangaskhan-Mega around they are hardly required on a team either).
A good point. Everyone uses Landorus-T, Rotom-W, and Heatran as well. That doesn't mean they are the best choices for a team either. Really I see these threats as sub-optimal in many situations, as since they are common and everyone knows what they do, almost any well built team will be ready for them. The way I see it, using less known or new/innovative ideas on your teams is more effective than just going standard. It keeps you less predictable and comes with some extra surprise value to boot.
The way I see it, Kangaskhan is used a lot because top players and common team builds utilize its offensive pressure and Fake Out support, and a lot of the lesser players just go along with it. Mawile-Mega, Charizard-Mega-Y/X, Venusaur-Mega, Gengar-Mega, Lucario-Mega and Blastoise-Mega are all very solid mega Pokemon and imo are heavily underused. That doesn't prove Kanga isn't worthy of a ban or anything along those lines, but I agree that if your only argument against Kangaskhan is that its overused, I'd suggest you use other Megas that are perfectly viable (many of which can counter the typical Kangaskhan sets) and hopefully get people to start using them instead of pushing for a ban =/
Lolk makes a strong point in the prediction involved around Kangaskhan. From my experience, Kangaskhan-Mega creates a lot of complicated situations (even on turn 1 you may be struggling to decide who to Fake Out, or even whether to PuP your partner on a possible double Protect) that can work against you as much as they can work for you. The fact Kangaskhan rarely has Protect (a very common "safe" move in the realm that is doubles) means that one bad/risky call with it can quite possibly result in Kangaskhan becoming crippled or taking heavy damage. The general point I'm making here is that Kangaskhan needs support to actually function as a sweeper, which any other typical sweeper (CharX, DD Mega TTar, SD Scizor, DD Gyarados, Belly Drum Azumarill) needs. The biggest argument you could really make is that Kangaskhan can also support its allies with Fake Out, allowing it to fill two useful roles in one slot (and I suppose that it hits really hard without boosts, but so does Mawile-Mega, Charizard-Y, Lucario-Mega, and more or less every other offensively built Mega Pokemon). I will agree that its ability to perform several different roles does make it a very useful and powerful choice for almost any team, but that alone does not make something overpowered (if it did, we'd have banned Landorus-T, Rotom-W, Togekiss, and a good few other threats by now).
The big issue here is that playing Kangaskhan perfectly is ridiculously difficult due to the fact it creates a ton of mind games on both sides (having no spread moves will tend to make that happen). I also think the means that are required to counter Kangaskhan are greatly exaggerated here. Steel-types can often set up on it and with proper support even beat it one-on-one since Power-Up Punch is really weak (though I'd recommend things like Scizor and Mawile-Mega that aren't weak to it), one properly utilized Ghost-type can usually do the trick (bar Crunch but that will cost Kanga its priority, making it far less threatening), any Faster Fighting-type can beat it before a PuP and even at +2 Sucker Punch won't be OHKOing Fighting-types:
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Terrakion: 153-180 (47.3 - 55.7%) -- 75.4% chance to 2HKO (pls attack this one I'd love to steal that +2 boost :3)
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Keldeo: 153-180 (47.3 - 55.7%) -- 75.4% chance to 2HKO
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mega Lucario: 154-183 (54.8 - 65.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+2 252+ Atk Parental Bond Mega Kangaskhan Sucker Punch vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Mienshao: 210-247 (77.4 - 91.1%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
Yeah I guess you can't take +2 Sucker Punches multiple times but if you are giving Mega Kanga 2 or 3 PuP opportunities per match you've either made some really bad calls or don't have a very solid team. Plus when the Fighting-type of choice puts Kanga in that "switch or stay in and risk getting OHKOd" situation you can potentially kill a switch in with a good play.
The "ways to beat Kanga" list doesn't even stop here. There's WoW, TWave or Trick Room, Intimidate, etc, all of which slow it down considerably if not outright cripple it. Any good team should have 2 of these at the least (regardless of whether Kanga exists or not).
I also don't really understand this "Kanga ruins switching" concept. Switching is naturally a play that will have risk involved (and Protect is the "safe" play last I checked, unless Mega-Pinsir or something is on the field) since if an opponent were to properly predict a switch it would be incredibly costly (for instance I once used Drill Run on a Cresselia and hit the predicted Heatran switch in which won me the game). Regardless of that, a ton of the other typically offensively built Mega Pokemon, Substitute Heatran, and countless others can potentially force switches and then take advantage of them; I don't really see how Kangaskhan ruins switches differently than any of those do. Basically what I've picked up from this is that Kangaskhan applies a lot of offensive pressure which makes it impossible to safely switch into or safely counter or something like that (which makes sense I guess but I wouldn't really consider it a good enough argument for a ban). Sorry if this came out rude/harsh (not my intent if it did) but I just don't exactly get the point you're trying to make (and would really like it if you could explain it a bit more?).
pwne edit: dont put your opinion in hide tags unless you're too bitch to stand by it nollan edit: or maybe also if its really really long =/ nollan edit: also pwnemon sux
Your calcs are truthful, but you know mega lucario has vaccum wave and is faster, right?
I think that mega kangashkan is very strong, and somewhat tricky (despite being predictable), but if you know what you're doing, It's no problem, especially when you have mega lucario with vaccum wave or sableye.
Yes, there are counters to Mega Kangaskhan (I will use Khan from now on) all over the place. A Jolly Mienshao has a 90% chance to OHKO Khan using a High Jump Kick, and is faster, and will through a sucker punch. Double targeting can also beat Khan. Intimidate and Will O Wisp can cut Khan's attack. And yes most of these strategies can be used against most other teams. The only problem is that Khan is a very easy mon to support.
The rest of a team on any successful Khan team is all about supporting Khan. Any competent user can easily slap together a team that can destroy most other teams using Khan and a few support mon. Like Totem said, he is way too easy to weaponise. Mienshao can be countered perfectly using Talonflame. Mienshao will never be able to take both on at once, and most counters to Talonflame can be easily countered in turn by Khan. An intimidator that switches in trying to cut Khan's attack will in turn be countered by a support mon with Defiant or Competitive, or any fast special attacker while Khan recovers using PuP. A mon trying to counter Khan using Will O Wisp will be countered in turn by a simple Safeguard.
The only way to consistently counter a Khan and his team is to run a combination of these strategies, and that involves running 2-3 mons dedicated to anti Khan. I do believe that is the definition of over centralizing. That is, of course, seeing only 2 types of teams in the meta: Khan teams and anti Khan teams.
There are a lot of powerful mega evolutions that don't get very much attention. I have been using Mega Charizard X and Mega Garchomp with great success on the ladder and in the seasonal. The problem I see is that not many of them are getting attention because they aren't Khan.
You might say that is what doubles is all about, trying to find a synergy of mons that work together to cover each other's weaknesses. But then by that reasoning, no mon is broken, and we should allow Xerneas, Palkia, Kyurem-W, Rayquaza, Lugia and Mewtwo into doubles each one of them has a very easy to use counter. We don't use them outside of Double Ubers because they can be weaponised too easily, and with very little support, can easily sweep most opposing teams.
I believe, for these reasons, that Khan is too powerful for the meta.
(Edit: I said 90% BC accuracy.)
(Edit: Sorry, I meant her)
Yes, there are counters to Mega Kangaskhan (I will use Khan from now on) all over the place. A Jolly Mienshao has a 90% chance to OHKO Khan using a High Jump Kick, and is faster, and will through a sucker punch. Double targeting can also beat Khan. Intimidate and Will O Wisp can cut Khan's attack. And yes most of these strategies can be used against most other teams. The only problem is that Khan is a very easy mon to support.
The rest of a team on any successful Khan team is all about supporting Khan. Any competent user can easily slap together a team that can destroy most other teams using Khan and a few support mon. Like Totem said, he is way too easy to weaponise. Mienshao can be countered perfectly using Talonflame. Mienshao will never be able to take both on at once, and most counters to Talonflame can be easily countered in turn by Khan. An intimidator that switches in trying to cut Khan's attack will in turn be countered by a support mon with Defiant or Competitive, or any fast special attacker while Khan recovers using PuP. A mon trying to counter Khan using Will O Wisp will be countered in turn by a simple Safeguard.
The only way to consistently counter a Khan and his team is to run a combination of these strategies, and that involves running 2-3 mons dedicated to anti Khan. I do believe that is the definition of over centralizing. That is, of course, seeing only 2 types of teams in the meta: Khan teams and anti Khan teams.
There are a lot of powerful mega evolutions that don't get very much attention. I have been using Mega Charizard X and Mega Garchomp with great success on the ladder and in the seasonal. The problem I see is that not many of them are getting attention because they aren't Khan.
You might say that is what doubles is all about, trying to find a synergy of mons that work together to cover each other's weaknesses. But then by that reasoning, no mon is broken, and we should allow Xerneas, Palkia, Kyurem-W, Rayquaza, Lugia and Mewtwo into doubles each one of them has a very easy to use counter. We don't use them outside of Double Ubers because they can be weaponised too easily, and with very little support, can easily sweep most opposing teams.
I believe, for these reasons, that Khan is too powerful for the meta.
I agree that a team needs to have checks, but 1. i dont think it needs too many, 2. there are checks that are viable outside of checking kahn. Stuff like landorus-t, hitmontop are great pokes in this meta. Most decent teams will have about 2 natural checks anyway.
For the arguments saying 'it can get to +2 and sweep with sucker punch', it is not that easy. If you put enough offensive pressure on it, it cannot set up Pup, as well the turn is sets them up, it is very vunerable, power up punch isn't killing anything anytime soon. Even after, you can switch in intimidators to lower its attack, or will-o-wisp, unless it's carrying crunch, which it would have to loose sucker punch, and terrakion or anything faster can revenge kill. As for sucker punch, it can be outplayed, stuff like quick guard or protects stop it from working and allow your team mate to attack.
Imo it isn't broken, it can be outplayed too easily. Im not sure if it is from the way i build my teams, but i had barely even considered kahn and have never had a problem. The scariest kanga set is a wall breaking one with double edge and crunch imo
You might say that is what doubles is all about, trying to find a synergy of mons that work together to cover each other's weaknesses. But then by that reasoning, no mon is broken, and we should allow Xerneas, Palkia, Kyurem-W, Rayquaza, Lugia and Mewtwo into doubles each one of them has a very easy to use counter. We don't use them outside of Double Ubers because they can be weaponised too easily, and with very little support, can easily sweep most opposing teams.
I believe, for these reasons, that Khan is too powerful for the meta.
