On Banning Abilities and Ability Combinations

[Virizion]

People, people.. You're making this much too complicated.

Solution? Agree with the opponent on whether or not Driz+SwSw is allowed for each battle you have.

Or..

We can all ignore the ban completely as it's only a "less-complex ban" since the moderators think we're idiots and can't remember what's banned or not (Ludi/Kingdra/Kabu + Drizzle, for example; how hard is it to remember THREE Pokemon that would be banned with Drizzle?), because honestly, if a complex ban helps the metagame, then make a complex ban. Does Blaze Blaziken 6-0 teams? I think not. In UU, it was slightly decent, but you just rip it out of UU because of its second ability (which it wouldn't even be using), but the moderators decide to not make a complex ban on Blazi so Blaze Blaziken is allowed, but SpeBoost isn't. I THINK we can tell whether or not we're using the allowed Blaze-ken, or the banned SB-ken, but mods think that we can't tell the difference between them when making teams, and just bans both of them.

Tl;dr - Mods believe that we don't have the brain capacity to remember what's banned or not about a certain Pokemon/strategy, so they ban everything related to them (Both Blazikens when only one is broken, etc.)


Also it's 3 AM as I typed this, so sorry if I'm completely wrong

 

[Sensei_Bobbilytus]

The point in mentioning Gorebyss is that I'm fairly cirtian that, despite the fact that it hasn't been mentioned in favor of the big three, I'm pretty sure as a core sweeper on a Drizzleteam, it wouldn't be as effective as Kabutops or Kingdra due to it's pure-water typing. Maybe, if and only if, you put it on a team with other UU SwSw pokemon, you might be able to score some wins on merit of DrizzleSwim alone, but as a standalone pokemon, it's about at terrifying as Drought with Exeggutor.

I just think it's far from the intention of the ban, to unintentionally prohibit pokemon who are already struggling to be useful from actually achieving a decent tier status. Wasn't the whole purpose of Ubers to give the big guys their own stomping ground so the lesser pokes had some room to show of their own merits? Why is this case different, where clearly broken pokemon should be removed from the metagame, without destroying the one chance a nice number of these sub-par pokemon have been givin for competative redemption?

Way to give Floatzel and Relicanth a chance, guys. Good job.

 

[Virizion]

Way to give Floatzel and Relicanth a chance, guys. Good job.

Floatzel is fast enough without SwSw, and Relicanth will ALWAYS use Rock Head + Rock Polish for Head Smash sweeping.

 

[Sensei_Bobbilytus]

I have never heard of a pokemon who was "fast enough". Ever.
And there's a Swift Swim variant of Relicanth listen on the Smogon page.

I dunno. I agree with the "this is too damn complicated, use your own personal DrizzleSwim Clause if you don't like the blanket-ban" idea. I just hate seeing creative options limited because competative options are too abusive.

 

[Virizion]

I have never heard of a pokemon who was "fast enough". Ever.
And there's a Swift Swim variant of Relicanth listen on the Smogon page.

Ninjask says hi

Also, I've only read the lolRelicanth analyses (R/S and D/P/Pt) once each, so I don't know them by heart lol

 

[Quixim]

The gorebyss setting up with a shell smash would (if your calculations of base power are correct), after a single turn (which it's guaranteed if it's raining, they don't have hazards out yet, and you've Focus sashed, or switched in on something that can't deal with you), be the fastest and strongest pokemon -in the entire game-.

Compare Cloyster, another shell smash user, who can do terrifying amounts of damage with a much, much lower set of base stats and without swift-swim support. Its main draw is a 125 power STAB move, whereas Gorebyss, thanks to the rain support, can use surf at 228% power for almost 200 base power, off a higher attack and with higher speed. Round out some coverage and in the rain Gorebyss obseletes nearly every pokemon that needs to set up.

Then again, this is just an example, it can go back and forth.

I think it's rather obvious that as a community we aren't happy with the ban. I don't think less powerful pokemon should necessarily be banned by this, but I'm worried that with enough of them sneaking in, every team will have to be a weather team or weather-counter team.

 

[Thorhammer]

Point is, it's believed it didn't make only, say, Kingdra, or Kingdra/Kabutops/Ludicolo or Kingdra+Kabutops+Ludicolo, but the majority of Swift Swimmers, either alone or all of them in a team, broken. And lol you mentioned Gorebyss... yeah good job, you just proved the pro-comboban people's point: It's not just the main trio; Swift Swim + Drizzle breaks other pokémon and makes them form broken teams which all share the same "counters" (read: Ferrothorn).

If we have ~10 relevant pokémon (yes, relevant pokémon, Luvdisc does not matter), and say, 7 of them are broken in some way during Drizzle, what's better, a combo ban for each pokémon, or a blanket one on the ability? It was believed the latter is better, so you have to show how the former would be preferable. And you're not going to prove it mentioning a pokémon not even you in your craziest dreams would use.

That may be what is believed, but there is no evidence to support it.

The fully-evolved Pokemon with the ability Swift Swim are Seaking, Omastar, Kabutops, Qwilfish, Mantine, Kingdra, Ludicolo, Huntail, Gorebyss, Relicanth, Luvdisc, Floatzel, Lumineon, Seismitoad, Golduck, Poliwrath, Armaldo, Carracosta, and Beartic. We know that three of them are broken with Swift Swim + Drizzle, and we can safely assume that three of them will not be relevant even with Swift Swim + Drizzle. So what about the other 13? Any number of those could be OU-viable, and we have no idea how many, if any, of them would in that case be broken. We have no idea how many Pokemon we're keeping out of OU, and potentially for the sake of three Pokemon that could be taken care of just as easily. How can you justify not even testing the others, at least in the Suspect ladder, to find out for sure exactly what's going on here?

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

Who ever fears getting sweeped by a swift swim Relicanth in OU, needs to work on there team building. Gorebyss is the top tier swim swimmer, and probably the area in which one could debate is the line you draw for not banning swift swim. I am glad someone brought it up, it appears that a signifigant portion of smogon users agree that banning these pokemon, is flat out pointless. At the least I would love to see people test Gorebyss, Relicanth and, Floatzel. But everything else should be allowed. I don't see any point in trying to stop this, I mean how long would it take to suspect a few pokemon? We even tested Heatran for uber last generation, and it had far less support then this.

 

[adman2]

My experience is dated, though I have used a Rain Dance team quite a bit on Pearl Wifi, and experimented with several of the Swift Swim Pokemon, especially a Lonely Kingdra and Kabutops.

Even when Rain wasn't nearly as common then, and people accordingly didn't prepare for it as much, there were some pretty hard counters to the Swift Swimmers.

Some of them are bulky water Pokemon that would be used anyway.

Vaporeon has Water Absorb and can take a Draco Meteor and Wish it off.

Suicune is always a pain with its sheer bulk and Calm Mind can put a stop to a Rain team.

Empoleon resists both Water and Dragon, and although it may eventually be powered through with Water attacks if the opponent plays poorly with it, is still a worthy choice.

Jellicent would also do well if it uses Water Absorb.

Water Absorb Quagsire and Storm Drain Gastrodon are immune to both Water and Electric attacks, and anyone with a brain would keep them away from Ludicolo anyway.

Of course, Tyranitar, especially if it has enough Special Defense is the enemy of Rain teams, and other weather changers could be used if played very carefully.

A Motor Drive, Volt Absorb, or Lightningrod Pokemon (or even a Ground type) can take the Electric moves.

Even the ever-present Ferrothorn could stop some of the Swift Swimmers.

Celebi is another worthy Grass type that can take most of what a Rain team can use, but watch out for X-Scissor that Kabutops sometimes uses specifically to take this Pokemon out.

Any health-draining move such as Leech Seed or Toxic will hurt the Life Orb users a lot.

My point is just "Don't be too afraid of Swift Swimmers!" Some of the better bulky waters, electric absorbers, and Ferrothorn can easily shift momentum in your favor. Just be able to outlast the Rain, and you'll do fine.

I have to support the banning of Drizzle with Swift Swim. My team would have been broken if I replaced the lead Crobat with a perma-rain Pokemon. A large part of a 4th gen Rain team was keeping the Rain up and getting in hard hits as fast as possible before it stops, and carrying Rain Dance on multiple Pokemon obviously limits their movepools. I have had no experience yet with Drizzle non-Swift Swim teams, though, since my 5th gen team is not yet completed.

 

[xMistyx]

I have had no experience yet with Drizzle non-Swift Swim teams, though, since my 5th gen team is not yet completed.

I've been playing around with a non swift swim drizzle team. Drizzle is definitely a viable option even without swift swimmers.

Notable exceptions;

Hydration Vaporeon.

Hurricane The move (currently using it on a Dragonite) have yet to try it on anybody else though.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

That may be what is believed, but there is no evidence to support it.

The fully-evolved Pokemon with the ability Swift Swim are Seaking, Omastar, Kabutops, Qwilfish, Mantine, Kingdra, Ludicolo, Huntail, Gorebyss, Relicanth, Luvdisc, Floatzel, Lumineon, Seismitoad, Golduck, Poliwrath, Armaldo, Carracosta, and Beartic. We know that three of them are broken with Swift Swim + Drizzle, and we can safely assume that three of them will not be relevant even with Swift Swim + Drizzle. So what about the other 13? Any number of those could be OU-viable, and we have no idea how many, if any, of them would in that case be broken. We have no idea how many Pokemon we're keeping out of OU, and potentially for the sake of three Pokemon that could be taken care of just as easily. How can you justify not even testing the others, at least in the Suspect ladder, to find out for sure exactly what's going on here?

I'm not saying we shouldn't test the others, I'm telling him what was thought when making the complex ban. I don't know whether many, if not all of the other 13 Swimmers would be broken by themselves or as a team (both of which would justify the current blanket ban) but mentioning Luvdisc of all pokémon as proof of this ban being poorly thought-out doesn't help the argument the slightest.

People, people.. You're making this much too complicated.

Solution? Agree with the opponent on whether or not Driz+SwSw is allowed for each battle you have.

Or..

We can all ignore the ban completely as it's only a "less-complex ban" since the moderators think we're idiots and can't remember what's banned or not (Ludi/Kingdra/Kabu + Drizzle, for example; how hard is it to remember THREE Pokemon that would be banned with Drizzle?)

Do you even know what you're talking about?

because honestly, if a complex ban helps the metagame, then make a complex ban. Does Blaze Blaziken 6-0 teams? I think not. In UU, it was slightly decent, but you just rip it out of UU because of its second ability (which it wouldn't even be using), but the moderators decide to not make a complex ban on Blazi so Blaze Blaziken is allowed, but SpeBoost isn't.

Jesus. I'll repeat myself: BLAZIKEN IS NOT ENTITLED TO UU! It doesn't matter if one of its "forms" would be acceptable there, we won't allow it! We didn't allow Sturdy Magnezone in DPPt UU, we won't allow Keen Eye Sableye in UU/NU when Prankster Sableye becomes available, we wouldn't allow Slow Start Deoxys in OU if it ever existed. The strongest set defines the pokémon's tiering, not the weakest. You know, guys, competitive pokémon. Where we play to win. And such. Remember that?

I've been playing around with a non swift swim drizzle team. Drizzle is definitely a viable option even without swift swimmers.

Notable exceptions;

Hydration Vaporeon.

Hurricane The move (currently using it on a Dragonite) have yet to try it on anybody else though.

Tornadus is a much better user of Hurricane, in my opinion.

 

[xMistyx]

Tornadus is a much better user of Hurricane, in my opinion.

I was going to test him next. But the teams been working so far so why try and fix what's not broken. But yes I had heard that he was a better user.

 

[Thorhammer]

I'm not saying we shouldn't test the others, I'm telling him what was thought when making the complex ban. I don't know whether many, if not all of the other 13 Swimmers would be broken by themselves or as a team (both of which would justify the current blanket ban) but mentioning Luvdisc of all pokémon as proof of this ban being poorly thought-out doesn't help the argument the slightest.

Nothing would justify the current complex ban unless all 19 of the fully-evolved Swift Swim users - including the three assumed NUs - were found to be broken individually. If it is only as a team that they are broken, then we can deal with that in a different way.

Luvdisc is indeed evidence. It is evidence that the combination of Swift Swim + Drizzle, even on a Water-type, is not sufficient for a Pokemon to be broken.

 

[TorchicBlaziken]

We don't play to win; we play to have fun. That's the problem with ladders.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

Jesus. I'll repeat myself: BLAZIKEN IS NOT ENTITLED TO UU! It doesn't matter if one of its "forms" would be acceptable there, we won't allow it! We didn't allow Sturdy Magnezone in DPPt UU, we won't allow Keen Eye Sableye in UU/NU when Prankster Sableye becomes available, we wouldn't allow Slow Start Deoxys in OU if it ever existed. The strongest set defines the pokémon's tiering, not the weakest. You know, guys, competitive pokémon. Where we play to win. And such. Remember that?

There is a diference between Uber-OU, and OU-UU or UU-NU, or even OU-NU. Uber is a banlist first, and a tier last. And if I am correct, this is Smogons offical policy, which many of you seem to be flaunting around so much. Seeing that I don't see what's wrong with having 2 Blazikens, one banned and one not. A large magority of players play OU, not Uber. And the difference between sturdy magnezone, and magnet pull isn't as big. Magnezone is fundamentally the same pokemon, same type weaknesses ect, Magnezone would still be a decent pokemon only going down one tier. While Blaziken without speed boost is UU, no doubt, there is a big diference between UU-Uber. And honestly if you can ajust a pokemon to not be banned, then I am all for that. I would rather have a shitty UU Blaziken, then all Blazikens be Uber.

I'm not saying we shouldn't test the others, I'm telling him what was thought when making the complex ban. I don't know whether many, if not all of the other 13 Swimmers would be broken by themselves or as a team (both of which would justify the current blanket ban) but mentioning Luvdisc of all pokémon as proof of this ban being poorly thought-out doesn't help the argument the slightest.

And stop pointing out luvdisc, even I stopped doing that a bit ago. Any maybe people should of asked these questions, BEFORE YOU BANNED IT. Uber isn't just another tier, its a fucking ban, not something to take lightly.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

Nothing would justify the current complex ban unless all 19 of the fully-evolved Swift Swim users - including the three assumed NUs - were found to be broken individually. If it is only as a team that they are broken, then we can deal with that in a different way.

Luvdisc is indeed evidence. It is evidence that the combination of Swift Swim + Drizzle, even on a Water-type, is not sufficient for a Pokemon to be broken.

Yes, my bad there. The current complex ban would be justified if they are broken as a team, however, if the majority, or at least a significant number of them, either all of them or only taking the "relevant ones" (not Luvdisc!) into account, are broken by themselves, then people would rather have the blanket ban instead of multiple Drizzle+pokémon bans or blanket pokémon bans. It isn't necessarily "the best option", but it's not necessarily "the worst" either.

We don't play to win; we play to have fun. That's the problem with ladders.

To have fun winning.

There is a diference between Uber-OU, and OU-UU or UU-NU, or even OU-NU. Uber is a banlist first, and a tier last. And if I am correct, this is Smogons offical policy, which many of you seem to be flaunting around so much. Seeing that I don't see what's wrong with having 2 Blazikens, one banned and one not. A large magority of players play OU, not Uber.

Because it's one pokémon. "Simplicity and effectiveness". What makes Blaziken special enough to be separated into two different entities with different tiering?

And the difference between sturdy magnezone, and magnet pull isn't as big. Magnezone is fundamentally the same pokemon, same type weaknesses ect, Magnezone would still be a decent pokemon only going down one tier.

Magnezone is cool and all, but surely wouldn't even be OU if it weren't for Magnet Pull, as it's its main asset since its Magneton days in Advance.

While Blaziken without speed boost is UU, no doubt, there is a big diference between UU-Uber. And honestly if you can ajust a pokemon to not be banned, then I am all for that. I would rather have a shitty UU Blaziken, then all Blazikens be Uber.

Again, key question here: why. Why "adjust" a pokémon to be not broken? Soul Dew was already a really borderline case (every pokémon can hold it but it only works in two, however, you can Trickchain it somehow and get it on your Lati...), what makes Blaziken entitled to be split in two?

And stop pointing out luvdisc, even I stopped doing that a bit ago. Any maybe people should of asked these questions, BEFORE YOU BANNED IT. Uber isn't just another tier, its a fucking ban, not something to take lightly.

Huh Bobbilytus mentioned it, that's why I pointed it out...? And OU is just a banlist to UU, so being OU makes you banned in lesser tiers by default.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

Yes, my bad there. The current complex ban would be justified if they are broken as a team, however, if the majority, or at least a significant number of them, either all of them or only taking the "relevant ones" (not Luvdisc!) into account, are broken by themselves, then people would rather have the blanket ban instead of multiple Drizzle+pokémon bans or blanket pokémon bans. It isn't necessarily "the best option", but it's not necessarily "the worst" either.

Now I don't believe relivance is a valid point at all here, I still stand by the belief that if its not broken or overcentralizing, it should not be banned. But if you take into consideration relivace, more relivant pokemon then not are not broken with swift swim:

Broken
Debatable
Not Broken

Golduck
Poliwrath
Omastar
Kabutops
Qwilfish
Mantine
Kingdra
Ludicolo
Armaldo
Huntail
Gorebyss
Relicanth
Floatzel
Lumineon
Siesmitoad
Carracoasta
Beartic


7 pokemon, including debatable ones, are broken with it, while 10 other pokemon are prefectly fine with it. And all of them are relivant too.

Because it's one pokémon. "Simplicity and effectiveness". What makes Blaziken special enough to be separated into two different entities with different tiering?

Oh lots of reasons, mainly it being one of the first pokemon with such a dynamic diference. Again we are taking something that could be UU, and banning it. It is certainally a special case. And simplicity is not an arguement.

Again, key question here: why. Why "adjust" a pokémon to be not broken? Soul Dew was already a really borderline case (every pokémon can hold it but it only works in two, however, you can Trickchain it somehow and get it on your Lati...), what makes Blaziken entitled to be split in two?

Its actually interesting that you brought soul dew up, its very similar to Blaziken, being that if you make such a simple change its not broken. Well that is until they banned it anyway, but Blaziken is actually much worse then them, so if we where willing to do that with Latias, why no Blaziken?

(why did you give that to me?)

 

[TorchicBlaziken]

All the Swift Swim Pokémon are already split into six different Pokémon, one of which has a different tiering:

Eternally-doubly-fast-until-another-weather-starts-or-unless-Politoed-never-comes-out Pokémon, several of which are unviable anyway, but also several of which do not even get boosts to their STAB: Uber

Doubly-fast-for-four-to-eight-turns-unless-another-weather-starts Pokémon, most of which get boosts to their STAB during this period, and several of which are unviable anyway: OU (except for the NU ones)

Pokémon, most of which get boosts to their STAB until another weather starts, and several of which are unviable, who don't get boosts to their speed because they are using an ability that isn't Swift Swim: OU (except for the NU ones)

Pokémon, most of which get boosts to their STAB for four to eight turns, unless another weather starts, and several of which are unviable, who don't get boosts to their speed because they are using an ability that isn't Swift Swim: OU (except for the NU ones)

Pokémon who don't get boosts to their STAB, but most of them get boosts to their STAB AND are doubly fast IF their opponent uses Rain, and several of which are unviable: OU (except for the NU ones, but it'd be dumb to use Swift Swim on any of these if you're not using any rain)

Pokémon who don't get boosts to their STAB, but most of them get boosts to their STAB IF their opponent uses Rain, and several of which are unviable: OU (except for the NU ones, but some of the OU ones are less useful)

Some of these may not count, but we are still separating them into six different entities, one of which is Uber, forcing players to use the other five.

 

[Sensei_Bobbilytus]

Because it's one pokémon. "Simplicity and effectiveness". What makes Blaziken special enough to be separated into two different entities with different tiering?

Huh Bobbilytus mentioned it, that's why I pointed it out...? And OU is just a banlist to UU, so being OU makes you banned in lesser tiers by default.

I mentioned it only really as a figurehead because again, if you're going to ban something, why bother worrying about the big guys who get effected. They're typically strong enough anyway, that their inclusion in the ban could come from a multitude of other actual factors. If the issue isn't big enough to make the crappy guys worth a damn, than don't ban the crappy guys; I don't see why you can't turn around and look at the obvious flaw. I'd like to see an argument other than irrelevance as to why "insert crappy SwSw poke here" is banned from use on a drizzle team, other than because it's another case of 'one bad apple spoiled the bunch'.

Let's stop throwing out arbitrary examples. My actual concern here, is actually all about family issues. Why on earth can't I use a DW Poli-core; why can't I have a team that utilizes SwSwrath and Drizzletoed? This is all I ask for.

As for the Blaziken issue, I think it's kinda wonky. The fact is, very few pokemon actually fit into the category Blaziken does. Why not move Sturdy Magnezone into UU, since it was only OU for it's Magnet Pull? I'd argue that's different, because Magnet Pull didn't break it to the point where it HAD to be OU, it just gave it a niche. If people in UU really, REALLY wanted to use Sturdy Magnezone, I'd be all for allowing that. But people haven't asked for it, for a reason. I've seen this sort of thing happen a lot. I use Ludicolo in Drizzle, but I use Rain Dish, because I prefer that ability OVER swift-swim, so the ban really didn't bother me too much. But people get antsy. And if I'm not allowed to use Ludicolo because they switch the ban over to "just the big 3+ SwSw pokes", and that hits Ludicolo, period, I'm still not going to be happy. Why shouldn't Rain Dish Ludicolo be viewed separately from SwSw Ludicolo?

It's simple, basic scientific procedure. If you think there's a problem, and you want to get rid of it, isolate variables until you know just what the problems are. And then remove only the very specific factors that cause the problem. Nothing else, unless that proves to be a problem too. Therefore, bans should be as specific, complex, and absolute as possible. Not crappy over-generalizations that cause more harm than good while allowing multiple loopholes to be abused, causing further unintended harm.

 

[RBG]

I would just like to say that if we ban Speed Boost on Blaziken (since it appears people want to ban pokemon by abilites pokemon combos) then in theory we would have to tier by pokemon ability combos, which as has been decided as being unnecessary and needlessly complex.

Oh and we tier based on wanting to win, not for fun.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

Its just one pokemon and one senario. And once again even if we needed to, I don't see why not? Argueing against that just seems lazy to be honest.

I would love to read the thread where this desicion was finalized, please provide the link.

 

[RBG]

Right here

 

[Mario With Lasers]

I didn't even read Bobbilytus's post because I gotta go now, but I may reply to it later

Now I don't believe relivance is a valid point at all here, I still stand by the belief that if its not broken or overcentralizing, it should not be banned. But if you take into consideration relivace, more relivant pokemon then not are not broken with swift swim:


7 pokemon, including debatable ones, are broken with it, while 10 other pokemon are prefectly fine with it. And all of them are relivant too.

...I'd take Lumineon out of that list. As you say, seven would be possibly broken, while 10 would be fine by themselves. But what about them as a team? And even if they weren't broken then, what about those seven pokémon banned? People would rather have a blanket ban (either on Swift Swim or Drizzle + Swift Swim) than ~7 separate bans (either on each pokémon or Drizzle+pokémon ones).

The main problem here is that we should have tested Swift Swim more thoroughly and banned only the broken trio and worked from there, but... we didn't have time. Drizzle would be banned and we'd be in a much worse situation to do anything. Now, Drizzle is still thought to be broken by some but, for the majority, it's fine nowadays. Proposing to lift the Drizzle+SwSw ban and try to test the Swimmers and see what makes which of them broken, though, even in a Suspect Ladder, would mean that we would make Rain better, either by having more diversity in sweepers, or by having even stronger sweepers (as if Rain needed any of them lol). The complex ban saved Drizzle from being banned "with no reason" but, at the same time, has put us in a weird situation where anything we do will be deemed a "waste of time" by both the anti- and the pro-Drizzle camps, as we'll put a Ladder and test things and discuss and argue and propose funny bans and see metagame shifts and analyze usage stats only to, in the end... make Rain better or, at least, end up with a metagame as effective as the current one. So, what would the point be?

Oh lots of reasons, mainly it being one of the first pokemon with such a dynamic diference. Again we are taking something that could be UU, and banning it. It is certainally a special case. And simplicity is not an arguement.

Even then, there's DPPt Tentacruel as an example. It was clearly UU, it would be quite awesome to UU, actually... and yet it got banned. It was banned by usage instead of strength, but still, it was banned even if it were "entitled" to being allowed in UU.

Also, as the thread linked by RBG shows, this would make our tiers based in pokémon+ability combinations, which was considered unnecessarily complicated, when the resulting metagames with Blaziken fully banned would be as effective and enjoyable as those with two differently tiered Blaziken. You may say we wouldn't need to differently tier every pokémon when their abilities are different enough (say, Super Luck Togekiss UU, Hustle Togekiss BL and Serene Grace OU) and only do it with "special cases", but... why? Why not do it with Togekiss and do it with Blaziken? This is not me being pedantic or stubborn, this is a mostly important issue. Blaziken isn't special, it's a pokémon with more than two "options" where one of them makes it strong enough to jump a tier; the only new thing here is that it made it go to Ubers while it had other options not as optimal.

Its actually interesting that you brought soul dew up, its very similar to Blaziken, being that if you make such a simple change its not broken. Well that is until they banned it anyway, but Blaziken is actually much worse then them, so if we where willing to do that with Latias, why no Blaziken?

I think the only reason for us to make Soul Dew an exception is that it's banned by Game Freak. You can't use it in Battle Tower/Frontier/Subway, you probably won't be able to use it in Random Matches when it's released, and you couldn't use it even in VGC 2010 (you know, where shit like Kyogre was allowed). Of course developer intention isn't something we should try to predict nor are Game Freak's banlists considered optimal by the majority of the community, but they work as a starting point; we got Sleep Clause, Species Clause, Freeze Clause from them, and it seems the Soul Dew ban is felt to be as "basic" as those clauses, as they're enforced by Game Freak in certain competitive environments.

(why did you give that to me?)

Because I knew somebody would bring that up anyway and because Soul Dew have always bothered me, so it's not like I am in favor of it.

 

[Thorhammer]

People would rather have a blanket ban (either on Swift Swim or Drizzle + Swift Swim) than ~7 separate bans (either on each pokémon or Drizzle+pokémon ones).

There isn't the slightest bit of evidence to support this.

Also, bear in mind that it's not ~7 Pokemon; it's 3-7 Pokemon.

The main problem here is that we should have tested Swift Swim more thoroughly and banned only the broken trio and worked from there, but... we didn't have time. Drizzle would be banned and we'd be in a much worse situation to do anything. Now, Drizzle is still thought to be broken by some but, for the majority, it's fine nowadays. Proposing to lift the Drizzle+SwSw ban and try to test the Swimmers and see what makes which of them broken, though, even in a Suspect Ladder, would mean that we would make Rain better, either by having more diversity in sweepers, or by having even stronger sweepers (as if Rain needed any of them lol). The complex ban saved Drizzle from being banned "with no reason" but, at the same time, has put us in a weird situation where anything we do will be deemed a "waste of time" by both the anti- and the pro-Drizzle camps, as we'll put a Ladder and test things and discuss and argue and propose funny bans and see metagame shifts and analyze usage stats only to, in the end... make Rain better or, at least, end up with a metagame as effective as the current one. So, what would the point be?

We had all the time we wanted. We just chose not to use it, and for no good reason. What we should have done was address each broken sweeper individually, exactly as we've always done in the past, so that we wouldn't run into this disaster of overly broad bans. But arguing about what we should have done in the past won't get us anywhere now. Right now, the way to proceed is to improve the metagame. Some people are claiming that that would be a waste of time, because they're willing to accept a metagame containing unnecessary bans, but that is an explicit violation of Smogon's policy. Removing unnecessary bans is never a waste of time. Yes, it will make rain better. But that's not an issue, as rain isn't close to being broken in the current metagame, and if any Swift Swim user is deemed not broken, then it will mean that it, too, does not make rain broken.

But besides the effect on the metagame, does it really seem to you as if we can simply leave things like this? Is this a healthy state for Smogon and its community to be in, one where a highly controversial and unprecedented ban leaves a huge rift in the community that remains over two months later, and shows no sign of disappearing? If nothing else, would you consider settling that to be a waste of time?

 

[TorchicBlaziken]

The reason that Soul Dew is banned by Game Freak is that it is an event item. In Gen III it was only available on Southern Island, and in Generation IV, it was the Enigma Crystal. Same reason that Phione is banned.