The Future of STABmons: You Decided Option 2

It's not like this choice is permanent. Whatever choice wins the vote, if it turns out there's still a problem or a new one, we can just go with another option. (assuming barely anyone wants the meta to stay as it is) eventually it'll reach a balanced game.
 
I already made a large post on the topic:

Option 1: I feel it is completely arbitrary and don't think it should be done.

However option 2 vs normal clause is definitely something we should discuss. I remember during the STABMons Frontier, all the brains bar one had a few restrictions. TEG said no Normal type teams(Monotype). Pagoose(LC) said no new normal type moves for a Pokemon. insanelegend(UU) banned only Belly Drum. Lcass(NU)(DEATH TO YANMA) also said no new normal type moves. I mean, if four of the best players in the tier, as well as a lot of other good players all feel that normal type moves are bad, surely we should look into that?

However, at the same time, I feel limiting only normal type moves is bad.

Look at the banlist. Yes, about 50% of them were banned due to normal type moves. And even there, most of those Pokemon would remain banned. (I typed this out and added some stuff later. That stuff is in italics.)

Even if it can use only Boomburst/Extremespeed, Altaria would still be broken. It can still boost with Dragon Dance/Agility. It will still be broken with Option 2 but normal clause will make it a little less powerful.

Sylveon is bulky enough to set up and spam Boomburst. It can also run a scarf set and outspeed everything below base 114. Or it can even run Power Herb Geomancy and still destroy things with Hyper Voice. Same as Altaria.

Porygon-Z gets Nasty Plot, Agility AND Adaptability. Adding Boomburst to it still makes it broken. Same as above.

Diggersby's main set was FakeSpeed/BellySpeed. True. But it could function perfectly well with only Extremespeed. It too gets Swords Dance and Agility. It also gets Precipice Blades and the elemental punches. While it will certainly be nerfed, it will still be a top threat. Same as above.

And so we come to Loppunny. It's fast enough to run SubSmash + Drain Punch and Return. It can still run FakeSpeed. I don't see it being unbanned either. Same as above.

Now for the rest of the Pokemon. Keldeo and Mega Aerodactyl aren't going to be affected regardless of any of the options and so can be ignored. Normal clause has no effect.

Kyurem-B was broken because it already has huge stats, it gets physical Ice STAB AND Dragon Dance. Option 2 would make Kyu-B a little less broken. Normal clause wouldn't affect it.

Mega Slowbro, I believe was broken due to its insane bulk, ability to set up on half the meta and ignore crits. The only thing it really gains is Stored Power. So again, both options are irrelevant.

Mega Metagross, Shift Gear + Heavy Slam is ridiculous. Option 2 nerfs it. Normal clause has no effect.

So if we apply option 2, we manage to do something about 7/10 of the bans. On the other hand, Normal clause affects only 5/10.

Then you come to the top threats of the current meta(Note that I'm saying top threats, not broken things only.): Darkrai, Braviary, Kangaskhan, Sableye, Landorus-T, Mega Scizor, Aegislash, Serperior, Thundurus and Tyranitar:

Darkrai: The only thing it really gains is a slightly stronger STAB and for that one dude that loves ruining my games, Topsy Turvy. Neither clause affects it.

Braviary: It gets Swords Dance so if it uses Option 2, it won't really be changed. Normal clause nerfs it a lot. Option 2 barely affects it.
Kangaskhan: Same as above except using option 2 means it can't use Lovely Kiss. See above.
Sableye: Neither clause affects it.
Landorus-T: With option 2, it loses Roost but still gains two strong STABs. Normal clause has no effect.
Mega Scizor: Option 2 nerfs it. Normal clause has no effect.
Aegislash: Doesn't really change all that much. Normal clause has no effect.
Serperior: It gets Spore. Unaffected by both clauses.
Tyranitar: Gets Diamond Storm and Sucker Punch. Unaffected by both clauses.
Thundurus: Gets Oblivion Wing and Bolt Strike. Unaffected by both clauses.

Now here, option 2 affects 4/10(It affects them all but only 4 of them get any sort of nerf) while normal clause affects 2/10.

Basically, normal clause nerfs only the normal type Pokemon but leaves Pokemon of other types which become stronger/more viable thanks to it.

Option 2 affects all Pokemon equally. But to be entirely honest, I dislike it. It only benefits Pokemon which have access to strong setup moves/strong attacks as they can simply pick one option and sweep. Stats are simply a bonus. But out of all the suggestions so far, I feel it's the best.

tl;dr: Fuck Yanma

Edit: On the topic of voting, I'd like it if only people who've played the meta for a while vote. I certainly don't have anything against new players and welcome it. But suppose I wanted a certain option 2 win, I could easily get a bunch of people to come vote for it. I propose an eligibility thingie. Like the person should have either won at least 10 matches or played 20 matches to vote. I'm not really a fan of the mini-council idea as it would exclude newer players.
Anyhow, after some thought, I say we go to Option 2 and if it doesn't work out, we can try other options.
 
Personally, I'm going to go with Option 3. Why? I agree with unfixable in that it is not a meta where whoever sets up first wins; stall is still a viable strategy. Also, looking at the viability rankings, you can find that of all the S-ranked, the only ones who utilize both Attack and Status moves are Scizor-Mega, and possibly Lando-T. Choosing between attack and status moves will not affect over half of the S-ranked pokes, and may even make them more difficult to wall. And like many other people believe, i feel that Option 1 is too restrictive. The meta is still good as it is, though possibly slightly favoring offense-but is there any OM where offense and stall are equally viable?
 

xJownage

Even pendulums swing both ways
Honestly people are being a little short minded and have some tunnel vision right now. I'm seeing several posts supporting option 3 that consist of "so and so isn't broken in this meta" or "so and so doesn't even use both setup and attacking moves". Looking at what is good now and making conclusions about those pokemon is the wrong way to go about this; we will be creating an entirely new metagame, and consequently, the best mons will change. If offense is shaped of mons like regular aerodactyl instead of thundurus, then stall becomes more viable, and everything, in terms of the best and the mediocre, is completely reformed.

We don't know if Option 2 will solve our issues, but you can't look at ANYTHING in the current metagame to figure out what will happen. It's like trying to predict ORAS OU's metagame as of now the day ORAS came out. You can't.

The current metagame flat out sucks. Its incredibly matchup based, and there is nothing that remotely resembles a stall team right now. While its not "the first to set up wins," its "spam very powerful threats and pick your sack / double switch every other turn." The metagame isn't very fun. I'm certainly quite fond of this metagame, but taking a step back and looking at how the meta works shows me how terrible this metagame is for competitive play.
 
Hey, this is Virginia != Virgin. I can confirm on PS!, but I just wanted to post this before I forgot about it.

I had no idea that so many people though setup in general was broken in STAB, but I think the meta is pretty stale and the banlist is absurdly long. Therefore I'm gonna vote for Option 2.

I haven't read this thread, but I'm sure it's full of reasonable discussion about the merits and faults of setup pokemon. I don't really care about that. I just think that Option 2 would be fun and inject some new life into STABmons. I'm also wary that the change will confuse the average Tournament room player, and dissuade them from playing it.

I guess I'm a rare breed of people who doesn't like to setup, but I was sitting at the top of the ladder for a few months with a grand total of 0 setup moves on my team. Personally, I think that the only setup pokemon worth using are BD Kangaskhan and NP Thundurus, since they're pretty much the entire list of pokemon that Sableye can't handle completely on its own. I realize that the fact that I've always run a really hard blanket check to setup pokemon has completely skewed my vision of how strong they were, and that it's insane to just tell everyone to run one pokemon just to check setup pokes.

I always though that Keldeo and M-Aerodactyl were way more broken than setup pokemon, since they just 2HKO everything off the bat. But that's just, like, my opinion, man.

I don't think that a change is necessary, and I'm fine with Option 3, but I think that Option 2 sounds like fun, and I'm all for fun.
 
Personally, I'm going to go with Option 3. Why? I agree with unfixable in that it is not a meta where whoever sets up first wins; stall is still a viable strategy. Also, looking at the viability rankings, you can find that of all the S-ranked, the only ones who utilize both Attack and Status moves are Scizor-Mega, and possibly Lando-T. Choosing between attack and status moves will not affect over half of the S-ranked pokes, and may even make them more difficult to wall. And like many other people believe, i feel that Option 1 is too restrictive. The meta is still good as it is, though possibly slightly favoring offense-but is there any OM where offense and stall are equally viable?
"Though possibly slightly favoring offense." Is a huge understatement. Stall has been discussed a million times in STABmons, the new additions offer offense soooo much more. Offense gets things like Belly Drum Scrappy Espeed sweepers with Elemental Punchs and Superpower. Stall gets… recovery on Snorlax (still worse then Chansey), and random niche utility stuff like Transform. Stall has to try to counter premium wallbreakers like mixed Char Y and Thunderous along with multiple sweepers that can hit max attack in one turn. Correct me if I am wrong but the only player that consistently plays stall in STABmons is insanelegend. If stall was really so viable why don't more people play it?
 

Lcass4919

The Xatu Warrior
Personally, I'm going to go with Option 3. Why? I agree with unfixable in that it is not a meta where whoever sets up first wins; stall is still a viable strategy. Also, looking at the viability rankings, you can find that of all the S-ranked, the only ones who utilize both Attack and Status moves are Scizor-Mega, and possibly Lando-T. Choosing between attack and status moves will not affect over half of the S-ranked pokes, and may even make them more difficult to wall. And like many other people believe, i feel that Option 1 is too restrictive. The meta is still good as it is, though possibly slightly favoring offense-but is there any OM where offense and stall are equally viable?
im just going to throw it out there and say again this is not why this suspect is being held. its being held due to the plethora of pokemon who are easily capable of setting up and smashing various pokemon HARD. i don't mind different opinions dont get me wrong, but this ISN'T a "reasoning" as your not outlining the problem at all. this aspect can be found in both stall AND offense...and restricting it doesn't help EITHER playstyle be more viable both can run setup mons with powerful attacks. i'm not saying "change your opinion" i'm saying "give an opinion that actually contributes to your reasoning" having scizor be capable of setting up to +2 speed, +1 attack, and have a 150 base power move BEFORE stab is just rediculous. especially when the best unaware user risks the OHKO from pin missle(literally the ONLY reason to run pin missle...but its a HUGE reason). by implimenting this "nerf"(from option 2) we allow scizor to STILL HAVE ACCESS TO BOOSTING. what it does, is prevent it from having NEW completely overkill moves. forcing pokemon to either rely on their attacking movepool, or their support movepool, most of which do one or the either regardless. sure some pokemon don't care about this change, but that's NOT why were considering it, its NOT to completely change the meta, its to stop MANY pokemon from being broken with setup. (seriously, bibarel single handedly sweeps teams...and im talking people in the top 100's). and if you don't agree with that, outline THAT, and not something we all agree on already.
 

Scyther NO Swiping

Washed up former great
is a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
I waited a little while to vote because I was kind of torn between options 2 and 3. I have a post already in this thread where I am behind option 2 and stating my reasons, for it. However, after making that post, I thought about the meta more, and Option three grew on me. That being said, I am voting Option 2. After much thought, I still feel like this is the best option because this will help break up the metagame unfairly skewed towards Hyper Offense and set up sweepers. I feel that the metagame needs a big change to break it from its current state of ban something broken, find something else broken, then ban it. While the constant ban cycle can keep the metagame balanced, in my opinion, it speaks to the fact that maybe the rules of the meta need to be changed, not the banlist. Option 2 allows for a change to the metagame hopefully helping fix this constant ban cycle, but many top tier threats are unaffected by this change as I said in my first post on this thread.
Sableye can still run d void, topsy turvy, parting shot, destiny bond, whatever. Thundurus can still run O Wing, t-bolt Taunt, and Nasty Plot, Tyranitar might lose dark Void, but it is still viable with sucker/knock off, diamond storm, and earthquake. I could go on and on about many B and above rank mons (Lando T, Chansey, Ferrothorn, Mega Diancie, Togekiss, and others I'm forgetting) that have sets that they commonly run, or sets similar to ones they commonly run, would be unaffected by this change.
 
So today we had an Option 2 STABmons tournament (my idea :DDDDD), and I'm going to post replays as they come. It's going on right now, actually.
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/stabmons-258330707
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/stabmons-258327483
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/stabmons-258331494
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/stabmons-258332476
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/stabmons-258335404
http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/stabmons-258338237

These were the only relevant ones. I'm not the best at STABmons, so I'll let you guys judge these replays for yourselves!
 
Last edited:
I have yet to play STABmons, but after doing some research, I would ultimately go with Option 2. From what I've seen, STABmons turns so many things into Game-Breakers it isn't even funny, and this is because of the sheer freedom it allows. I mean, prior to Sylveon's ban, she had access to Geomancy AND Boomburst (as well as more), and there was nothing stopping her. While we can expect some mons to still be banned, Option 2 would turn the metagame fresh again, with you never knowing whether, say, Sylveon was gonna be a supporter or an attacker, ultimately leading to more diversity.
 
I took part in the tour and I believe Option 2 is the best choice because it helps shorten the banlist without completly eliminating a playstyle like Option 1 or 3. This makes it so you would have to choose between running a Set-up move or a better attack. This change prevents combinations such as Gear Grind-Shift Gear and Shell-Smash-Boomburst. This change definitely would help the metagame as it would add new threats and allow this OM to work with all these exclusive powerful moves being available to many pokemon. The only member of my team even affected by this was Mega Scizor, who got nerfed hard by this option, so it would not ruin every team completely. This choice seems to be the most common option and is the best option.
 

EV

Banned deucer.
I've gotten feedback that players are close to the 1400 req but can't quite hit it in time. I'm lowering it to 1350 and extending the deadline to Sunday, the 16th. Remember, you do not need a fresh alt for this. Ladder with your main account if you want!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MK

Pikachuun

the entire waruda machine
After some thinking, I'm going to go with Option 2. Option 1 is very complex imo, and Option 3 would, most likely, get us back to where we are right now eventually as it's effectively no change. My other reasons are pretty much echo'd in other posts.
 

EV

Banned deucer.
Btw screenshot your ranking once you hit 1350. The ladder is resetting soonish according to Zarel so I'd hate for you to hit the mark and then when I go to check this Sunday I don't see you! @_@
 

Josh

=P
is a Team Rater Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Alright, well now that its 1353, I can vote yey.

Anyways, that said, I'm actually voting option 3. I'm not a fan of constriction at all and this option is the least constricting and leaves the most options for the tier going forward. I'm also not opposed to option 2 though, if option 3 proves to fail in the upcoming weeks/months.
 
Option 3.

STABmons is supposed to be fun with offense gaining the upper hand slightly. Even though I haven't been around for a while, I can see that defense still has the upper hand here. I confess, I've used defense + back up offense strategy as well, but I'd say I was forced to.

I remember discussing with Eevee General about STABmons becoming stale with the mounting number of bans. If you choose Option 1 or 2, you're basically adding more to the staleness.

I'm sure that people who actually love playing STABmons (And not just for the sake of laddering) will instinctively vote for Option 3.
 

Kit Kasai

Love colored magic
Option 3.

STABmons is supposed to be fun with offense gaining the upper hand slightly. Even though I haven't been around for a while, I can see that defense still has the upper hand here. I confess, I've used defense + back up offense strategy as well, but I'd say I was forced to.

I remember discussing with Eevee General about STABmons becoming stale with the mounting number of bans. If you choose Option 1 or 2, you're basically adding more to the staleness.

I'm sure that people who actually love playing STABmons (And not just for the sake of laddering) will instinctively vote for Option 3.
...? care to explain what you mean?

There are a few people that agree that STABmons should not be changed, and many of us agree that the meta is at least a bit stale, but literally no one else thinks that defense has the upper hand. Basically everyone agrees that offense is the dominant playstyle, although to different extents.
 
Option 3.

STABmons is supposed to be fun with offense gaining the upper hand slightly. Even though I haven't been around for a while, I can see that defense still has the upper hand here. I confess, I've used defense + back up offense strategy as well, but I'd say I was forced to.

I remember discussing with Eevee General about STABmons becoming stale with the mounting number of bans. If you choose Option 1 or 2, you're basically adding more to the staleness.

I'm sure that people who actually love playing STABmons (And not just for the sake of laddering) will instinctively vote for Option 3.
First off, I have refuted Dinaisha's assertion that defense is better then offense in STABmons multiple times and he has yet to provide solid proof he is correct. If you feel you are forced to run defensive mons, it is not because they are so powerful you can't win without them. It is because set up mons like Scizor and Azumaril are near impossible to revenge kill after they set up. The only things capable of checking Gear Grind/Shift Gear Scizor are bulky fire types. Azumaril gets 2 new priority moves and Shell Smash to complement Belly Drum. Several revenge killers such as Talonflame aren't taking a +6 Espeed, so you may find yourself "forced" to run defensive mons like Quagsire.
 
Maybe I didn't word it nicely at all. I agree, Offense is the preferred play style. So then logically, as Kingslayer explained, you have to run Defense if you have any hopes of saving grace (Remember all those times you lost because you mispredicted and you opponent set up a Tail Glow or Shell Smash or Belly Drum and finished you off). Now my point was that Defense in STABmons wonderful, what with all the Offensive bans (Remember that I wasn't against a handful of those bans).

The obvious proof of this is the plethora of Defensive mons used extensively by the top ladder players. The offensive mons they use are either Revengers (Which is next to necessary in STABmons) or an end-game sweeper.

If you argue that setup (Especially bulky setup) Offense can be countered by Offense itself, then I point at you and laugh.

So, I think more restrictions will not contribute to betterment of the game in any sense. STABmons should remain the same and that's that.
 
Option 2

Thought about this for a bit, and this makes the most sense, other people already posted what i was going to say, no need to repeat myself.

Something to note is that if we just do nothing, there will inevitably be several more bans, one after another, until the meta becomes literally STABmons UU. Option 2 will also inevitably end up with quite a few bans (mega aero, slowbro, keldeo), but in the end, the meta should balance itself out.

Maybe I didn't word it nicely at all. I agree, Offense is the preferred play style. So then logically, as Kingslayer explained, you have to run Defense if you have any hopes of saving grace (Remember all those times you lost because you mispredicted and you opponent set up a Tail Glow or Shell Smash or Belly Drum and finished you off). Now my point was that Defense in STABmons wonderful, what with all the Offensive bans (Remember that I wasn't against a handful of those bans).

The obvious proof of this is the plethora of Defensive mons used extensively by the top ladder players. The offensive mons they use are either Revengers (Which is next to necessary in STABmons) or an end-game sweeper.

If you argue that setup (Especially bulky setup) Offense can be countered by Offense itself, then I point at you and laugh.

So, I think more restrictions will not contribute to betterment of the game in any sense. STABmons should remain the same and that's that.
I sort of get your logic, but not really; if you think set-up is so centralizing, why don't you just vote option 1 and try to get other people to hop along? At the very least vote option 2 to nerf set-up offense and as a result making other types of offense more viable, as opposed to just saying "do nothing and the problem will solve itself"
 
Maybe I didn't word it nicely at all. I agree, Offense is the preferred play style. So then logically, as Kingslayer explained, you have to run Defense if you have any hopes of saving grace (Remember all those times you lost because you mispredicted and you opponent set up a Tail Glow or Shell Smash or Belly Drum and finished you off). Now my point was that Defense in STABmons wonderful, what with all the Offensive bans (Remember that I wasn't against a handful of those bans).

The obvious proof of this is the plethora of Defensive mons used extensively by the top ladder players. The offensive mons they use are either Revengers (Which is next to necessary in STABmons) or an end-game sweeper.

If you argue that setup (Especially bulky setup) Offense can be countered by Offense itself, then I point at you and laugh.

So, I think more restrictions will not contribute to betterment of the game in any sense. STABmons should remain the same and that's that.
Your logic doesn't match your vote. If Offense can't check/counter other offense because of set up, then why did you vote option 3? Also if top ladder players are really using defensive mons backed up with offensive revenge killers and sweepers, that sounds alot like balance. Nothing is particularly wrong with running balance, though you shouldn't be forced to run it to win. Which brings me back to my original point. If you really think set up is a problem why leave things alone?
 
Option 2

All of the reasons for my vote have already been explained in this thread, so I don't see any need to repeat them.
 

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

Top