Just to clarify, I never said they are not broken, as I do believe they are. However the post you quoted was me admitting that since they have always been banned, I cannot know for certain that they are broken. My previous post assumed they were broken. All I was saying here is that it is true that we have never played with them, so we do not know they are actually broken or not, and as such unless we just assume they are broken we have no reason to ban them.
when you told in the last page that evasion raising is a fantastic strategy someone said to you that this is false.he said to you that actually when you follow this strategy the odds are against you.and you accepted that.so that means that double teaming is in most of cases not the best thing to do or to rely to so it wouldn't break the metagame.maybe it would break a few pokes but then these pokes should get banned.not the move!so maybe,i am telling,maybe this moves were banned due to a reason that you don't understand?such as uncompetitiveness...
and i don't think that uncompetitiveness is something so hard to explain.as i have said in the suspect thread discussion
uncompetitiveness is:
when an element of our game(move,ability,ability combination,item)makes the game more luck based and doesn't add nothing that promotes and rewards skill and in the same time doesn't have enough counters then this element is considered to be uncompetitive!
f.e.double team makes the game more luck based without adding anything else that promotes skill and in the same time doesn't have enough counters.
brightpowder does the same.
criticals don't do the same.they introduce luck but they come along with the damage that they make.so when you make a move the decisions that you take are not taken about the critical which may occur but are taken for the normal damage that the moves is expected to deal!so according to the damage of every move you plan when and how to use them?see?this requires skill and thoughfull planing...
when you use flamethrower you don't think that a burn will occur.you think:is it a good time to use a fire move right now or the opponent will switch into a resist,and even if it hits are the damage enough to do the thing that i want to achieve?you don't think 'i will rely on the lucky burn and hopefully win the game because off this'.
also when you use iron head there is definetely a lot of luck involved but again you make some decisions that are based on the damage dealt.the main reason that every jirachi uses iron head is 'cause of the damage it can do(with the help of the flinches of 'course).if iron head didn't flinch will jirachi use this move at all?more rarely but it will still see some use...if iron head only did the flinch will anyone use this move?i don't think so.again the main reason you use this move is because of the damage that it can do.so according to the damage that you expect it to do you act accordingly.you take decisions.and even if haxrachi was considered partly uncompetitive it still has plenty of counters so it's out of the question.
but what decisions do you take when you use double team except 'hopefullly the opponent will miss'.where is the planing of your next move?where is the reward of experience and skill?'cause double team can be used by a poor player and a skilled player to almost the same degree of succes...or when you use a sand veil poke and you spam subs are you thinking aything else except from 'sooner or later the opponent will miss'.how does this promotes a healthy and competitive metagame???
also sand veil is also uncompetitive according to the previous term with the only exception that it requires a conditionto be so:sandstorm.
but in a sand dominated metagame where sand has 25% of the usage,and sun and rain combined have only the 17% of usage,while the other 68% of the teams don't even have a hope of countering sand veil,is opposing weather enough to balance the uncompetitiveness that this ability brings?i think that no...
Possibly off-topic a little, but...
Showing how people minimise luck doesn't show how competitive or uncompetitive luck is. All it shows is that people will do their best to avoid relying on luck. Luck will still be a factor, and every player takes this into account when planning. If part of the skill of team-building is luck management - or, to go with the MtG analogy, if part of the skill of deck-building is luck management, then adding in ways to control a draw is a way of managing the luck, no more, no less.
Luck management is a skillful technique. Whether or not it is competitive is an entirely different question.
exactly this!!!
but what happens when the player can no longer avoid relying on luck?
what happens when your only option is to rely on luck?
does it takes skill or luck management to hope that your next hits will land???i don't think so...
what planning can you do when in the end everyhting will be decided by a coin flip?
of 'course i am not talking about useless and unviable solutions like always hiting moves.these moves have one and only purpose...to hit through evasion...if everyone was supposed to use them to even have a chance of avoiding to rely on luck(100% hitiing moves would do nothing to defensive evasion boosters) wouldn't this be overcentralization?and overcentraliazation about something that revolves completely around luck.not strategy luck.
and on a final nore i think that all of us(or almost all of us) play pokemon for one and only reason:'cause we think that it is a chalenging and competitive game that requires experience and skill to master!and we enjoy training our skill and increasing our experience to get better!our enjoyment comes from the reward of skill and strategy!
would you enjoy a game where you would spam double team and then yoo proceeded to ko your opponents unprepeared team?no!
would you enjoy a game that was won through predictions and right decisions?of 'course yes!!!
sry for the babbling i am done!
