@ Heysup
As for "weeding out" Kabutops, I stated that its unfair because there are other sweepers that could be equally good as a rain sweeper. Kabutops is very good as a rain dance sweeper, albeit not a broken sweeper. I've stated already that rain dance functions as a group to focus on a spectrum. Kabutops can't do it alone by itself.
I don't see how using a team that "focuses on one spectrum" means that there cannot be any broken Pokemon on it. I mean, look at Yanmega, Staraptor, Gallade, and Honchkrow. They were all used on Heavy Offense and focused on destroying "one spectrum", yet they were banned because they were absolutely fulfilling the OC or the SC, depending on which roles they played.
Franky said:
I truly believe the two sweepers I mentioned are equally up to par with Kabutops with the reasons listed. Sure Kabutops has Aqua Jet, Stone Edge, and good Defense but the aforementioned Pokemon have their own qualities which make them dangerous sweepers as well. Don't get me wrong, Kabutops is a really good sweeper; I just find it unfair that Kabutops deserves to be banned when I feel like the other sweepers are equally dangerous.
Once again, I don't mean to make the argument that Kabutops is
better overall. I am trying to point out that, as a sweeper, Kabutops is the
only Rain Dance sweeper that fulfills the offensive characteristics, namely because of Stone Edge, and its monstrous Attack + SD + Priority combo.
Kabutops is probably the Swift Swimmer which requires the least support to sweep (I mean, it's fine as it is without Rain).
I keep forgetting to bring this up, so thanks.
Kabutops is the only Rain Dance that absolutely doesn't "rely" on the Rain (maybe Qwilfish as well, but to a lesser degree).
Kabutops is able to take out its would-be counters in a maximum of 2-3 Rain Dance turns, and easily sweep the rest of the team without Rain. It still has Base 80 Speed, STAB Priority, and 722 Attack.
i'm not interested in debating this part of the debate because (a) everyone else is jumping all over it anyways (b) this type of argument (i.e. x is better than y, etc) always devolves into people exchanging fucking ridiculous numbers of posts which is tbh just a hassle to read not to even to reply to.
Fair enough whoostleh (that was an attempt to make your name sound jewish)
whistle said:
my argument is that even assuming kabutops is the only pokemon that is broken while under rain, we should still ban rain and not kabutops. the arguments about whether the assumption is actually true (i.e. is kabutops the best ?!?!) aren't relevant to what i'm talking about.
I know, but the fact that Kabutops is fulfilling the OC is relevant in my opinion. Rain isn't fulfilling the "SC" (not because it isn't a Pokemon, because it doesn't "make" Kabutops broken, Kabutops abuses the rain to the point that it's impossible to stop even after the rain dies down).
whistle said:
why? you haven't given a warrant that explains why kabutops is the culprit even assuming it's the only pokemon that's broken by rain. i've given several reasons why this isn't the case:
1. separate the two. rain benefits every swift swimmer in the exact same way i.e. doubled speed and an additional stab bonus. to conceptualize what i'm trying to get at let's construct an artificial scale of the "goodness" of a pokemon -- it's a scale of 1-150, and 100 is the "uber" line for a given tier. keeping in mind that i'm assuming your (heysup's) arguments about kabutops being the best sweeper, assign the following ratings:
kabutops w/o rain: 90
ludicolo w/o rain: 60
gorebyss w/o rain: 50
qwilfish w/o rain: 60
kabutops w/ rain: 120
ludicolo w/ rain: 90
gorebyss w/ rain: 80
qwilfish w/ rain: 90
rain raises the effectiveness of each pokemon by 30 completely arbitrary points on a non-linear scale (the point isn't that "kabutops gets 30% better in rain" but rather that "rain benefits everything equally"). kabutops is only broken by rain because it's better than the others to begin with, which by itself isn't anything banworthy. it is only banworthy once rain is added to the equation.
I don't see the issue here. If Kabutops and
only Kabutops is broken under rain, then lets ban what is broken. It doesn't matter that Rain affects all of the Pokemon the same amount (if it does indeed affect them the same amount, I'm sceptical of that point but it's not too important) because in the end what matters is "What is broken?" This is why we banned shit like Honchkrow and even Wobbuffet not the Pokemon that it increased the effectiveness of (which it did essentially equally for many Pokemon I might add).
whistle said:
2. you can't apply the same reasoning reverse. the sweepers define a rain team and not the other way around, so saying "rain is not broken without kabutops but it becomes broken with kabutops" doesn't make that much sense. additionally, the comparison i drew above is the logical way to think about it because kabutops is used tons on rain and non-rain teams alike but there aren't many (aren't any?) competitive rain teams without kabutops. finally, the precedent set by things like abomasnow (assume it was banned under the support clause for walrein / froslass / etc) / spikes (assume froslass is broken and these spikes are coming from her) stays the same -- the key reasoning for why these pokemon are the ones banned and not the pokemon that they break is because they provide necessary support that breaks other pokemon.
Why? If anything, your comparison supports the fact that Kabutops is the culprit.
Additionally, Abomasnow was not banned because it "broke" Walrein, Froslass, and etc; it was banned because it was broken itself due to SubSeed + Hail. Otherwise Snover would have been theorybanned.
In any event, the reason that Spikes (from Froslass), though similar to Rain Dance, were banned was because they broke more than one Pokemon. This means that Spikes was the common denominator. Rain on the other hand does not. There is a way to deduce Spikes being the culprit, but because there is no way to deduce that for Rain, you cannot
assume Rain is the culprit.
whistle said:
3. quantity doesn't matter. the reason you only have one "culprit" pokemon under rain (kabutops) is because the sample size of rain sweepers is so small in the first place. literally EVERY offensive pokemon likes spikes, so it makes sense that a higher raw number of them become broken in its presence. regardless of this (imo) logical fallacy, there's no reason that the number of pokemon that become broken gives any indication as to what the problem factor is. why don't we just ban moltres and swellow? oh yeah -- it's cause spikes is at fault here. same thing with kabutops. it's fine without rain but becomes broken in rain, so it's rain's fault.
It's not the direct numbers that I'm comparing, it's the relative ones. The fact that Spikes breaks "many" Pokemon and is a clear common denominator shows that it should be broken, while Rain does NOT break anything other than Kabutops. It's not the fact that "More Pokemon are broken with Spikes than with Rain", its the fact that "Spikes breaks many Pokemon, while Kabutops is the only Pokemon broken under Rain".
it may be clear to you but you haven't given any reason for it to be clear to me / others reading. also, the part of my post that you quoted in your response is my #3 argument, to clarify.
whistle said:
edit: to clarify, when i use the term "ban rain" itc i mean "take steps to reduce rain's effectiveness", not literally "ban the move rain dance". i've posted before (beginning of np: rain drops specifically, among other places) about why i think banning damp rock is a preferred first step over straight up banning the move rain dance. also, i should point out that i'm not taking a stance either way on whether rain is broken or not or if kabutops is broken or not -- i'm just posting in an assumed world. (on a side note i find it kind of interesting that i always feel the need to post disclaimers in uu discussion threads for fear that everyone will jump down my throat ................... hmmmmmmmmm)
So you want to ban the move Rain Dance????? /jumpdownyourthroat
But seriously by that logic you can simply "ban anything" to reduce Rains effectiveness. We should be banning what is broken, not what "slightly nerfs something that contributes to another thing being broken". If your goal is to reduce Rain's effectiveness then I don't see why you're even against banning Kabutops since it would do just that. You even said yourself that there was no competitive Rain teams without Kabutops.