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.
I still wish we had done it the other way around. I know its highly likely that we'll suspect Caly afterwards, but ignoring the majority of the playerbase feels like a bit of a whack decision to me.
I don't think tiering council is ignoring the majority of the playerbase. Admittedly ~58% of the community survey voters deemed Calyrex-Shadow should have been adressed first, but 50% of the qualified voters deemed Zacian-H should have been adressed first (and 25% of the qualified voters for Calyrex-Shadow) which means most of our good players wanted Zacian-H to be adressed first.
-------
I personally think Zacian-H should be banned.
Why? On paper it doesn't look really good but in practice it is insanely good and forces your team to have at least Necrozma-Dusk-Mane + 1 regenerator mon if not 2 in Ho-Oh, Toxapex or Tangrowth to barely keep it in check (not mentionning you also need yveltal for obvious reasons). If it's holding babiri berry it easily gets past of the aforementionned core because NDM can't reliably switch in, Toxapex and Ho-Oh just die to Wild Charge. Tangrowth is more reliable but if it misses Sleep Powder or with a bit of prior chip it easily loses its 1v1. As Manaphy said, Amoonguss beats Zacian-H pretty handily but let's be real it's not really good.
Does it have any counter? Yes it does! Just mentionned above NDM + 1/2 regenerator pokemons is usually enough but you would agree it isn't really fun to run the same core over and over again. Jolly Marshadow can threaten it at best but will never OHKO. Timid Eternatus will OHKO with sludge bomb but is generally weak. Both Scarf Kyogre and Specs Calyrex revenge kill it with ease but you have to lose another pokemon to do so while your opponent can switch out his Zacian-H for either Yveltal or Eternatus who are on almost every team. So far all Zacian-H's supposed counter can either be dealt with (babiri Zacian or switch Zacian out) or pretty unviable (Jolly Marsh/Timid Eternatus) which tells how problematic Zacian-H is.
Supposed Zacian's counters:
252 Atk Choice Band Marshadow Poltergeist (110 BP) vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Zacian: 232-274 (71.3 - 84.3%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 SpA Life Orb Eternatus Sludge Bomb vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Zacian: 369-437 (113.5 - 134.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO
0 Atk Necrozma-Dusk-Mane Sunsteel Strike vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Babiri Berry Zacian: 142-168 (43.6 - 51.6%) -- 9% chance to 2HKO
Now Zacian calcs:
+3 252+ Atk Zacian Crunch vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Prism Armor Necrozma-Dusk-Mane: 219-258 (55 - 64.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+1 252+ Atk Choice Band Zacian Crunch vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Prism Armor Necrozma-Dusk-Mane: 196-232 (49.2 - 58.2%) -- 98% chance to 2HKO +1 252+ Atk Choice Band Zacian Play Rough vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Eternatus: 378-445 (89.7 - 105.7%) -- guaranteed OHKO after Stealth Rock
+3 252+ Atk Zacian Play Rough vs. 252 HP / 252+ Def Tangrowth: 249-294 (61.6 - 72.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
+1 252+ Atk Choice Band Zacian Wild Charge vs. 252 HP / 204+ Def Ho-Oh: 390-460 (93.7 - 110.5%) -- 62.5% chance to OHKO
How the metagame would change? With it being gone Necrozma-Dusk-Mane will finally be able to run more offensive sets such as Swords Dance or Dragon Dance outside of those Sticky Web teams which is obviously great for meta diversification. You will also have another option for Xerneas in SpD NDM which would allow you to use Ho-Oh a bit more offensively for example. If you are afraid that stall teams would become too good we still have great stallbreakers such as Sub SD Calyrex-Ice or Meteor Beam Eternatus. Not being forced to run NDM + 1 or 2 passive mons would also help a lot enabling you to run very offensive teams.
But it's Ubers, we shouldn't ban mons from the tier. Just like Manaphy said, this is an old ideology and we shouldn't follow it anymore. If something is too good, ubers or not it has to go. This is just a pain in the neck to build for and play against without mentionning it limits a few mons who would see usages with it (and probably calyrex) being gone such as Dialga or Mewtwo for example. With that in mind banning Zacian-H seems the only reasonable way to go to push SS Ubers in the right direction.
How will banning certain mon like zacian make certain meta more healthy?
Answer is: It will not make metagame more healthy. Why? There are many mons that are too overpowered to a concrete tier. Example? Calyrex-s. Ability As One(Spectrier) lets this mon boost its special attack almost every turn its on battlefield.
Moreover banning those mons takes away probably the only answer to some buffed mons
Zacian-Hero is not as dominant as other "banworthy" Pokemon throughout the ages in that it had counterplay. Unlike Mega Rayquaza, many Pokemon could easily switch into it and force it out, being able to defeat it in the long run.
However, this may not have been the concern of those voting for its ban. Those voting for its ban are looking for a more diversified Ubers metagame, instead of one concentrated around Zacian and its checks. They believe that building around NDM and a Regenerator (Ho-oh or Tangrowth) are too restrictive and would like to see Zacian-Hero gone to free up more space for innovation. (If anything I have written here is factually incorrect of if I have misinterpreted any of the previous posts, feel free to reply to confirm your actual feelings.)
In this case, I believe that both banning and not banning this Pokemon make sense. While banning Zacina-Hero would free up innovation to use other sets such as Banded Ho-oh and Dragon Dance NDM, not banning Zacian-Hero also makes sense, given that it does not have a stranglehold on the metagame per se (or at least not as much a stranglehold as Pokemon that are banned from various tiers such as Gothitelle from ORAS OU and Mega Rayquaza).
In other words, I am fine with both results of this suspect test and encourage others to have an open mind about this.
After getting reqs, I'm not exactly sure how to feel about Zacian-H.
I think to understand why I feel conflict, you have to understand what I think an Ubers mons deserves to get banned. Firstly, from what I've seen, Ubers does not ban based on solely being broken. Being broken means having few ways to deal with a given threat in any metagame, whether it be a single mon (Zacian-C had Quagsire and Necromaza-DM) or an entire playstyle (Baton Pass had random mons with Haze like Zygarde or Toxapex since a good BP team could use a Normal-type to ignore Spectral Thief). Previously banned things in Ubers, like the aforementioned Baton pass, often had other reasons for being banned, which leads me to my second point in my Ubers tiering philosophy: for something to be banned from Ubers, it has to have multiple reasons for being banned. Going over all the bans in SWSH Ubers, we can see a consistent trend that proves this point:
Dynamax was broken because it allows mons to break past their checks at a moment's notice, making most offensive mons have 0 consistent counterplay, combined with having no negative drawbacks to outweigh this, and uncompetitive because it was near impossible to play Dynamax successfully without resorting to 50/50s which were heavily skewed in the Dynamaxer's favor.
Baton Pass was broken because it had a limited amount of counterplay to deal with, and the available options to a Baton Pass team allowed to it beat all but the most dedicated counters, overcentralizing because it forced mons/moveslots on mons solely dedicated to beat the playstyle, and uncompetitive because of how quickly it could force the game out of the player's hands.
Zacian-C was broken because it had very few viable switch-ins, most of which could be beaten through a (viable) change in moveslots), and overcentralizing because it basically forced 2-3 mons on a team just to check Zacian-C, which heavily constrained teambuilding.
Shadow Tag (more specifically on Gothitelle) was broken because it could easily dispose of defensive mons that weren't specifically built to beat Gothitelle, often at the expense of dealing with other offensive threats, and uncompetitive because playing around Gothitelle boiled down to 50/50s where the risk-reward was heavily skewed in the Gothitelle player's favor.
Do you see a pattern here? All of the current-gen Ubers bans had multiple reasons for their banning, not a single one like being broken or uncompetitive. If Ubers did ban based on one trait, then Pokemon like Zygarde, Zekrom, and Xerneas would be long gone by now due to their limited counterplay and ability to deal with all but the most dedicated counters. But they aren't because none of them are uncompetitive (only Glare Zygarde involves luck to a serious degree) or overcentralizing since their answers are widely available due to the higher average power level of the tier. Often, soft checks will exist for every one of these threats so they cannot snowball out of hand. A major flaw I've seen in some ban arguments is that solely Zacian-H's brokenness in terms of limited switch-ins is accounted for, and while the big numbers are scary, for a tier such as Ubers, the main focus should not be how big a number is, but rather its impact on teambuilding in combination with this.
All of this is interesting and all, but how does this apply to Zacian-H? Well, with defining an Ubers ban falling under strict guidelines, I think it's important to figure out how exactly Zacian-H lives up to its predecessors.
Firstly, I think it is absolutely undebatable that Zacian-H is objectively broken. Yeah, you can make the case that Necromaza-DM + random Regen mon can make you safe against Band Zacian-H (even though you have to play 50/50s every time it comes on the field and pray you guess right), but these types of cores crumble to SD Zacian-H, whether it be Pixie Plate, Life Orb, or the menace that is Babiri Zacian-H, which basically a free +4 that lets it demolish every possible defensive core. Even if we are solely talking about Band, the risk-reward factor is heavily skewed in Zacian-H's favor because of its extremely high damage output which means even neutral hits dent defensive mons quite a bit. Combine this with its colorful coverage and you have a mon that is nigh uncounterable.
On the other side of the spectrum, I find it hard to believe that Zacian-H is uncompetitive either. It doesn't rely on any luck to break through its checks (although Crunch defense drops suck), the more skillful player usually wins with Zacian-H, and in general, it doesn't make the meta less competitive. Of course, this is a subjective take and I have seen people call Zacian-H uncompetitive, or at the very least interfering with the competitiveness of the meta, but to me, Zacian-H can actually reward correct prediction with Choice Band, which is something that sets it apart from all the other current bans where they could just click buttons/follow a flowchart and win.
And right smack dab in the middle is the ultimate question: Is Zacian-H overcentralizing? This is the main reason why I am conflicted about Zacian-H, as while to some extent, it does centralize the meta around it in an unhealthy way by forcing 2-3 mons to deal with it, this is not uncommon in Ubers. If your only Xerneas check is Necromaza-DM, then quite honestly you deserve to lose to it because you made a conscious choice not to adequately prepare for a top-tier mon. There is a wide amount of available counterplay, and while that doesn't mean Zacian-H is balanced, I have seen enough creativity and careful preparation to think that Zacian-H is not overcentralizing enough for a ban.
However, all of what I said about Zacian-H applies only in a vacuum. It is important to remember that Ubers is a 6v6 game, and Zacian-H's impact by itself is not just what counts when considering to ban a Pokemon, but rather it is its interaction with the tier as a whole and its synergy with others. If anything would push Zacian-H over the edge, it is not its performance as a singular Pokemon, but rather its interaction with others and its impact when, combined with them, on the tier.
I understand my statements are not shared by all, but frankly, I am absolutely exhausted trying to build for Ubers. It is near impossible to build a team that does consistently well vs every viable threat in the tier or at least has outs vs them. Teambuilding in Ubers has come down to matchup management, where, when building a team, you are actively accepting that you cannot beat certain, usually viable, threats because the general power level of the tier mandates answers to the top-tier mons. This creates an unhealthy dynamic that, objectively, leads to a constrained tier and, subjectively, impacts player enjoyment as well as leading to an unhappy player base.
Again, how does this have to do with Zacian-H? Well, it's clear that Zacian-H isn't the one forcing Yveltal or Eternatus onto teams, it's Calyrex-S/Kyorge. My thinking is that the combined offensive power of these three constrains the tier heavily and leads to the aforementioned matchup management when teambuilding. This is not me advocating for a Calyrex-S or a Kyogre ban in a thread about a Zacian-H suspect, but rather me explaining my dissatisfaction with the current state of Ubers. Not all of this is due to Zacian-H; however, it is the most obvious restriction on teambuilding, as its ability to force 2 checks on a team and its ability to wear them down and possibly beat them makes it look potentially unhealthy in my eyes. If there was any reason for banning it, this would be it.
I know this was a long and possibly confusing post that was kinda rambly, but a tl;dr of this is that I'm conflicted. On one hand, the aspects that could potentially make Zacian-H banworthy are a bit overblown and debatable. Counterplay exists, and apart from Babiri sets, it lacks ways to get around them without careful prediction. On the other hand, its subjective impact on teambuilding, at least for me, is absolutely frustrating and annoying. I never adequately feel safe vs it while feeling safe vs other top threats as well, and when I do feel safe vs it, it's often at the cost of the Calyrex-S, Kyogre, Toxic Zygarde, or other matchups that must be prepared for. Hopefully, as the date of voting comes closer and more quality posts are written, I can feel clearer about which side to take in this dilemma.
Usually, whenever a ban is proposed or there is talk of banning something, somebody comes in and talks about Ubers identity, and how banning something would be contradictory to the "Ubers identity". Surprisingly, I have seen very little talk about it during the current suspect test, as the main debate seems to stem from if Zacian-H has consistent counterplay or not, rather than the wide impact of its ban. I do not like it when these arguments are used in favor of not banning something to uphold the status quo of Ubers.
Now, I understand why the Ubers identity is a contentious subject for people. From what I can understand, the Ubers community has repeatedly been the source of scorn by others. It has had to fight for tournament slots, has been treated like a second-rate meta despite having a main subforum, and generally has been seen poorly compared to established tiers like OU or UU (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). From this point of view, it is understandable to defend the Ubers identity, as it is effectively the only thing one can grab onto when their community is being attacked: a sense of community. This is a way cults and religions gain their followers and is a standard human defense mechanism (Note: I am NOT equating those who use the Ubers identity defense with cults).
However, I believe the fate of the Ubers identity should belong to the community as a whole, not some post written ten years ago, by a majorly different generation of players. Who are we, as individuals, to halt a process/progress that a majority of players deem necessary due to the current state of the meta, not because of a belief that the said aspect is okay for the tier, but that by doing so, it causes the tier to lose some sort of arbitrary identity? If the Ubers community deems this ban, others that have preceded it, and others that may succeed it, necessary, then what does it matter that Ubers is becoming "less of itself"? At what point does the tier sacrifice playability for a supposed identity of being the realm where brokens roam? And, ultimately, who cares? I do not see myself stopping to play Ubers if it suddenly banned, say, Calyrex-S on a quickban slate immediately after this suspect test, and I feel that many people would stay in this hypothetical.
Ultimately, what I am saying is that, while I can understand the claims about Ubers identity, I feel that it is often invalid and used to stop progress instead of providing a debate of if Ubers is going too far.
While I love using this mon (I mean who doesn't) to sweep and don't use the band or adamant nature. I think I'll go with ban. Zacian-H is way too OP to be in ubers and it's ridiculous what it can do with over 900 attack. I think this is the right call.
i don't think zacian-h should get banned from ubers because i know a pokemon that can outspeed and revenge kill it and its adamant choice scarf solgaleo because 252 adamant sunsteel strike will always ohko it and you outspeed it because of your choice scarf read this damage calc to see
252+ Atk Solgaleo Sunsteel Strike vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Zacian: 332-392 (102.1 - 120.6%) -- guaranteed OHKO
anyways if you want to use it here is the set
Solgaleo @ Choice Scarf
Ability: Full Metal Body
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Adamant Nature
- Sunsteel Strike
- Earthquake
- Stone Edge
- Flare Blitz
adamant choice scarf solgaleo is a good way of checking zacian-h but it doesn't really switch into it as it can get ohkoed by choice band +1 crunch
Though I am not very familiar with the Ubers metagame, I believe that Solgaleo is quite outclassed by Necrozma-Dusk-Mane. In fact, one could also slap a Scarf on Dusk Mane and call it a revenge killer of Zacian-Hero. However, Dusk Mane is much happier using a defensive set or using a boosting move like Dragon Dance.
Besides, even if Solgaleo is able to OHKO Band Zacian, Zacian also frequently runs Babiri Berry for Dusk Mane as well. Therefore, if Zacian runs a Babiri Berry, it is able to soak an attack and use Close Combat to KO if Swords Dance is up. Otherwise, the trainer can switch to one of the physically defensive Pokemon on their team to soak Sunsteel Strike such as their own Dusk Mane, while piling on damage with Rocky Helmet chip.
Therefore, it can be seen that not even a scarfed revenge killer is able to stop Zacian. There are ways to stop Zacian though, and that is why the people who will vote for the suspect test should think about both sides of the argument.
How will banning certain mon like zacian make certain meta more healthy?
Answer is: It will not make metagame more healthy. Why? There are many mons that are too overpowered to a concrete tier. Example? Calyrex-s. Ability As One(Spectrier) lets this mon boost its special attack almost every turn its on battlefield.
Moreover banning those mons takes away probably the only answer to some buffed mons
Your philosophy runs afoul of broken checking broken, which is not something we as a community want. Anyway, even by Ubers standards, Zacian is grossly overpowered. Also, I'll have to correct you on Shadow Calyrex - its ability boosts its special attack after knocking out a Pokemon; I'd imagine it'd have been banned already if it got special attack boosts every turn. I won't go into any more about Calyrex, as this is a Zacian suspect thread.
i don't think zacian-h should get banned from ubers because i know a pokemon that can outspeed and revenge kill it and its adamant choice scarf solgaleo because 252 adamant sunsteel strike will always ohko it and you outspeed it because of your choice scarf read this damage calc to see
252+ Atk Solgaleo Sunsteel Strike vs. 0 HP / 0 Def Zacian: 332-392 (102.1 - 120.6%) -- guaranteed OHKO
anyways if you want to use it here is the set
Solgaleo @ Choice Scarf
Ability: Full Metal Body
EVs: 252 Atk / 4 SpD / 252 Spe
Adamant Nature
- Sunsteel Strike
- Earthquake
- Stone Edge
- Flare Blitz
adamant choice scarf solgaleo is a good way of checking zacian-h but it doesn't really switch into it as it can get ohkoed by choice band +1 crunch
A for effort, but you're devoting a team slot to a mon that, according to the Ubers viability rankings, has no niche in the metagame as a proverbial silver bullet that has no purpose other than defeating Zacian (and frankly, I'd consider that grounds for banning on account of bring overcentralizing).
Thank you all for the active discussion on the matter and for participating in our suspect testing process. I finished laddering tonight and will be voting to ban Zacian-Hero from Ubers. I won't rehash anything I didn't already outline in the OP or that others like Manaphy and Staxi eloquently put into words in this thread before this post, though I do want to touch on two things that have stood out to me reading through the thread.
First and foremost, there seems to be a concern that banning Zacian-Hero leads to an abundance of bulky or stall teams that we'll be unable to break without Zacian-Hero. I don't see that. In fact, I've been experimenting a lot lately with different kinds of breakers, such as Choice Specs Zekrom and Choice Band Necrozma-Dusk-Mane in my UPL games, for example. There are countless currently unexplored offensive options that will bring a lot of fresh life to the metagame. Pokemon like Dialga, Palkia, Reshiram, Kyurem-White, Calyrex-Ice, Mewtwo and many more - including lots of non-Ubers Pokemon - can all be finetuned to take the metagame by storm with the right support. Necrozma-Dusk-Mane has a base 157 Attack stat that gets neglected entirely in the majority of Ubers games right now, not to mention Yveltal's ability to ravage defensive structures with offensive sets or stall breaking sets with Taunt. Keep an open mind here and please keep exploring! There are so many viable Pokemon and movesets available to us.
The other misconception I want to clear up is the focus on Zacian-Hero's effect on the team builder rather than in-game, because I disagree with the sentiment that the former is more pressing than the latter. Yveltal is near undroppable right now, but actually handles Calyrex-Shadow well. That's an example of being restricted in the team builder, rather than in the game itself. Zacian-Hero has good defensive answers like Necrozma-Dusk-Mane, Ho-Oh and Tangrowth, but they don't guarantee success against it at all when you're playing. Not to mention the overlap in your defensive structure that Zacian-Hero's teammates like Xerneas handily take advantage of. Zacian-Hero beats its best counters when it clicks the right moves or has the right set to help achieve its goal, like Babiri Berry or Protective Pads on Swords Dance.
This is why I pushed for Zacian-Hero to be tested first. First being the key word here. We're not forgetting about Calyrex-Shadow at all, but we're prioritizing being able to play the metagame between the two evils. Please, please don't vote do not ban on account of this not being a Calyrex-Shadow suspect test first, because that's coming. The Ubers council isn't done after this. We'll continue to push for SS Ubers to be as good as it can be.
you know what zacian-h has got to be banned from ubers is so overpowered it is such a powerful wallbreaker with choice band + it's ability and necrozma-DM is 2hkoed by adamant choice band close combat so my vote is ban zacian-h to AG also ignore my other post about the scarf solgaleo its bullcrap
As pointed out in the post directly above, Zacian-Hero was banned from Ubers. I'm going to close this thread now and we'll pick the metagame discussion back up here as we monitor how the metagame develops these next couple of weeks.
