^Add Tera Skeledirge (accounting defensive Tera to counter a sweeper that almost always wants to Tera is not opportunity cost, it's a fair trade) and Garganacl unless its running EQ (note that you don't need to Tera Garg against Tera-Flying Roaring Moon, since resisting Acrobatics is the top priority).
Thing is, ID or Curse Corv and Garg, Tera Skeledirge and Dondozo are all great answers to the myriad of physical sweepers that appeared as "potentially problematic" in the survey... but no one runs them. Why? Because the meta doesn't let you defensively check ANYTHING under the Hazard rule: you either go full stall with HDB (which is still unpopular, but Gliscor alone has turned it into a viable strategy and I've faced more stall in the last week than in all the months of pre-DLC Gen 9 OU) and fear Knock Off and Psyshock Gholdengo or go ham with your own offense.
The problem with Roaring Moon is that he'll "probably be fine" in a healthy meta, and banning him will not solve the problem at hand. Is he really all that worse than Ogerpon, Kingambit or Sneasler? Mons that essentially do the same and are checked by virtually the same mons? Bonus points to Sneasler not being considered such a great problem for the same reason why Corv is seen as non-viable: Gholdengo existing (+Gliscor for Sneasler).
Will banning Roaring Moon solve anything? No, it'll just change who is the premier sweeper, and cause the same problems. Would Roaring Moon still be a problem in a meta where these secondary problems are treated? Probably not; would still be a great DD sweeper, but would crash into the commonly-run OU staple walls that everyone used to run a few months ago and that now, even though they still fulfill an important role in the meta, feel like they're just a slow way to lose.
Can we say that Roaring Moon is the problem and inherently broken, when we wouldn't be having this conversation in a healthier meta AND we'll have to address said meta either way? Aren't we just blaming the mon for an inherent imbalance in the game as it is today?
We do have defensive answers to Roaring Moon, but the game isn't letting us use them.
I don't think we can reach a conclusive resolution to these questions in the current meta, and its state is so toxic that "being broken in the current meta" is not even an argument, just a description of the entire tier as it is. My point being, if I were to agree that Roaring Moon is broken and should be banned today, I'd have to say the same for virtually all mons in OU right now, which forces me to reconsider my definition of "broken" (and is kind of one of the reasons why I'm mostly down at UU right nowI even peaked! I'm within the top 300! I can see my name from the Ladder Menu!!)
I won't be even trying to get reqs for this suspect, but the only factor that makes me doubt are sets with Taunt having the potential to break past some of the above defensive sets if unexpected, but RM greatly suffers from giving up coverage, and would still make me very slightly lean towards No Ban.
And with that said, I'd like to reiterate my own message from the Metagame Thread: we should ask in the next survey not about single mons, but whether or not people "want tiering action on Hazards", and THEN ask "which mon you think is the bigger problem here". If we're going to keep prioritizing survey results to decide our next move (which I'm not against at all, mind), we'll need to learn that not all questions and ways to ask are the same, and I honestly believe this will allow us to move against the real threat and problem of the meta today.
Thing is, ID or Curse Corv and Garg, Tera Skeledirge and Dondozo are all great answers to the myriad of physical sweepers that appeared as "potentially problematic" in the survey... but no one runs them. Why? Because the meta doesn't let you defensively check ANYTHING under the Hazard rule: you either go full stall with HDB (which is still unpopular, but Gliscor alone has turned it into a viable strategy and I've faced more stall in the last week than in all the months of pre-DLC Gen 9 OU) and fear Knock Off and Psyshock Gholdengo or go ham with your own offense.
The problem with Roaring Moon is that he'll "probably be fine" in a healthy meta, and banning him will not solve the problem at hand. Is he really all that worse than Ogerpon, Kingambit or Sneasler? Mons that essentially do the same and are checked by virtually the same mons? Bonus points to Sneasler not being considered such a great problem for the same reason why Corv is seen as non-viable: Gholdengo existing (+Gliscor for Sneasler).
Will banning Roaring Moon solve anything? No, it'll just change who is the premier sweeper, and cause the same problems. Would Roaring Moon still be a problem in a meta where these secondary problems are treated? Probably not; would still be a great DD sweeper, but would crash into the commonly-run OU staple walls that everyone used to run a few months ago and that now, even though they still fulfill an important role in the meta, feel like they're just a slow way to lose.
Can we say that Roaring Moon is the problem and inherently broken, when we wouldn't be having this conversation in a healthier meta AND we'll have to address said meta either way? Aren't we just blaming the mon for an inherent imbalance in the game as it is today?
We do have defensive answers to Roaring Moon, but the game isn't letting us use them.
I don't think we can reach a conclusive resolution to these questions in the current meta, and its state is so toxic that "being broken in the current meta" is not even an argument, just a description of the entire tier as it is. My point being, if I were to agree that Roaring Moon is broken and should be banned today, I'd have to say the same for virtually all mons in OU right now, which forces me to reconsider my definition of "broken" (and is kind of one of the reasons why I'm mostly down at UU right now
I won't be even trying to get reqs for this suspect, but the only factor that makes me doubt are sets with Taunt having the potential to break past some of the above defensive sets if unexpected, but RM greatly suffers from giving up coverage, and would still make me very slightly lean towards No Ban.
And with that said, I'd like to reiterate my own message from the Metagame Thread: we should ask in the next survey not about single mons, but whether or not people "want tiering action on Hazards", and THEN ask "which mon you think is the bigger problem here". If we're going to keep prioritizing survey results to decide our next move (which I'm not against at all, mind), we'll need to learn that not all questions and ways to ask are the same, and I honestly believe this will allow us to move against the real threat and problem of the meta today.