Metagame SV OU Metagame Discussion v4 [Volcarona Banned]

[Divine Retribution]

Allow 2 Pokémon if there is anything different between them in terms of base game mechanics? Doesn’t seem too arbitrary to me.

Definitely seems more arbitrary than just "no same species, period", and in the end what would we get? Multiple Ogerpons on the same team, which definitely has the potential to be broken, a Galarian bird and a Kantonian bird on the same team, which would see next to no use cases, and multiple Rotom on the same team, which might be nice in like UU or something but would also see next to no use cases in OU.

I agree with this but IIRC don't regular Link Battles have no species clause?

IIRC Species Clause was not enforced in regular link battles in Sw/Sh but I don't own SV so I don't know if that's the case in them. It is usually enforced in tournaments, in the Battle Tower/equivalents, etc.

 

[Heatranator]

i like this idea, i really do. in a perfect world we'd be able to do this. it can theoretically open up some new strategies—one might want more than one form of, say, ogerpon or slowking or even deoxys on their team—while seemingly not inviting anything actually broken because you're usually either weakness-stacking on some level or just running something that isn't that good.

however.

this is in fact not a perfect world, as evidenced by the fact that i don't own a submarine, and so there's a very large and obvious problem that we will inevitably run into: not every distinct form is mechanically different. for example, you'd be able to use zarude and zarude-dada on the same team because they're legally two different forms, even though they're exactly the same mon in every respect aside from one wearing a scarf. this might not seem a problem to some, but it's becoming increasingly common for game freak to give these alternate forms to mons. this gen alone, there are 2 dudunsparce forms, 2 maushold forms, and 4 squawkabilly forms, all of which are almost identical (the squawkabillies get different abilities but they're still close enough to mention), plus some other things i'm sure i forgot to mention. we'd have to open up a discussion on what forms of alcremie even count as "forms" and even if we chose the bare minimum you'd still be able to run a full team of alcremies. even if we decide to not do anything about alcremie, you can run a 6-pikachu team in whatever tier pikachu's in because they keep giving the rat bastard a billion new hats every gen. and these are just the problems we have right now. what happens if next gen comes around and they give identical forms to a good mon, or worse, a great mon? say something that's, like, iron-valiant-tier good drops next gen and there's 4 mechanically identical but cosmetically different forms of it. what do we do then? we can't go picking and choosing what forms "count" under species clause, it's all or nothing. it's better to just keep species clause the way it is; the potential dangers outweigh the potential benefits of reworking it

also the fact that it's an actual in-game rule you can implement

I would finally be able to use the all rotom gimmick team I came up with. I think that is enough reason to do it.

But for real, the things like zarude dada or sinistcha antique could simply become options that you choose in the pokemon's options like you can for minior or gastrodon. I didn't know about maushold, so that could be a problem. The only other problems you could have would be greninja or squakabilly. Greninja you can technically already select battle bond from the normal greninja abilities, so don't know why it even has a different option in teambuilder. As for squakabilly, you could easily just make it so their are two different entries, one for the ones with guts and one for the ones with sheer force.

 

[SpritePony]

Definitely seems more arbitrary than just "no same species, period", and in the end what would we get? Multiple Ogerpons on the same team, which definitely has the potential to be broken, a Galarian bird and a Kantonian bird on the same team, which would see next to no use cases, and multiple Rotom on the same team, which might be nice in like UU or something but would also see next to no use cases in OU.



IIRC Species Clause was not enforced in regular link battles in Sw/Sh but I don't own SV so I don't know if that's the case in them. It is usually enforced in tournaments, in the Battle Tower/equivalents, etc.

As someone who owns SV and semi-regularly plays in regular Lv50/Lv100 Link Battles, I can confirm this. The normal 50/all (flat) and Unrestricted formats allow for:
-Multiple Pokemon of the same name
-Multiple items of the same name
-Any and all Pokemon
-Multiple Pokemon being put to sleep (shout outs to the jerks who want to spam garbage like Spore or Hypnosis like degenerates)
-Evasion, OHKO, Moody, Swagger, and Endless Clauses do not exist in ANY formats.

 

[Xufactor]

I would finally be able to use the all rotom gimmick team I came up with. I think that is enough reason to do it.

But for real, the things like zarude dada or sinistcha antique could simply become options that you choose in the pokemon's options like you can for minior or gastrodon. I didn't know about maushold, so that could be a problem. The only other problems you could have would be greninja or squakabilly. Greninja you can technically already select battle bond from the normal greninja abilities, so don't know why it even has a different option in teambuilder. As for squakabilly, you could easily just make it so their are two different entries, one for the ones with guts and one for the ones with sheer force.

Only same base game mechanics, so a blank slate for a Pokémon before customizing it. Two entries would be different only if they had access to different abilities or other things. I don’t see a fundamental reason why we can’t do this? If multiple Ogerpon are broken that can be addressed with Ogerpon.

 

[Divine Retribution]

I'm definitely open to the idea of modifying Species clause although I can't really say I'd support it right now. I think the current clause is nice and simple and avoids some thorny problems like Ogerpon and other high-tier alternate form Pokemon, and that Rotom and Zapdos and whatnot aren't really significant enough collateral to justify changing it. That said, I think discussion of Species clause is probably better suited for a PR thread than OU meta discussion. I don't think it has much direct relevance to the OU metagame; the only real impact it would have is possibly getting Ogerpon banned. Most other alternate form Pokemon have little to no niche in OU; even Zapdos would be unlikely to show up on the same team due to how drastically different its two forms play making them difficult to fit on the same archetype (and the fact that Gapdos frankly kind of sucks lol).

 

[CobsonYaoi]

While adjusting the species clause to allow different variants of a Pokémon is interesting, there would have to be so many exceptions due to some mons being too similar it would not be worth the hassle.

 

[RaikouLover]

I'm definitely open to the idea of modifying Species clause although I can't really say I'd support it right now.

I was going to make a Slither Wing, Volcarona, Iron Moth team but was thinking I couldn’t. Paradox mons aren’t the same species right?

(All three are the same species to me Idc Idc Idc)

On the topic of sleep clause-
Just ban sleep. All of it. It’s too strong and it is added silly RNG. Most of the other statuses are RNG as well but have realistic counterplay (clear type immunities for burn, para, freeze, and thawing moves / sun / fire baiting with freeze).

 

[Divine Retribution]

I was going to make a Slither Wing, Volcarona, Iron Moth team but was thinking I couldn’t. Paradox mons aren’t the same species right?

Nope, paradoxes are treated as entirely separate Pokemon.

 

[SwaggySammy44]

imo there’s been an overreaction to hypnosis ,its not even consistent to be used on ladder as its essentially a coin flip (good players rather have consistency). I feel like the sleep clause mod in singles has made sleep more balanced as only one mon can be slept at a time, allowing for more counterplay.

I agree that hypnosis darkrai isn't the best set, personally I think NP + 3 attacks is the way to go. The real shit is . Alolatales can set vale, then put the opponent to sleep, giving darkrai a free switch in. If hypnosis misses, at least you still have vale up. This strategy basically throws as many inconveniences at your opponent as possible in order to give darkrai an opportunity to set up without sacrificing coverage.

 

[`ShadowTwo]

[/QUOTE]

I'm definitely open to the idea of modifying Species clause although I can't really say I'd support it right now. I think the current clause is nice and simple and avoids some thorny problems like Ogerpon and other high-tier alternate form Pokemon, and that Rotom and Zapdos and whatnot aren't really significant enough collateral to justify changing it. That said, I think discussion of Species clause is probably better suited for a PR thread than OU meta discussion. I don't think it has much direct relevance to the OU metagame; the only real impact it would have is possibly getting Ogerpon banned. Most other alternate form Pokemon have little to no niche in OU; even Zapdos would be unlikely to show up on the same team due to how drastically different its two forms play making them difficult to fit on the same archetype (and the fact that Gapdos frankly kind of sucks lol).

What is the problem with Ogerpon? I don't think it's that interesting to play several forms of Ogerpon in the same team (counting the fact that Heartflame is Uber).

 

[boo836]

OHKO Clause is not a mod.

Gen 1 is a unique case and has a history separate from smogon, freeze clause would not go over well in any modern gen. Even got removed in gen 3 and 4.


Maybe in other generations like Gen 1 freeze/sleep clause that are vital to make progress or Gen 3 switch order mod to remove an uncompetitive mechanic, but there is no real downside to removing sleep clause mod in Gen 9.


Banning glitches is completely different than modding the game to create impossible gamestates.

1) Sleep Mod could very easily be replaced with an autolose condition that accomplishes the same thing. Creating an autofail for OHKO moves absolutely is modifying gamestates in ways that have never existed on cartridge and no different from the Sleep mod. There is no coherent policy that alters how sleep functions on the basis of fidelity but somehow argues for keeping other autofail clauses. If any action on Sleep Clause Mod is taken, then there necessarily have to be changes to other clauses too, there is simply no justification for making Sleep unique in this case outside of "we don't care about making good policy."
2) Freeze clause being a "unique" case doesn't justify its existence and getting rid of sleep clause mod necessarily requires it to leave too.
3) The downside is that a core mechanic of the game is removed instead of the two controversial abusers that have been complained about since they dropped, because people wanted to go to convoluted lengths to keep them in the metagame. Even some people who want to get rid of sleep think that getting rid of extremely old rulesets and invalidating strategies across several tiers and metagames just to keep Darkrai around in SV OU is a bad way to approach the problem. Arguing to change the function of how the RNG operates from the game after complaining about Sleep Clause being faithless is contradictory.
4) No it isn't, arguing for total fidelity and then turning around and saying "that's too much fidelity" makes absolutely no sense. The simple fact is that competitive Pokemon simulation has never been about entirely replicating cartridge behaviours and anyone arguing that way is kidding themselves, it has always been accepted that the community can and should create rulesets to make games more competitive, and one of those consensus-based rules is that uncompetitive glitches shouldn't be recognised.

 

[Cuddly]

The main purpose of the Species Clause, from what I understand, it to make guess work for the opponent a little bit more fair mid match.
Like for example, say you’re playing AG and your opponent has 2 Calyrex-S with different items and moves. It’s be pretty unfair and easy to get cheap KOs because you could possibly determine 1 Calyrex-S’s set (say specs), but once they bring it back in, it’s hard to tell if Calyrex-S coming in is the same Specs one or is an entirely new one.
You could determine it somewhat more easily on Showdown due to PP showing, percentage based HP, and chat logs, but otherwise it’s pretty much a gamble.
If your opponent is using Calyrex-I and Calyrex-S together, it isn’t so bad either.
Imo it’s be fine and even neat to have Species Clause allowed alternate forms, but I would say that’s very low priority for a change.

 

[Divine Retribution]

1) Sleep Mod could very easily be replaced with an autolose condition that accomplishes the same thing. Creating an autofail for OHKO moves absolutely is modifying gamestates in ways that have never existed on cartridge and no different from the Sleep mod. There is no coherent policy that alters how sleep functions on the basis of fidelity but somehow argues for keeping other autofail clauses. If any action on Sleep Clause Mod is taken, then there necessarily have to be changes to other clauses too, there is simply no justification for making Sleep unique in this case outside of "we don't care about making good policy."

OHKO Clause isn't an "auto-lose condition", you just outright can't bring OHKO moves, and if you do in a cart battle or something, you've invalided or forfeited that battle as far as Smogon tiers are concerned. Sleep is already unique in this case; instead of auto-losing if you sleep 2 Pokemon, the attempt to sleep the 2nd Pokemon is modified to fail.

2) Freeze clause being a "unique" case doesn't justify its existence and getting rid of sleep clause mod necessarily requires it to leave too.

I really don't care about RBY to be honest, but I think a mod that compensates for a game breaking glitch and is absolutely necessary for the tier to be playable is probably a pretty reasonable exception, and as we'll get to with your 4th point, glitches are not the same as regular game mechanics and shouldn't be treated the same.

3) The downside is that a core mechanic of the game is removed instead

Why does a core mechanic being removed actually matter, exactly?

instead of the two controversial abusers that have been complained about since they dropped, because people wanted to go to convoluted lengths to keep them in the metagame. Even some people who want to get rid of sleep think that getting rid of extremely old rulesets and invalidating strategies across several tiers and metagames just to keep Darkrai around in SV OU is a bad way to approach the problem. Arguing to change the function of how the RNG operates from the game after complaining about Sleep Clause being faithless is contradictory.

Personally, I don't really care about Darkrai and I genuinely think there's an argument to be made that Valiant isn't healthy even without Hypnosis. That said, any decision made in the context of SV OU doesn't necessarily retroactively apply to old tiers, unless a broader tiering decision is made or the council members of those given tiers decide to adopt the decision as well. Lastly I'm not sure what your point is with that last bit. Very few people have suggested changing how Sleep works, so that idea has basically no traction. I agree it would be contradictory, but it's not an idea that has any meaningful support.

4) No it isn't, arguing for total fidelity and then turning around and saying "that's too much fidelity" makes absolutely no sense. The simple fact is that competitive Pokemon simulation has never been about entirely replicating cartridge behaviours and anyone arguing that way is kidding themselves, it has always been accepted that the community can and should create rulesets to make games more competitive, and one of those consensus-based rules is that uncompetitive glitches shouldn't be recognised.

Yeah, I think this is non-sense to be honest lol. Glitches are by definition unintentional interactions and therefore not intended game mechanics, so treating unambiguous glitches differently is not a contradiction and makes perfect sense. If the fact that glitches have not been allowed is your only other example of Smogon deviating from cartridge behaviours, then I think that's a point against your argument rather than for it.

 

[YubelVT]

Well now majority of Pokemon that learn any sleep move is now extremely broken if you do that.

So I do agree with you that sleep clause shouldn't be banned, but also most pokemon with a sleep move are stuck with hypnosis or sing. The Bug Type and The Grass Type generally have access to sleep powder but precious few of those can do anything else and putting something to sleep and then switching out isn't enough with nerfed sleep. Spore is even rarer and has only ever been on 2 good pokemon in the entire history of the franchise (I'm not counting smeargle that's cheating and also Smeargle is an objectively terrible pokemon that was only ever good because it learned everything).

Yeah, I think this is non-sense to be honest lol. Glitches are by definition unintentional interactions and therefore not intended game mechanics, so treating unambiguous glitches differently is not a contradiction and makes perfect sense. If the fact that glitches have not been allowed is your only other example of Smogon deviating from cartridge behaviours, then I think that's a point against your argument rather than for it.

RBY Hyper Beam:

2) Freeze clause being a "unique" case doesn't justify its existence and getting rid of sleep clause mod necessarily requires it to leave too.

Freeze Clause justifies its existence in RBY if you take one single look at RBY freeze mechanics. I'm a RBY hater as much as the next guy (has not played RBY(average RBY hater tbh)) but like, removing Sleep Clause Mod in modern gens absolutely does not necessitate removing Freeze Clause in RBY. Banning sleep in this generation would have an impact on the meta, but banning freeze in RBY would both be an extremely large meta change for that gen but would also likely not go over well. You just can't compare the clauses of modern gens and RBY because the context is completely different for each of them.

 

[Ehmcee]

1) Sleep Mod could very easily be replaced with an autolose condition that accomplishes the same thing. Creating an autofail for OHKO moves absolutely is modifying gamestates in ways that have never existed on cartridge and no different from the Sleep mod. There is no coherent policy that alters how sleep functions on the basis of fidelity but somehow argues for keeping other autofail clauses. If any action on Sleep Clause Mod is taken, then there necessarily have to be changes to other clauses too, there is simply no justification for making Sleep unique in this case outside of "we don't care about making good policy."

Equating OHKO Clause and a theoretical change to Sleep Clause are too entirely different things, you cannot argue they are the same thing in good faith. Restrictions like Moody Clause, OHKO Clause, Evasion Clause and Swagger Clause are all builder restrictions, they do not affect the battle itself, but only what you can bring in to the battle.

Smogon OU functions under the assumption that both players have already brought a legal team, the "autofail" for using an OHKO move doesn't exist because it assumes that the player has already brought a legal team. If you want to head into the semantics of possible failstates if we were to port to cartridge, there is technically a disconnect that exists between the two, simply due to showdown's validator:

Showdown Failstate:
- You run out of heathy Pokemon

Cartridge Failstate:
- You run out of healthy Pokemon
- You bring an invalid team

Saying that an altered sleep clause is "the same" is just wrong, because it would add a 2nd Failstate to Showdown rules, as well as a 3rd Failstate to Cartridge rules. It would also actively change your options in game, which any of the other clauses don't actively do.

 

[SittinGamer]

I'm curious about the subject now. Given we know that regional forms are something that are now in like 1/3rd of Pokemon generations, I wonder if it should be looked at to allow alternate regional forms. Not sure how many original mons would want to be run along their Galar, Paldean, or Alolan selves, but it seems pretty distinct from the type of thing the clause is supposed to prevent. It is not something I care enough to clamor for action about, but is it possible to distinctualize regional forms from other form types?

 

[Heatranator]

I'm curious about the subject now. Given we know that regional forms are something that are now in like 1/3rd of Pokemon generations, I wonder if it should be looked at to allow alternate regional forms. Not sure how many original mons would want to be run along their Galar, Paldean, or Alolan selves, but it seems pretty distinct from the type of thing the clause is supposed to prevent. It is not something I care enough to clamor for action about, but is it possible to distinctualize regional forms from other form types?

Things like slowking or ogerpon would love this clause, as there main weakness is that they are outclassed by their other forms. They are not bad mons, slowking is great but is outclassed by its galar counterpart, but you can't use them with the other form. A perfect example of this is in Ubers (I know this is OU discussion, but hear me out), which is Necrozma Dawn wings. On it's own merits, it is not bad at all, in fact, it is pretty good. However, one of the main reasons why it sees so little usage is that if you use it, you can't use Necrozma Dusk mane, which is one of the best mons in the tier. SImply put, it would be like choosing to use a car over a luxury train on a country trip, on it's own merits, the car isn't bad, but compared to the train, you would pick the train 99% of the time.

 

[SittinGamer]

I specifically mention regional variants so things like legendaries with formes that have alt type/bst forms wouldn't be included.

 

[Heatranator]

I specifically mention regional variants so things like legendaries with formes that have alt type/bst forms wouldn't be included.

Something I remembered was that the galarian birds in their previews on pokemon.com they said this.

I know that it probably isn't true, but it makes you think, what is the difference between forms and different mons? Same pokedex entry? What defines a new mon?

 

[SittinGamer]

but it makes you think, what is the difference between forms and different mons? Same pokedex entry? What defines a new mon?

I thought things were simple enough when it was just original or regional form, but then they went and complicated it by having regional forms evolve into their own mon (Purrserker, Obstagoon) and MORE with mons that seem like a regional form in everything but name (Wiglett, Toedscool) but are just altogether new guys.

 

[quacc]

BAN

BAN


DLC2 dropped more than a month ago and, as expected, the vast amount of new and returning mons as well as changing movepools really shook the metagme.

Furthermore stellar type absolutely changed... I joke lol that's the most useless mechanic ever introduced. Just wanted to point out how useless and forgetable this thing is (luckily serp and enam make it have at least 0.1% usage).

Regardless of these changes I think that Gliscor still remains as problematic as it was in DLC1 metagme. Yes, we have offensive things that check it like kyurem but does it really make an impact? In my opinion it really doesn't.

Gliscor was never broken because of it being unkillable, there are several mons that can OKHO it without too many problems. Any special attacking water type or mon that has ice coverage can OKHO it easily, so the fact that new strong attackers like kyurem are in the tier means nothing in practical terms when it comes to the brokenness of gliscor. There could be even 100 viable ice type pokémons in OU but it wouldn't change a thing: you will still most likely have 1/2 mons that can OKHO gliscor in a given team, you will never have 6 things that can deal with it regardless of how many options are avaible in a given meta.

What makes this thing incredibly toxic is its impact on team building and the nasty cores it can create coupled with other pokemons. Its list of perks is very long:

-The passive regenaration granted by its ability is obviously its main thing
-It is essentially immune to knock off
-It is immune to every single hazard except for rocks.
-It has an incredibly vast movepool.
-The interactions it creates with protect are just uncompetitive. The gliscor player doesn't even need to risk anything trying to predict as it can safely regen and scout with protect
-It is not passive by any means. Even with 0 investments its STAB earthquake is forcing out a lot of pokémons, furthermore it has access to knock, toxic and swords dance sets.

All of the above factors contribute to the issue I have with gliscor: this mon stops any kind of progress being made in a given game. Gliscor feels particularly broken this gen because, in my opinion, it has two team mates that make it absolutely toxic:

this mon with gliscor is just a no brainer in my opinion. They complement each other weaknesses almost (if not straight up) PERFECTLY. This thing has regenrator, pivotting, great special bulk and options such future sight, t wave, sludge bomb etc. etc.

Gliscor litrally learns all hazards ever outside of sticky webs and Ghold is simply a great partner to it, not much explanation is need here.

Gliscor is not borken in a vacum, as I said gliscor is not your standard broken mon like urshifu single strike (which in my opinion is a broken mon regardless of the metagame you put it in). In gen 9 meta, nonetheless, I think Gliscor is absolutely uncompetitive and really should be taken out of the game.


I will just ask you this: what makes gliscor easier to handle compared to DLC1? Answer: Absolutely nothhing. This mon is still broken as before because just like before it has partners that can just create unbreakable cores.

Don't let me get started on the impact of gliscor on stall. I will leave you a replay that, in my opinion, clearly displays how broken it is.

Explanation: I am running a wack team that was the result of some nasty cooking. I have two mons that, in theory, should just have a great matchup against stall:

- Sub/wisp/hex/CURSE

- Tacyhon/psyshock/volt switch/FUTURE SIGHT

- support

to keep the previous two healthy.

With this kind of team I really shouldn't struggle as much against stall but, since gliscor and his uncompetitiveness are in the tier, the stall matches are incredibly difficult even with this niche trash ass team I am running. Not only I struggled by I also took huge risks in that game (like switching 25% health crown on slowking, one flamethrower and it was gg).

Gliscor stall ≈ 1900 elo replay: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2037217394

Bonus yapping: ban Kingambit, Roaring moon, Darkrai and gholedngo. I will make more detailed posts about these but for real some actions have to be taken. We can't have a tier with gambit, moon, darkrai, dengo and gliscor free to do the F they want without even a suspect test.

1. https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2037893026-h8fhl8r8h3xubih8vbhbj5m84cdljnapw (Gliscorless stall btw)
2. Tf are you saying about Gliscor, your whole team (crude recreation) gets 6-0d by spikes. In this metagame? Nah bro that's unacceptable. Yes, that is an unaware Clefable, not even magic guard.
3. Your team does not beat stall in the slightest, Gliscor or not. First off, you burned the kitchen down with that Dragapult set because clearly you forgot that you get walled by Blissey. This is one of the worst sets into stall, maybe ever, aside from screens Pult I guess. Second off, here is a list of stall teams from post-shed tail ban and HOME meta that beat your team:
Pre-HOME Hazard Stack Stall by SupaGmoney
HOME Metagame Regen Stall by SupaGmoney
Ditto Stall by WeirdHamster
Cyclizar Stall by SupaGmoney
Mirror Coat Alomomola Stall by Me
Sticky Hold Gastrodon + Copycat Blissey Stall by Knexhawk
Notice a pattern? All of these teams (except for the second one) have spikes. Guess what, your team gets 6-0d by hazards. Nice! This does not break stall even if there is not a Gliscor present.
4. The stall team you played against? C'mon now that isn't even a good stall team (I'm not the only person that says this), if you find that stall team problematic then don't say that your team should have a good matchup against stall. Okay, it had a Gliscor, but that list of stall teams beat your team anyways and they don't have a Gliscor. Your opponent also lost to you, and guess what; the opponent didn't have spikes.
5. Stall is one of the least dominating playstyles right now, you have to be very good to pull it off consistently and it only has a few sound matchups.
6. If your team actually did have a good matchup into stall, skill issue???
7. Out of any of the mons in OU, you picked Gliscor as broken.

You look at the entire list of dragons in OU, cross out maybe Dragonite, maybe Dragapult, and maybe Walking Wake (maybe you think it is broken I won't judge), and you literally could have selected any of those mons to get banned. Those mons are far more menacing than a Gliscor. Why did you jump to Gliscor???

The fact you have never seen or heard of a gliscor coming back from very low health tells me alot about your metagame knowledge and experience.

As someone who has done this, I can tell you that players that allow this to happen are either playing the most passive teams known to mankind or are just ass. I remember doing this during Gliscor suspect, turn 2 I got tera blast iced by Cinderace, but I got my Gliscor back with good doubles and abusing the fact that my opponent did not know how to punish me. Speaking of this, by the way, why did people even run tera blast ice Cinderace then? It didn't OHKO physically defensive Gliscor all the time, by your logic the Gliscor just took absolutely nothing and will be healthy in just a couple of turns, so why use tera blast ice Cinderace? Why use super effective moves on Gliscor if they don't OHKO anyways?

Because good players know how to punish a low HP Gliscor. Your Gliscor is in range of basically everything, is forced to spam protect every single time it switches in especially if rocks are up (16 pp on protect is gonna drain eventually), so even if it does get to full, it cannot spam recovery anymore.

This was also true during DLC1, and it was still banned. Your arguments are just not backed up by how people play the game

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there were quite a number of good players that believed the Gliscor meta was far healthier and competitive than the Zapdos Gking Ting-Lu Cinderace Waterpon meta. Saying that a mon got banned does not mean it is necessarily broken, especially Gliscor; mon didn't have that great numbers in SCL, and if you want to take a deeper look into it, you should check out this post by xavgb here.

That's all I have to say, please don't make Gliscor ban posts when there are far more pressing mons to talk about guys.

 

[Anchor9]

When Species clause is removed. My future team: https://pokepast.es/f080da1cf9dbc6b6

 

[CobsonYaoi]

1) Sleep Mod could very easily be replaced with an autolose condition that accomplishes the same thing. Creating an autofail for OHKO moves absolutely is modifying gamestates in ways that have never existed on cartridge and no different from the Sleep mod. There is no coherent policy that alters how sleep functions on the basis of fidelity but somehow argues for keeping other autofail clauses. If any action on Sleep Clause Mod is taken, then there necessarily have to be changes to other clauses too, there is simply no justification for making Sleep unique in this case outside of "we don't care about making good policy."
2) Freeze clause being a "unique" case doesn't justify its existence and getting rid of sleep clause mod necessarily requires it to leave too.
3) The downside is that a core mechanic of the game is removed instead of the two controversial abusers that have been complained about since they dropped, because people wanted to go to convoluted lengths to keep them in the metagame. Even some people who want to get rid of sleep think that getting rid of extremely old rulesets and invalidating strategies across several tiers and metagames just to keep Darkrai around in SV OU is a bad way to approach the problem. Arguing to change the function of how the RNG operates from the game after complaining about Sleep Clause being faithless is contradictory.
4) No it isn't, arguing for total fidelity and then turning around and saying "that's too much fidelity" makes absolutely no sense. The simple fact is that competitive Pokemon simulation has never been about entirely replicating cartridge behaviours and anyone arguing that way is kidding themselves, it has always been accepted that the community can and should create rulesets to make games more competitive, and one of those consensus-based rules is that uncompetitive glitches shouldn't be recognised.

Y'all will say ANYTHING to keep sleep clause in place holy shit.
Also I’ve been looking through the comment section of Blunder’s video and I’ve been seeing shit like “Ban Darkrai, Iron Valiant, and Alolan Ninetales instead.” I don’t get why people are so keen on keeping a mechanic already neutered by a mod.

 

[YubelVT]

When Species clause is removed. My future team: https://pokepast.es/f080da1cf9dbc6b6

how do you contend with the mirror match

 

[senorlopez]