Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion, Part II [CLOSED FOR DLC]

[L27]

Prior Terastallization Tiering Discussion | Initial Terastallization Suspect Test

Terastallization remained fully legal in SV OU after a suspect early this generation; this suspect was among the most popular and close suspects of all time, making Terastallization a recurring tiering topic. This thread will be used to discuss Terastallization's tiering as a second suspect becomes a possibility. Please note that this is not a guarantee at the moment, but rather an acknowledgement that further discussion is necessary and a suspect is possible.

We promised to look back into Terastallization after the release of Pokemon HOME regardless of the first suspect's verdict prior. To follow suit, in our second tiering survey since the drop of HOME, we asked our playerbase if they believed any tiering action was needed. Their response was the following:

Overall, 950 players believed tiering action is necessary while 574 players believed tiering action is not necessary. However, we tend to pay the most attention to the "qualified" demographic, which consists of players who perform well on the ladder, qualify for recent suspect requirements, and/or participate in official tournaments or the final rounds of circuit tournaments. Of 136 qualified players who responded, 88 supported action on Terastallization while 48 opposed action -- this is approximately 65% support.

This data is absolutely not binding as Google Forms are an unofficial way of collecting data, the metagame continues to evolve, and the question was purposefully made vague to potentially segue into a larger discussion, such as this one. However, we do believe this data is probable cause enough to at least open a topic on the matter for the time being without publicly committing to anything yet.

Here are some things to discuss and parameters for discussion:

• Fringe options such as a singular Terastallization captain and only allowing STAB Terastallization types did not receive enough support last time and nothing has changed to make them worthy of discussing more this time. They are off the table as well as anything else that was pitched initially that never gained any traction.
• Banning Terastallization outright is an option that can be discussed.
  • Banning of a generation's core mechanic is something that should be taken very seriously and require clear evidence, but it is absolutely not being dismissed.
• Restricting Terastallization via disclosing Terastallization types at Team Preview, which is a component of the official formats, is an option that can be discussed.
  • We are aware that many people doubt the impact this may have on mitigating any issues and people who are both in favor of or opposed to this option are encouraged to share their point-of-view.
• The status quo of keeping Terastallization fully legal and unrestricted is an option that can be discussed.
• Tera Blast is a move that has led directly to the bans of Volcarona, Regieleki, and Espathra; it is not deemed overly problematic in the current format, but people can discuss it if they deem it worthwhile to.
• We are not interested in using the National Dex suspect test(s) as a reference point at this time.
• People are free to discuss if they think a suspect should occur, what format the suspect should be if it is to be held, and anything else that they find appropriate within reason. Use your best judgement as anything out of line may be subject to deletion or infraction.

Please share your thoughts on Terastallization and the best way to proceed in this thread. Thank you.

I think for now we should lay low until the DLC arrives.
Not only will we see the introduction of brand new Tera abusers, but we could also see something called “Tera forms”
We don’t know what these are, or even if they really exist, but I don’t doubt that they will expand on the Tera gimmick in some way.
At this time, I wouldn’t be against a team preview restriction, but I would prefer for us to wait and see what becomes of the actual mechanic in the following months

 

[Finchinator]

Would re-tests be a thing they’re interested in?

If something happens to tera, they would be considered on Pokemon, yes.

 

[Ehmcee]

Not only will we see the introduction of brand new Tera abusers, but we could also see something called “Tera forms”

Unconfirmed speculative mechanics should have no bearing on current tiering policy

 

[ianlazerbeem]

This does nothing to address the issue at hand. While I don't speak for everyone I do think that the vast majority have settled into some preferred ranking of no action, full ban, Tera preview, or Tera Blast ban.

there will be no ranking. Tera blast ban and preview, or BOTH, are all great options. The best way is yes/No votes on both restrictions + full ban all on one ballot. No ranked choices, no 60% "should we do anything" (even though it would be yes based on the poll)

I think for now we should lay low until the DLC arrives.
Not only will we see the introduction of brand new Tera abusers, but we could also see something called “Tera forms”
We don’t know what these are, or even if they really exist, but I don’t doubt that they will expand on the Tera gimmick in some way.
At this time, I wouldn’t be against a team preview restriction, but I would prefer for us to wait and see what becomes of the actual mechanic in the following months

This is a common refrain from the no restriction crowd, "now is not the time!" We've been hearing "home could come at any moment, we can't touch Tera now!" for 7 months, now it's been here for 2 months and "the DLC is on the way!" You and I both know you people will pivot to "Shh, no no no, DLC 2 is coming, we have to wait and see what changes" the moment DLC 1 comes out. When will be the time? We're playing the game, why not now? This is a discussion silencing tactic by the 30 percent.

 

[DaddyBuzzwole]

I think for now we should lay low until the DLC arrives.
Not only will we see the introduction of brand new Tera abusers, but we could also see something called “Tera forms”
We don’t know what these are, or even if they really exist, but I don’t doubt that they will expand on the Tera gimmick in some way.

if we don't know whether they really exist, why are you bringing this up at all? if we do a suspect test, we should work with what we have, what exists right here and right now, to discern what to do about tera. there's no telling when the dlc will come out, especially given how poorly the home rollout was done. hell, we can't even be 100% certain that dlc will come at all—what if, for example, some other entity purchases the pokemon ip and scraps the dlc plans, or an economic downturn forces game freak to lay off most of its employees? (unlikely and possibly ridiculous, sure, but if i went back to 2014 and told you literally any news item from any point after 2014, you'd say that was unlikely and ridiculous too.) even in the most likely outcome by far (the dlc comes out this fall as planned), we still have a month and a half at least to do things.

 

[Rootb]

there will be no ranking. Tera blast ban and preview, or BOTH, are all great options. The best way is yes/No votes on both restrictions + full ban all on one ballot. No ranked choices, no 60% "should we do anything" (even though it would be yes based on the poll)




This is a common refrain from the no restriction crowd, "now is not the time!" We've been hearing "home could come at any moment, we can't touch Tera now!" for 7 months, now it's been here for 2 months and "the DLC is on the way!" You and I both know you people will pivot to "Shh, no no no, DLC 2 is coming, we have to wait and see what changes" the moment DLC 1 comes out. When will be the time? We're playing the game, why not now? This is a discussion silencing tactic by the 30 percent.

Alright, hold on. The reason why we didn't get a second Tera test pre-home isn't because "now is not the time". It's because we already tried suspecting it once in the pre-home environment. That narrow defeat wouldn't have caused a full ban to come into effect, either - it would have put in Tera Preview.

And, I mean, preview sounded like a fine idea back then, I'd still prefer it to a full ban now. But lately, a Tera Blast ban, or even just leaving the damn mechanic alone, have both seemed to be gaining steam, because as it turns out? The signal-to-noise ratio of tera haters, whether it be on Smogon, Showdown, or elsewhere, is atrocious.

Seriously, no matter where you go, it feels like the end times. Like Dynamax has come back to steal our children, and our lemons besides! But every time you poll the community, the response to Tera (aside from some very heavy-handed protest votes) is nowhere near as harsh as you'd expect. Turns out that people actually do like the mechanic!

Until someone comes up with an idea that looks like it has even a reasonable shot at 60%, it really would be a waste of time to use a suspect slot on a second go at Tera.

 

[Link loyan]

If terastalization needs psudo-game-mod nerfs to remain in the tier, it should just be banned - and I say this as one of the pro-tera voices.

I dont understand what you mean with pseudo game mod, is it a game mod that you can only sleep one opp? Is it a game mod that you cant use volcarona or Annihilape? in a way it is, and thats because we as the community make rules so that we can play the game as competetively as possible, the rule that you can only tera a pokemon that had beast ball in its item slot at the start of the match would be similar to the rule, that for mega evolving youd need a mega stone or for z-moving you needed the z-crystal
the only difference is that one of these restrictions would have to be done by us but saying we cant do that because thats not how cartridge is is just like saying "we cant ban OHKO moves because you can use them on cart or you cant ban evasion moves because cart, it wouldnt be the most elegant version of a nerf (imo the other ones wouldnt be as well and if we could give pokemon terashards it would actually be quite elegant imo) but it would be better than banning something just to realize that it didnt have any effect
It would be a lot like z-moves and megas in the regard that we can keep the mechanic but it is restricted enough that even though it is a big part of the game, the win or loss of the players isnt dependant on the mechanic in 90% of the game

 

[Link loyan]

Many have suggested this, not only is it bad because it is a pseudo game mod (yes it can technically be considered a handshake,) but it is COMPLETELY arbitrary. Has it been demonstrated that the PROBLEM with Tera directly relates to the ability to hold an item? Yes holding an item objectively makes the mechanic better than not holding an item, but does it have anything to do with the fact that any Pokémon can blow up its check and be rendered nigh uncounterable, and that this happens once per battle so you need to constantly be cognizant of it? Does it have anything to do with the fact that not being able to factor in all 700 possible Tera combinations (rough approximation based on number of Pokémon OU by usage x number of types, yes I am aware some are more viable than others) making perfectly competent teams lose instantly in the builder & making this meta game extremely matchup reliant? I can't count the number of times a Tera type I've no answer to pops up & gets a free turn to boost and despite having 4+ healthy mons I have to say "well there's absolutely nothing I can do about that." Does ANY of that have to do with an item? Tera Blast bans and Preview directly address these issues.

Actually yes, for most pokemon the difference is very much the item they can hold (as i already mentioned in a post before), sure you can still use a great pokemon and tera and lure a threat of the opponent but thats more predictable if you know "okay the IVal has booster so it cant be tera, however the enam changed moves and took rocks dmg, so it probably is tera"
also what are biggest tera abusers?

In that case, you successfully managed to position your sweeper in a spot where they can do a lot of damage, that has always been one of the actual skillfull parts of pokemon but you actually needed to do something for that to happen, it wasnt just "let me use my boots tera ground volc to do volc stuff better than ever" or especially "let me use my lorb tera ground volc to even kill the few checks to my boots set", it was getting your hazardremoval in to remove the hazards while making sure they dont get up again, the opponent doesnt use the turn to set up their val (which could be any kind of booster set with taunt, encore or sd liquidation or even something like a tera sub or tera set to make sure volc doesnt switch in at all)
the pokemon you said didnt have to be volc, the same could happen with a baxcalibur with dd or sd, they could freely rely on their item to carry them to the point where they could tera because they just teraed to ground (or dragon) to setup through their hazardweaknesses because they used boots, same for val: it uses a few sets with booster and a tera type (ive used a few tera ghosts with sub cm) which make it enormously hard to revenge it since it is basically as fast as eleki while being able to completely ignore espeed (and quick attack, fake out, mach punch and vacuum wave), play for mindgames with sucker punch and not get destroyed by bullet punch, ive seen a lot of other sets though


other tera users:

garg without lefties is no garg anymore is a saying i heard a lot and it is true in a way, garg really wants its passive recovery on the switches it forces

DNite: really wants its boots or its cb, otherwise it isnt as long lived and threatening as before

Ting lu: one of quite a few defensive tera users but seriously, ting lu without lefties is like three times as bad as garg without lefties in comparison to with them

kingambit: yeah it isnt hit AS badly, still it really enjoyed lefties for switching in on ghost or dragon moves repeatedly, also air balloon really helped the teams it was on and without black glasses the insane calc against dozo isnt AS insane anymore

Pult: less cheesy tera fighting pults with lorb anyymore, without the powerboost it really just doesnt hit as hard anymore

Enam: i used it as an example a lot, tera ground enam is just a really good teratype on it, it would be worse if it couldnt be boots/specs/scarf on those sets but it would still be great no matter the set

samurott: Oh no, i cant get free spikes while making sure the opponent cant get their spin on me, the metagame will break *irony out* it really wants one of its items but i can see tera ghost be more important on ho or very offensive teams in particular, even though they really want their sash so idk

Sneasler: yeah please stop this tera flying stuff, i dont like that personally as i feel its one of those "predict a turn to win or lose the game" sometimes which just isnt competetive pokemon to me

cresselia: is anyone sad they cant fight opponents with tera poison lefties cress anymore? if so sorry, i cant relate



that should be the most tera users, i cant say all of ou for obvious reasons but i feel like many of these pokemon get enabled by being able to use tera plus item so much that having to choose might actually be difficult and many of these could have good sets on each spectrum, which makes the metagame more interesting, while calming the powercreep down a lot and making balanced teams (the sign of a balanced metagame) better and more popular, sure a lot of the pokemon i didnt list love to use their defensive tera to check something but thats such a weird mechanic as well: "my only way to break through amoonguss is my cinderace, every time i get my cinderace in on their specs gholdengo i have to uturn or double out now though since if i pyro ball and they stay and tera, i lose to amoonguss"
that was only an example to everyone yelling at me on how bad that team is but the same can be said offensively (i brough the amoonguss on sub val now so often that everyone knows it, same goes for a tera flying/fire gambit with tera blast, tera flying sneas, tera ice sandy (i dont think thats too common atm but still it does run around sometimes) and so on, and that was only for one defensive pokemon, if you have a big problem against pokemon x on the opposing side and you usually could use pokemon y to check both x and another one of the opponent, lets call it z, you cant use y to check z unless you want to get killed by something, be it stab tera or some different tera and a stronger move/tera blast and have x sweep you

that was a weird walk through my problem with tera, in the end i just feel like tera is a permanent but a bit weaker zmove with defensive boosting capabilities, a bit like how i see megas, tera just sits awkwardly between those two but springs to the eye due to its nonreliance on an item



Ill just say that it can very well depend on your team and that is something tera without item is capable of: supporting your team without being overwhelming for the opponent

you lose to bax and have a hard time against zama? use tera fairy dozo and eeven without helmet/lefties it helps your team immensly due to not instalosing
you really hate losing to amoonguss? use tera flying tera blast lando or tera psychic cm valiant, might not sweep outright but you are better versed against this pokemon that the rest of your team hates facing

(the second example actually is a good example of a lureset imo, it has a big opportunitycost but helps your team in the way that youcan use your otherwise good team due to having a good chance to just beat the one pokemon you struggle with)

 

[Link loyan]

That's why the two most popular solutions are Tera Blast Ban and Tera Preview, because you can do that during a local match (You have to take items out though, but is not unreasonable) and the other is just a "gentleman's clause" of asking to not use X move. That's not convoluted, although the former isn't feasible on online.

And a gentlemans clause to only tera pokemon who did use a very special item in the beginning of the game isnt possible because? Its basically the same as the clause to not use tera blast imo

 

[ianlazerbeem]

I dont understand what you mean with pseudo game mod, is it a game mod that you can only sleep one opp? Is it a game mod that you cant use volcarona or Annihilape? in a way it is, and thats because we as the community make rules so that we can play the game as competetively as possible, the rule that you can only tera a pokemon that had beast ball in its item slot at the start of the match would be similar to the rule, that for mega evolving youd need a mega stone or for z-moving you needed the z-crystal
the only difference is that one of these restrictions would have to be done by us but saying we cant do that because thats not how cartridge is is just like saying "we cant ban OHKO moves because you can use them on cart or you cant ban evasion moves because cart, it wouldnt be the most elegant version of a nerf (imo the other ones wouldnt be as well and if we could give pokemon terashards it would actually be quite elegant imo) but it would be better than banning something just to realize that it didnt have any effect
It would be a lot like z-moves and megas in the regard that we can keep the mechanic but it is restricted enough that even though it is a big part of the game, the win or loss of the players isnt dependant on the mechanic in 90% of the game

The difference is the intention is to change how a mechanic works rather than remove an unbalanced part of a tier. Also, how is holding an item remotely related to the issues of Tera? It's funny you say "banning something just to realize it wouldn't have any affect" and suggest something guaranteed to be less impactful than Tera preview or TB ban, our real options. This changing of mechanics would be unnecessary, and in fact is by another name the "Tera captain" suggestion the council has directly said would not happen. There will be a Tera blast ban, a Tera preview, or a full ban, or there will be nothing. Those are our choices.

And a gentlemans clause to only tera pokemon who did use a very special item in the beginning of the game isnt possible because? Its basically the same as the clause to not use tera blast imo

Changing a mechanic to center it around an item that it does not center around for an arbitrary "nerf" is not the same as a ban because bans don't change mechanics. Why don't we keep Kingambit in the tier but it can only hold Lagging Tail and only Tera into Bug? It's a "gentleman's agreement!" And sleep clause is not relevant to the equation; sleep clause has been a part of competitve Pokémon since game freak put it in stadium 20 years ago. Saying "hey I know Tera's problems have nothing to do with items, but what if you had to choose what Pokémon you tera in the team builder and they couldn't hold an item" is not remotely comparable. That "very special item" DOES NOT EXIST and you are not removing something from the game, you are creating something new and adding it. It's a mod. It's also not possible because the council said it's not happening in the very first post of this thread, and they are the ones who decide what we vote on.

by the way you shouldn't post 3 times in a row. If you post your comment but want to address someone or something else before someone else replies, edit your comment

 

[Furret4ssb]

I dont understand what you mean with pseudo game mod, is it a game mod that you can only sleep one opp?

yes it is a mod

And a gentlemans clause to only tera pokemon who did use a very special item in the beginning of the game isnt possible because? Its basically the same as the clause to not use tera blast imo

thats known as a complex ban

 

[Empress Mobile]

there will be no ranking. Tera blast ban and preview, or BOTH, are all great options. The best way is yes/No votes on both restrictions + full ban all on one ballot. No ranked choices, no 60% "should we do anything" (even though it would be yes based on the poll)

I wasn't referring to a ranked vote, just to people's ranked preferences. But since you mentioned it, are you basing this on something that was said, or is this just speculation/your opinion?

 

[ianlazerbeem]

I wasn't referring to a ranked vote, just to people's ranked preferences. But since you mentioned it, are you basing this on something that was said, or is this just speculation/your opinion?

It is objectively the best way to handle this vote given that multiple legitimate options that are not mutually exclusive are on the table.

 

[Empress Mobile]

It is objectively the best way to handle this vote given that multiple legitimate options that are not mutually exclusive are on the table.

Not what "objective" means. That's just your opinion. And while I see merit in it, I don't agree with it. I'm not personally a fan of the possibility of implementing both restrictions simultaneously.

 

[Ast0rga]

Rose are red
Violets are blue
freedom of speech is worthless
submit your will to tera preview

 

[Froctopus]

Not this again...

Ranked voting seems to throw everyone into a fit. just have people vote on what options they want to see. It should be a multiple choice of the following:

Do you support action on Tera
Yes
No

If action were to be held on tera, what would you like to see happen to it (multiple choices ok)
Full Ban
Tera Preview
Ban Tera Blast
Tera Orb item restriction
Any other option that could show up
Other (Write in)

This way every eligible person shows their preferred action, and whatever option is picked the most wins.
That second question is avoided if No is more popular than Yes. It is honestly quite as simple as this.

 

[ianlazerbeem]

Not this again...

Ranked voting seems to throw everyone into a fit. just have people vote on what options they want to see. It should be a multiple choice of the following:

Do you support action on Tera
Yes
No

If action were to be held on tera, what would you like to see happen to it (multiple choices ok)
Full Ban
Tera Preview
Ban Tera Blast
Tera Orb item restriction
Any other option that could show up
Other (Write in)

This way every eligible person shows their preferred action, and whatever option is picked the most wins.
That second question is avoided if No is more popular than Yes. It is honestly quite as simple as this.

Big mistake offering one question that can completely invalidate the entire rest of the vote if it doesn't get a supermajority, that's the same thing that went wrong with the first vote. Voting "no" on any restriction serves as your "no action" option. If any action fails to get a supermajority then no action is taken. No need to add a "should anything be done" question.

Should Tera Blast Be Banned? Yes/No
Should Tera Types Be Shown at Team Preview? Yes/No
Should Tera be fully banned? Yes/No
(not going to validate the idea of creating a new item for Tera to center around)

Simple as that. If you are part of the roughly 30% that believes Tera should see no action, vote "no" on all these. "Whatever option gets the most votes wins" is a bad way to structure the vote because the 2 real restrictions you think should be combined into one question are both possible, not mutually exclusive, and if 60% of players think they should both happen, they should both happen, rather than only one happening. We're at the point where people's viewpoints have evolved beyond "something should be done" to "here's what I would like to see done" so a generic "should something be done" will not address people's preferences. Last vote we saw people who believed Preview would improve the game vote no action because they thought full ban would win and they didn't want to see that. Multiple yes/No questions removes "strategic voting" like this and gives voters the freedom to vote on restrictions they would or would not like to see. A 60% "should any action, from full ban to minor changes, be done" does not allow for people to vote with their conscience. The full ban and pro-Tera-with-restriction camps are very different and should not be lumped into just one vote. This structure you're proposing unfairly favors the 30 Percent.

Not what "objective" means. That's just your opinion. And while I see merit in it, I don't agree with it. I'm not personally a fan of the possibility of implementing both restrictions simultaneously.

Why not? They are not mutually exclusive. On principle or due to the impacts? You're saying that if 60% of qualified voters believe Tera Blast should be banned, and 60% of qualified voters want to see Tera Preview, only one should happen, because you "aren't a fan" of both happening at once? Even if 60% of the voters think that both would improve the game?

 

[Rootb]

Why not? They are not mutually exclusive. On principle or due to the impacts? You're saying that if 60% of qualified voters believe Tera Blast should be banned, and 60% of qualified voters want to see Tera Preview, only one should happen, because you "aren't a fan" of both happening at once? Even if 60% of the voters think that both would improve the game?

Because you can't isolate why people are voting yes for specific options, unless you encourage them to leave options they absolutely don't want off of the rankings entirely. And if you do that, it's likely that you won't get to 60% for anything.

Someone might be willing to settle for Tera Preview, prefer no restriction, and actively want a Tera Blast ban. If that's the case, why would you assume they actually meant they wanted both? It's a good way to make even fewer people happier.. while also failing to successfully isolate a problematic element.

A rare lose-lose-lose situation.

 

[Ehmcee]

Ranked Voting in terms of options is still a good idea, but keeping the dichotomy of supporting action and then your preferred option doesn't really work. There are many people that would rather Tera Preview, No Action, then Full Ban.

Ranked Voting should simply include the options available, with their preferred options in order.
As it comes to combination options (stuff like preview + tera blast ban), they should both be included on the same option, so we can get a good idea of the amount of people that want it (probably not a lot).

A final slate should prob look something like this:

Full Ban
No Ban
Tera Preview
Tera Blast Ban
Tera Preview + Tera Blast Ban
(Any other options that arise)

 

[Alternator]

Given that banning Tera Blast had less pushback than Tera Preview on the Policy thread, I suggest the following:

1) Do you want to ban Tera Blast?

2) If Tera Blast is banned, do you want to implement Tera Preview?
2a) If Tera Blast is not banned, do you want to implement Tera Preview?

3) Do you want to ban the Terastal mechanic?

If a full ban reaches 60%, implement the ban; otherwise, implement any restrictions that passed. If nothing reaches 60%, then no action is taken.

 

[Eelstartega]

The difference is the intention is to change how a mechanic works rather than remove an unbalanced part of a tier. Also, how is holding an item remotely related to the issues of Tera? It's funny you say "banning something just to realize it wouldn't have any affect" and suggest something guaranteed to be less impactful than Tera preview or TB ban, our real options. This changing of mechanics would be unnecessary, and in fact is by another name the "Tera captain" suggestion the council has directly said would not happen. There will be a Tera blast ban, a Tera preview, or a full ban, or there will be nothing. Those are our choices.


Changing a mechanic to center it around an item that it does not center around for an arbitrary "nerf" is not the same as a ban because bans don't change mechanics. Why don't we keep Kingambit in the tier but it can only hold Lagging Tail and only Tera into Bug? It's a "gentleman's agreement!" And sleep clause is not relevant to the equation; sleep clause has been a part of competitve Pokémon since game freak put it in stadium 20 years ago. Saying "hey I know Tera's problems have nothing to do with items, but what if you had to choose what Pokémon you tera in the team builder and they couldn't hold an item" is not remotely comparable. That "very special item" DOES NOT EXIST and you are not removing something from the game, you are creating something new and adding it. It's a mod. It's also not possible because the council said it's not happening in the very first post of this thread, and they are the ones who decide what we vote on.

by the way you shouldn't post 3 times in a row. If you post your comment but want to address someone or something else before someone else replies, edit your comment

Not to mention it can create all sorts of prolems due to how it forces a specific tera user. That idea lost steam quite fast for a simple reason and is because it created more problems than what it solved. A big point in favor of tera is that you can answer better certain structures with certain tera user than others.

 

[Ehmcee]

Given that banning Tera Blast had less pushback than Tera Preview on the Policy thread, I suggest the following:



If a full ban reaches 60%, implement the ban; otherwise, implement any restrictions that passed. If nothing reaches 60%, then no action is taken.

Why should a full ban take priority over restrictions? I don't see a reason to not just do a simple ranked choice vote here.

There's no reason that a full ban with 62% of the vote should take priority over a Tera Preview option with 67% of the vote (for example)

 

[Empress Mobile]

Why not? They are not mutually exclusive. On principle or due to the impacts? You're saying that if 60% of qualified voters believe Tera Blast should be banned, and 60% of qualified voters want to see Tera Preview, only one should happen, because you "aren't a fan" of both happening at once? Even if 60% of the voters think that both would improve the game?

It's just my opinion. I think that having the double barreled question might influence how people vote. So no, that's not remotely what I'm saying, at all. Not the slightest clue where you got that from. If we move forward with simple yes/no and both receive clear majorities then obviously we should implement both. I'm saying I don't think we should do it that way. Implementing one a time allows us to isolate the problematic issue, IF it's possible to do so.

 

[ianlazerbeem]

It's just my opinion. I think that having the double barreled question might influence how people vote. So no, that's not remotely what I'm saying, at all. Not the slightest clue where you got that from. If we move forward with simple yes/no and both receive clear majorities then obviously we should implement both. I'm saying I don't think we should do it that way. Implementing one a time allows us to isolate the problematic issue, IF it's possible to do so.

I would think having a yes/no "should something happen to Tera" question that could lead to either a full ban or a minor change would influence how people vote a lot more. In fact, I know it would, because we saw it happen in the last suspect. We would have had preview for months now if people didn't avoid voting "yes" on action because they were worried about a full ban even though they supported preview. And given that the way this vote was structured, eg letting people who support no action at all decide an action (which was obviously going to be the least impactful one) the first Tera suspect was not a complete exploration of whether Tera should be banned or not. That's why the matter was not settled after that first suspect test, even though HOME turned out to still been a while away.

Tera has no one "problematic issue" because it's used by many different threats for different purposes. There will be no single one-size-fits-all restriction that solves the Tera problem.

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of tiering action. It's not to identify problems, it's to solve them. Suspect TESTS (hence the name) exist to identity problems. Bans, or in the case of Tera restrictions, exist to SOLVE them. In theory everyone voting in the suspect would be doing so because they've identified what they believe the problem is (or lack thereof,) not to test restrictions out and see what happens. And in that vein...

Alright, hold on. The reason why we didn't get a second Tera test pre-home isn't because "now is not the time". It's because we already tried suspecting it once in the pre-home environment. That narrow defeat wouldn't have caused a full ban to come into effect, either - it would have put in Tera Preview.

And, I mean, preview sounded like a fine idea back then, I'd still prefer it to a full ban now. But lately, a Tera Blast ban, or even just leaving the damn mechanic alone, have both seemed to be gaining steam, because as it turns out? The signal-to-noise ratio of tera haters, whether it be on Smogon, Showdown, or elsewhere, is atrocious.

Seriously, no matter where you go, it feels like the end times. Like Dynamax has come back to steal our children, and our lemons besides! But every time you poll the community, the response to Tera (aside from some very heavy-handed protest votes) is nowhere near as harsh as you'd expect. Turns out that people actually do like the mechanic!

Until someone comes up with an idea that looks like it has even a reasonable shot at 60%, it really would be a waste of time to use a suspect slot on a second go at Tera.

This is measurably untrue? 62% of the general playerbase and 65% of the qualified playerbase voted in the last tiering survey that they believed Tera should see tiering action. I know that not everyone who plays does the surveys but you said "no matter where you go" and "every time you poll the community" but I'm just wondering why "Smogon" and "the most recent time" are exempt from that?

If separate yes/No questions on every single restriction leads to none of them getting 60% after 2+ weeks of testing, that's not a "waste of a suspect" that's a matter settled. Really don't understand the "waste of a suspect" sentiment when a suspect test is just that, a test. A lot of people look at tests as just a vehicle for banning rather than a science experiment. That's why the above comment is wrong too, because it views the ban itself as the experiment rather than the test.

I also want to say, supporting Tera restrictions often is born out of love for the mechanic, because a lot of us want to see it be more balanced, eg more acceptable in a competitive environment, without getting rid of it completely. Supports restrictions does not automatically mean hates Tera.

Why should a full ban take priority over restrictions? I don't see a reason to not just do a simple ranked choice vote here.

There's no reason that a full ban with 62% of the vote should take priority over a Tera Preview option with 67% of the vote (for example)

The challenge with ranked choice voting is Tera Blast Ban and Team Preview are not mutually exclusive, and many people, me included, think the best path forward, addressing all concerns including that both bans don't do enough individually, would be to implement both.

A full ban should "take priority over" (which is to say, require the same vote threshold as) restrictions because it's much more severe and demonstrably much less popular. Given the way public opinion has been expressed in this thread, the thread about Tera with the people better at the game than us, and in the tiering surveys which have vote numbers in them, a full ban is extremely unlikely given the volume of people who will never support any action against Tera and those who want to see it changed and not removed. If full ban actually gets 60% that would be a signal that it's become clear something is very very wrong with Tera and it definitely needs to go.

 

[Rootb]

This is measurably untrue? 62% of the general playerbase and 65% of the qualified playerbase voted in the last tiering survey that they believed Tera should see tiering action. I know that not everyone who plays does the surveys but you said "no matter where you go" and "every time you poll the community" but I'm just wondering why "Smogon" and "the most recent time" are exempt from that?

If separate yes/No questions on every single restriction leads to none of them getting 60% after 2+ weeks of testing, that's not a "waste of a suspect" that's a matter settled. Really don't understand the "waste of a suspect" sentiment when a suspect test is just that, a test. A lot of people look at tests as just a vehicle for banning rather than a science experiment. That's why the above comment is wrong too, because it views the ban itself as the experiment rather than the test.

I also want to say, supporting Tera restrictions often is born out of love for the mechanic, because a lot of us want to see it be more balanced, eg more acceptable in a competitive environment, without getting rid of it completely. Supports restrictions does not automatically mean hates Tera.

I phrased it the way I did because it's true. The way the question was posed was intentionally super vague, to combine groups of voters who absolutely do not agree with each other as a "yes" vote to prove cause (e: to cast the widest possible net for action). If you held a vote immediately after the tiering survey showed that 60% threshold, it would have broken down into either three or four camps, and it's likely that none of them would have even reached a simple majority, let alone a super one.

And, frankly, a full ban on Tera should have been settled the first time -- it didn't even hit 25% in the initial vote. The discussion during the rest of pre-HOME, and even now, should have been centered on what restrictions make the most sense for an eventual retest, not "when will we get another chance to ban Tera?".

That's why it'd be a waste of a suspect. Not because Tera wouldn't benefit from one, but because a second failure would do absolutely nothing to dissuade people from blaming Tera for the format's woes, all while ignoring the reality that a full ban was never popular to begin with. I'd love to see some kind of restriction seriously tried for, but if we're going to take a real swing?

Well, we'd better not miss.

e: editing for clarity before bed