Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I honestly dont know why the mechanic shouldnt be banned. All it does is turn matchups into a guessing game (unless your opponent makes it more than obvious what terra type they have), I dont see a single benefit of keeping terra in the OU meta game.

you even keep your old stabs while changing your type,this is screaming to be banned
 
I think the main problem with Terastal is just how volatile the mechanic is. Terastal is tantalizingly within the realm of manageability...on paper.

In practice, you've got six Pokemon to a team that can each be running one of several different Tera Types that could significantly increase their power level or upend their matchup spread on a dime. Possibly both. No, not every Pokemon is gonna use all 18 Tera types, but nearly every Pokemon's got their STABs and at least a couple defensive/extra STAB options that can each drastically change how you deal with them. This is on top of the usual variance that comes with EV Spreads, Items and Moves.

It's really not a matter of information; Pokemon is, in some part, a game of gleaning information out of your opponent. It's the fact that this particular bit of information, known or not, adds a whole other dimension to trying to play around an opponent. Even if you added Tera Types to Team Preview and could even reasonably guess which of your opponent's Pokemon was gonna style it up, you still have to account for the fact that your opponent can either makeshift-Adaptability their way through you or possibly turn off your checks by changing their type altogether.

Terastal might not be the obvious stupid power buff of Dynamax, but they're both broken in similar ways. Both of them make the game incredibly volatile and prone to massive swings. Dynamax's swings were bigger, but Terastal's are more pervasive and flexible. In either case, the game devolves into people either using the most broken Hyper Offense they can think of to abuse the mechanic (until those things get punted upstairs and the next-best-things step up) or the few strictly defensive Pokemon that can somewhat consistently weather the storm.

I realize fun is subjective, but I don't see how a meta with a mechanic so powerful it encourages such binary play is any more fun than a meta where it's not there and a wider range of strategies can potentially take root. Is Terastal emblematic of the generation? Sure, maybe in VGCs where TPCi actually gives something resembling a fuck about the competitive scene. The developers already don't care what we're doing; they wouldn't have mandated the stupid 20 minute timer or removed 100-All battles if they did. So why are some players tethering themselves to the notion that we should care about preserving what the developers did to the game? We're here to inject order into chaos, essentially, not sit amongst the chaos and say "Welp, that's just how it is."

I know it's a generational gimmick and we need to humour the idea of keeping it around in some capacity anyway, but I'd just get it over with and ban the mechanic. It's too chaotic for its own good.
 
With all this consideration of options in between full ban and no ban, it does seem like the given options aren't sufficient. The vast majority of people here seem to at least agree that banning Tera Blast doesn't do much of anything and the only STAB tera option does more harm than good. While there is more varied opinions on Tera Team Preview and the Single Tera Limit, many people have made good points on why this could lead to negative consequences or at least why it wouldn't do enough to address the issues.

Perhaps it might be better to break Tera down into exactly what makes it good and the biggest issues it has?

To me, the good thing about Tera is the creativity and freedom that comes with the types changing mechanic. So if we really want to make it work, this is probably the part we should emphasize. Taking that away, like with limiting Tera to same type only, would be counterproductive to what parts of the mechanic actually make it good.

The biggest problems come from the free Adaptability style same type Tera and the strain the sheer amount of variables puts on you when you are playing and team building.

I don't think anybody on here really needs or wants the double STAB bonus, do they? It just seems incredibly excessive.

Like if Scizor lives a single fire move by changing type, I don't have a huge problem with that. What I do have a problem with is the double STAB Technician boosted Bullet Punch being returned after that. But if you took away the double STAB, it suddenly wouldn't be all that different than what Scizor normally does. Like most of the priority abusers wind up using same type Tera, with the exception of Dragonite. Maybe Dragonite and it's E-killer set need to be banned. Or maybe not. But if that needs to be done, it's a lot easier to make a single ban than to wind up having to ban all the good priority users. And same for every other abuser of the mechanic.

I do think the Tera Team Preview option is a decent option to help limit the factors you are dealing with. It's not a perfect solution. But it would give you much needed Tera information during a match that helps the strain on decision making. Like you wouldn't need to wait for your Breloom to die to find out Roaring Moon was indeed Flying Tera instead of Steel and you should have used Scizor to hit it instead. You would at least be able to plan for that ahead of time. It doesn't change all the unpredictability. But it does mitigate it enough where it seems like sort of a decent compromise.

The biggest problem I have is that, even with Tera team preview, you still don't address the brute force aspect of double STAB attacks. Conversely, I do think there would be a bit less strain on your team building and decision making if the threat of double STAB wasn't there.

Conclusion:

If there is going to be some sort of decent compromise solution, we're gonna have to address the issue of the double STAB. If we somehow find a reasonable way to mitigate that and combine it with Tera team preview, I think that's the only possible way it could work.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it really sucks when one side of the discussion is made by reasonable individuals and the side you stand closer to is the entire fucking circus. Every time someone trying to defend Tera for partial or full remaining, it's like an undercover agent has played Opening Entry of the Gladiators as they typed their post.

I want to continue on about Tera at Preview. The argument that keeps getting parroted by the "Ban Tera" camp is that it introduces a 50/50.

Showing Tera type at Team Preview:
In my opinion, I think that showing tera type does not do enough to mitigate the guesswork involved in playing around tera types. For every replay, I feel that knowing the tera type would not have helped the opponent in making the correct play. Even if they knew my tera type, they would still have to guess when I do it and with whom. As the metagame develops, I think we will see certain pokemon settle into certain tera types, so perhaps the "who will tera" question will be easier to guess with time. However, the timing is the most important and most problematic factor, and knowing the tera type beforehand doesn't change the fact that you have to guess when it comes out, and guessing wrong can lose you the game.
I'm mostly picking on Srn because we talked about this post a bit on showdown after and it summarizes the main points of the ban camp pretty succinctly.

The type changes that persist after usage are largely irrelevant in this discussion. I don't think one could reasonably argue that the lingering effects of Tera are unfair, unpredictable, or any other number of arguments brought up about the mechanic as a whole. The turn at which a Tera takes place continues to be the focus, from 50/50 guessing games on "when they tera" to the argumentation of the unknown combination of what Tera types could be. While there IS lingering power that at some level should be acknowledged, I think it isn't really worth mentioning in context of resolving what to do with Tera typing unless something about that typing change in subsequent turns is consistently making different pokemon too strong.

And that's why I bring up Z-Moves, even though I think the discussion isn't always pertinent. The way we interact with these two mechanics is similar enough to draw comparisons in how a player reacts not knowing where the ZMove is or when its coming down. And the fact is, that was a meta call. There was more knock off to give you an idea than tera gives currently, but given a preview of what types are available, I'd argue far more information is available to the opponent than ever was in the case of ZMoves. You had no idea when it was being used and, at a glance, no idea who would use it outside meta calls. This didn't ever change either. The power on the turn of the mechanic used is more powerful for the ZMove user in almost every case. Sure, they don't have an item. But considering the attack did between 160-190 power, it should be clear the power was favored towards the Z Move user on that turn as opposed to the tera user.

But there are three core differences. The first is the obvious: Tera changes types. By revealing the type, you still gain the benefits of a typing change, but making this clear to what changes can be made will allow skilled players to not only access at preview what pokemon types could show up, but also reasonably (by a meta call) what pokemon would use Tera, and beyond that... make inferences about the sets on the opponent's team. Zmoves, if you somehow survived this hit (which you shouldn't unless something went horrifically wrong), you were sure that the type was the same as it was at the beginning of the turn. It makes what attack would be right to click always clear.

The second is the item. I don't want to dwell on this since its not relevant to talking about Tera as a whole. The only mention is that you could realistically knock out a person's ZMove user (and not know it) and then the zmove just never got used that match, which is a difference here.

The third is a bit less clear and makes the comparison rougher. Zmoves were fundamentally gated by speed. As I said earlier:

Porygon2 Hacks the Past said:
The difference to me seems to be that speed no longer invalidates the question. If you were faster than a mon with a Zmove, you could shrug and say "who cares, it dies before" whereas now the type change could potentially change a damage number. Assuming you knew which type it was, couldn't you also easily math out "will they use it" by just checking to see if it causes a KO to do so?
The fact that a Tera change happens at the beginning of a turn means that it will always go off in some capacity. That you MUST interact with it. People could ignore Z Moves by just being faster. But in my opinion the punish for getting hit by a ZMove often felt worse, just because the move base powers were so much more devastating. And we wouldn't have any knowledge of what you were about to get hit by except for meta set guessing, nor when it was coming other than basic common sense. But people DIDN'T HAVE to interact with ZMoves. You could outspeed and kill the user.

To be clear, I hate ZMoves. I quit Gen7 when it became clear that nothing would be done about them. I have no problem getting rid of mechanics GF implements and would've liked to see ZMoves removed or at least suspected or something while I had been around. The ability for someone to banish a wall into the 5th dimension for what seemed like no reason was unbelievably frustrating and I imagine some level of that frustration is now hitting offensive-minded players who are more negatively effected by this mechanic as it stands.

But that said, I do believe the amount of information provided in a Tera team preview is more than sufficient to allow good players to plan from preview how to handle a game. More importantly, I do not believe that WITHOUT TESTING you can assert it would still fundamentally introduce too much informational hazard into the format. In my opinion, Tera at Preview risks the exact opposite: Giving a clear indication of exactly what sets your opponent has before hand, or potentially offering a bait that should be otherwise impossible.

I think in every situation, had your opponents seen flying on the Gholdengo they could've acted more accordingly. Like did you win in your second replay (vs 3Bad) because of Tera or because multiple turns were inefficiently used around Gholdengo's existence? There's the fact that Kingambit was brought in vs a 1hp glimmora instead Iron Valiant which would've paused Chien Pao's easy enterance which secured another OHKO. By time Gholdengo comes to Tera Flying, 3Bad's team is devestated. Tera Flying being common knowledge would've made you less likely to click it on electric terrain too when a +Speed Valiant could've packed something for you (Tbolt/thunder punch, or letting a fairy move go through).

HTCL has a way out if his Clod has literally any move not EQ. Seeing Flying at preview would've given him a clear indication that Clod wasn't an answer, and from that point if he doesn't have an answer on team, that's a compositional loss, not a 50/50. Clodsire with Poison Jab doesn't have to bother in this instance and Clodsire is probably uniquely screwed by this conundrum of "Poison jab is immune, EQ is immune after Tera"... which Gholdengo is immune to this anyways with its balloon set. In fact, I'd argue that should Clod have had Poison Jab, the use of Tera would've lost the matchup.

As you acknowledge, Chi Yu being Fire tera is something that is... really predictable when a Torkoal is on a Chi Yu team. And as you state, even then 1) there's no OTK anyways (damage rolled too low, would need to his 12% harder if no tera, but excusable because the calc hasn't been working the entire gen) and 2) Knowing there's a Fire tera there should pretty clearly spell out what's about to happen.... This isn't in my eyes an argument about the broken aspects of Tera (Chi Yu natively does an absolute bombload of damage, and Tera being banned DOES marginally reduce that, but... I don't know if it really changes that when Chi Yu is so overkill vs about everything not named Blissey without Tera). Chi Yu tera'd relatively predictably. But one thing I don't get is "is it wrong for Stevy124 to lose this game due to the damage output of a tera Chi Yu?". And if it is, isn't Chi Yu the problem because the only difference Tera made that game in securing a 2hko was TiangLu for 53% which... was not played correctly unless Stevy wanted to sac that mon. Chi Yu does a ton of damage, and I don't think that's new information. It merges with the next replay where Chi Yu is still doing a ton of damage but this time there was a Iron Bundle that could've probably forced you out.

Is Chi Yu a unique problem with 'revealed Tera type at preview"? Yeah. Chi Yu does a ton of damage. 2hko's blissey in that setup. But its unqiue in the damage department of being (almost) utterly unstoppable with adaptability tera specs. Specifically with the sun setup (TTar can counter? this).

On your last replay, I'd argue Tera at preview changes this game utterly. At minimum, a protect Sylveon would think to scout it, or switch altogether. Knowing its steel means you know most of Roaring Moon's set too, further nerfing its impact. They have an answer in something like Dondozo that could've sat in reasonably comfortably as an answer. The options avaliable to them knowing the Tera type and that Sylveon was in immediate danger is one of the primary changes this implementation would have.

As discussed with Srn in OU, I think the better argument against a complex adjustment is the fact that Smogon has thus far attempted to maintain its closeness to the cartridges. This would be a massive break from that. This isn't anything on game balancing, but the council will have to be sure what they believe stands in line with 'forming a competitive metagame'. Whether that extra work for the cartridge is part of the experience now or if that's a step too far. But certainly, I don't accept any argument that the information disparity would continue to be too much of a problem before anyone has even played a game with a revealed Tera team at preview to check, let alone a collection of games to be significant.
 
however I can tell you that as someone who plays both VGC and Smogon singles, VGC saw the most significant spike in player activity in the history of the game ( cart). In fact, the Sword and Shield Meta on cart was the most played meta in terms of active players for online cart play in the history of Pokemon. So I would say many of the polls are skewed, because many players lost faith in Smogon at that time.
Where is your source on that claim? How can you say players lost faith in smogon so they went to VGC? Where is this based on?
 
1. The turn you actually use your Terastalization holds almost all of the power of using it, when you're using it offensively. That's the big "surprise" turn for their check. It doesn't have anywhere near the lasting impact of Mega evolution, it also doesn't have the immediate impact of Z-moves. Offensively Terastalizing is the weakest of the gimmicks. Especially since the defensive use of it can be used to offset the offensive uses.

2. The defensive usage of Terastalizing balances the offensive usage. Let's take a situation as an example: Amoonguss vs Barraskewda. Barraskewda could Tera into a Psychic type to nuke Amoonguss, but Amoonguss could run a Steel Tera type to turn all its existing weaknesses, except Fire, into resists, while also losing some resists. In this situation, Barraskewda using Tera Psychic into Amoonguss, who doesn't Tera gives the biggest advantage to the Skewda player. If Skewda does that, and Amoon also Teras, Amoon has basically wasted Skewda's Tera. What this means is that the Skewda Player's best move is to Flip Turn into something that pressures Amoonguss. If Tera could only be used offensively, I'd honestly say it's banworthy, but the defensive aspect complements the offensive aspect, especially if we show what Tera type a mon is.

3. You could run multiple Z users on a team, which is something I did pretty often. Having 2 different Z users afforded a lot of versatility and let me break walls more effectively. Z moves had a higher cost, but also a disproportionately high impact. Especially since they did damage through Protect, which is something your defensive mons can use to scout their Tera usage.

4. Their impact was much higher on the offensive side than Tera. Most defensive mons would be taking enough damage from one SE Z move that they'd faint the following turn. Even if you used protect, your tank would still take anywhere from 15-30%.

5. Terastalization for offense does rely on that pretty heavily, unless you're using a mon with super high offenses, because a base 80 power move generally doesn't cut it to break walls. Terablast is almost never a good move to slot, because of how bad it is if you don't Tera.

Terastalization is definitely more impactful than Z moves, when you consider their defensive usage. If we only look at their offensive usage, Z moves are WAY worse for the game. Terastalizing offers just as much usage for your defensive cores as your sweepers, which has the potential to make an amazingly deep metagame. Which is why my opinion is that we should just show the type, and MAYBE pair that with making you select 2 mons on your team that can Terastalize
Aren't you limited to only one Z-Move per battle?
 
As it stands, Tera is both uncompetitive in the sense that it mitigates the impact of informed building & playing, as you can't prep for it, you can't surmise which Pokemon might be using it as with Z-Moves from general team structure, and you can't predict (accurately enough) when the opponent will activate it, thus leading to a bunch of nasty, often game-determining 50-50 scenarios. Furthermore, it is also overwhelmingly powerful, or broken, as either additional STAB and/or 2x STAB on a typing of your own choice enables pretty much any user to bypass any would be checks/counters.

Any form or combination of limitations placed on Tera fail to address what each purport to solve: that of unpredictability, and even in the most pared-down, heavily restricted form possible, there will be no way to build teams that meaningfully cover adequate portions of the meta, thus leading to a matchup-volatile metagame, and the "50-50" scenarios will remain. Furthermore, any of the offensive limitations suggested do not address that even with Tera only offering, say, 2x STAB for one of the Pokemon's shared typings, this is going to always be overwhelming in terms of power levels.

The only acceptable step forwards would be an out-right ban. Let's not have a repeat of Baton Pass, and get to a place where the meta can finally develop, please.

First and foremost, what exactly does "Uncompetitive" even mean? Many people throw this word around and would say the exact definition varies.
What truly makes something "Uncompetitive" as you say? You say that you can't prep for it, but I just take it you haven't played many games. You certainly can tell, based on the fact that you think you can't predict what Tera type a Pokemon is using. Really, all you have to do is memorize all of the possible typings and proceed. For instance, let's postulate that you have a Dondozo in front of you. What typings could possibly hinder this Pokemon and prevent it from sweeping? Well, you have super-effective typings like Electric and Grass. Guess what resists both of those typings? Dragon. Suddenly Dondozo is not as unpredictable as you thought. Same goes for Dragonite, as the only real "viable" Tera type on it is Normal. You cannot tell me that you have seen another type because it is simply not true. If you can't get the point with these two examples alone, then allow me to present another: Skeledirge. What is Skeledirge weak to? Dark, Ghost, Ground, Rock, and Water. You know what is neutral against all of these typings? Fairy typing. A friend the other day complained to me because he lost to a Tera Ghost Kingambit vs his Breloom. If a person sends a Kingambit out against you, then obviously they've got a trick up their sleeve. I laughed in his face. When a Pokemon that is usually countered gets switched in, I.E Latios vs Weavile, you can safely assume the player is using a Choice Scarf Latios. My point is that you can generally assume the Tera typing of a Pokemon simply based on their weaknesses and your ability to predict during any given scenario.

Quite frankly, those that want an outright ban are LAZY. They don't want to try different solutions because that would require you to do actual work, which many of these ban-hungry people refuse to do. Work ethic isn't their strong suit, I put it? You don't just reject all other options because they might take a bit of time to test. Did Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stop protesting because he was met with resistance in Selma and Montgomery? No, he valiantly continued to practice his cause and his efforts have allowed us to live peacefully today.

Anyway, I've observed some high-level matches and I can show you first hand how balanced this mechanic is: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1722191406-v596uwbvvkerey1043f5djoo4yfhqo5pw
This replay is from the #1 player on the ladder. He accurately predicted the aforementioned Tera Fairy Skeledirge. People, or shall I say humans, tend to blow things out of proportion when they see an unfamiliar tech that causes confusion. I hope that you all are able to see through the thin veneer that the OU council has so vehemently attempted to set since day one.
 
this is probably the sole semi-ban-worthy mechanic that i would say to just let it live, and let the meta build around it. sure, tera is very strong and can turn the tide of a battle, but it's not as absurdly broken as something like dynamax was. yes, it can force 50/50s, but when has pokemon not had tons of 50/50s? honestly, a good chunk of the game is predicting whether to stay in on a bad matchup hoping the opponent thinks you'll switch into your check, or switching into your check and hoping the opponent thinks you're staying in. plus, banning the center mechanic of a generation kinda damages the tier's identity. it's not special or anything now, and makes for a much more bland tier. plus tera is actually fun to use
 
As discussed with Srn in OU, I think the better argument against a complex adjustment is the fact that Smogon has thus far attempted to maintain its closeness to the cartridges. This would be a massive break from that.
What do you mean by massive break? It was clarified in the policy review version of this thread that all proposed solution are implementable as gentleman agreements.


https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/terastallization-tiering-discussion.3711464/post-9413438

First and foremost, what exactly does "Uncompetitive" even mean? Many people throw this word around and would say the exact definition varies.
What truly makes something "Uncompetitive" as you say?
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/tiering-policy-framework.3628026/
 
First and foremost, what exactly does "Uncompetitive" even mean? Many people throw this word around and would say the exact definition varies.
What truly makes something "Uncompetitive" as you say? You say that you can't prep for it, but I just take it you haven't played many games. You certainly can tell, based on the fact that you think you can't predict what Tera type a Pokemon is using. Really, all you have to do is memorize all of the possible typings and proceed. For instance, let's postulate that you have a Dondozo in front of you. What typings could possibly hinder this Pokemon and prevent it from sweeping? Well, you have super-effective typings like Electric and Grass. Guess what resists both of those typings? Dragon. Suddenly Dondozo is not as unpredictable as you thought. Same goes for Dragonite, as the only real "viable" Tera type on it is Normal. You cannot tell me that you have seen another type because it is simply not true. If you can't get the point with these two examples alone, then allow me to present another: Skeledirge. What is Skeledirge weak to? Dark, Ghost, Ground, Rock, and Water. You know what is neutral against all of these typings? Fairy typing. A friend the other day complained to me because he lost to a Tera Ghost Kingambit vs his Breloom. If a person sends a Kingambit out against you, then obviously they've got a trick up their sleeve. I laughed in his face. When a Pokemon that is usually countered gets switched in, I.E Latios vs Weavile, you can safely assume the player is using a Choice Scarf Latios. My point is that you can generally assume the Tera typing of a Pokemon simply based on their weaknesses and your ability to predict during any given scenario.

Quite frankly, those that want an outright ban are LAZY. They don't want to try different solutions because that would require you to do actual work, which many of these ban-hungry people refuse to do. Work ethic isn't their strong suit, I put it? You don't just reject all other options because they might take a bit of time to test. Did Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stop protesting because he was met with resistance in Selma and Montgomery? No, he valiantly continued to practice his cause and his efforts have allowed us to live peacefully today.

Anyway, I've observed some high-level matches and I can show you first hand how balanced this mechanic is: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1722191406-v596uwbvvkerey1043f5djoo4yfhqo5pw
This replay is from the #1 player on the ladder. He accurately predicted the aforementioned Tera Fairy Skeledirge. People, or shall I say humans, tend to blow things out of proportion when they see an unfamiliar tech that causes confusion. I hope that you all are able to see through the thin veneer that the OU council has so vehemently attempted to set since day one.
I agree with most of your arguments but please chill a bit, playing Pokemon is nothing like standing up for Civil Rights like... ... ...
 
What do you mean by massive break? It was clarified in the policy review version of this thread that all proposed solution are implementable as gentleman agreements.
Can we add the gentlemen's agreement to allow me to use level 70 Zacian? "Gentlemen's agreements" should be reserved for absolutely game breaking things (and nothing more), a la Endless Battle Clause. We shouldn't be, again this is in my "old ways" opinion, implementing "Gentlemen's agreements" to games that are supposed to be Competitive. Why is this gentlemen's agreement okay but an agreement to forfeit when we get an evasion boost from Moody is not? I'm amazed that this is legitimately being discussed.

I really hope we're not going to unironically add "House Rules" to Smogon Metagames lol.
 
First and foremost, what exactly does "Uncompetitive" even mean? Many people throw this word around and would say the exact definition varies.
What truly makes something "Uncompetitive" as you say? You say that you can't prep for it, but I just take it you haven't played many games. You certainly can tell, based on the fact that you think you can't predict what Tera type a Pokemon is using. Really, all you have to do is memorize all of the possible typings and proceed. For instance, let's postulate that you have a Dondozo in front of you. What typings could possibly hinder this Pokemon and prevent it from sweeping? Well, you have super-effective typings like Electric and Grass. Guess what resists both of those typings? Dragon. Suddenly Dondozo is not as unpredictable as you thought. Same goes for Dragonite, as the only real "viable" Tera type on it is Normal. You cannot tell me that you have seen another type because it is simply not true. If you can't get the point with these two examples alone, then allow me to present another: Skeledirge. What is Skeledirge weak to? Dark, Ghost, Ground, Rock, and Water. You know what is neutral against all of these typings? Fairy typing. A friend the other day complained to me because he lost to a Tera Ghost Kingambit vs his Breloom. If a person sends a Kingambit out against you, then obviously they've got a trick up their sleeve. I laughed in his face. When a Pokemon that is usually countered gets switched in, I.E Latios vs Weavile, you can safely assume the player is using a Choice Scarf Latios. My point is that you can generally assume the Tera typing of a Pokemon simply based on their weaknesses and your ability to predict during any given scenario.

Quite frankly, those that want an outright ban are LAZY. They don't want to try different solutions because that would require you to do actual work, which many of these ban-hungry people refuse to do. Work ethic isn't their strong suit, I put it? You don't just reject all other options because they might take a bit of time to test. Did Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stop protesting because he was met with resistance in Selma and Montgomery? No, he valiantly continued to practice his cause and his efforts have allowed us to live peacefully today.

Anyway, I've observed some high-level matches and I can show you first hand how balanced this mechanic is: https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-1722191406-v596uwbvvkerey1043f5djoo4yfhqo5pw
This replay is from the #1 player on the ladder. He accurately predicted the aforementioned Tera Fairy Skeledirge. People, or shall I say humans, tend to blow things out of proportion when they see an unfamiliar tech that causes confusion. I hope that you all are able to see through the thin veneer that the OU council has so vehemently attempted to set since day one.
Using this replay as proof of anything is dumb. It's clear to anyone that a Skeledirge switching into Gholdengo is 99.9% going to Terastallize, so it's clear that Make It Rain was the obvious play and that it wasn't the sort of 50/50 that the pro-ban camp talks about.

And comparing the civil rights movement to Terastal in Pokemon is laughable and is so clearly a bad faith argument.
 
What do you mean by massive break? It was clarified in the policy review version of this thread that all proposed solution are implementable as gentleman agreements.
In every mechanic iteration except banning just tera blast, we are now giving information that otherwise is not available to the player for a mechanic. If we break down piece by piece what Tera is:

All six pokemon innately have access to one type change. (Limiting Tera mons takes apart this piece of the mechanic)
That type change is hidden information. (Showing at preview removes this piece of the mechanic).
That type change can be to any type in the game (Limiting to stab only removes this piece of the mechanic).
That type change can be initiated once per game at any time with no item.
That change gives a 1.5x STAB to the changed type or 2.0 to a type you already had.

When we chose to ban dynamax, we removed it from the competition. There needed to be no consideration for WHAT dynamax could be. Same would be true removing Tera.

But in every case above, removing a piece of the Tera mechanic but not the whole changes how we play the game given the information we now have in a way that the mechanic itself DID NOT INTEND.

By limiting Tera to one mon, you must reveal which mon WILL tera. This means you know a mechanic which would otherwise be avaliable is not a threat for multiple other mons. This also means that you can assume certain pokemon that would need a set to be boosted by Tera will probably not be on a Tera-built set (Espeed Dragonite).

By showing the Tera type at preview, you reveal not only what type they'd go into (not intended) but also what sets that pokemon could have (definitely not intended).

By limiting to STAB, you do both in reduced fashion. Certain pokemon do not want to Tera into a stab, and it reduces what options are avaliable. This also makes the metagame more offensive than intended as STAB 2.0 is a more offensive minded Tera.

The reason I think that an argument could be made against a complex implementation of Tera following this guideline is that we are now shaping the metagame by changing what information is known or limiting options that was not intended. This is different than removing problematic pokemon/moves, because that is to remove a problematic pokemon that is too powerful for a tier. But any change we take is going to fundamentally change how this mechanic would cause the generation to play.
 
Where is your source on that claim? How can you say players lost faith in smogon so they went to VGC? Where is this based on?
Time playing both cart and smogon during the time, threads like this, back logs of long since lost or forgotten forum posts, the hundreds upon thousands of comments and post on other sources such as Reddit or youtube, as well as the period of stagnation directly after Dynamax's ban followed by the simultaneous exponential growth of cart 3v3 and VGC to record levels. Again, this is all from my experience playing. I have been playing competitive since generation 3, so seeing how low Showdowns numbers dipped during early Gen 8 after the ban, after seeing some incredibly high usage numbers definitely raised some eyebrows. In terms of VGC and SwSh singles, I know there is an article on serebii somewhere I could try to find supporting my claim on that at least.
 
Can we add the gentlemen's agreement to allow me to use level 70 Zacian? "Gentlemen's agreements" should be reserved for absolutely game breaking things (and nothing more), a la Endless Battle Clause. We shouldn't be, again this is in my "old ways" opinion, implementing "Gentlemen's agreements" to games that are supposed to be Competitive. Why is this gentlemen's agreement okay but an agreement to forfeit when we get an evasion boost from Moody is not? I'm amazed that this is legitimately being discussed.

I really hope we're not going to unironically add "House Rules" to Smogon Metagames lol.
Um... I don't think you get it.

The "Gentlemen's agreements" is not for Smogon. It's how it'd theoretically be played on cart.

In which case, yes, forfeiting if you use a thing against Smogon rules is indeed also a gentleman's agreement. Using Smogon rules on cart in general is a gentleman's agreement.
 
Um... I don't think you get it.

The "Gentlemen's agreements" is not for Smogon. It's how it'd theoretically be played on cart.

In which case, yes, forfeiting if you use a thing against Smogon rules is indeed also a gentleman's agreement. Using Smogon rules on cart in general is a gentleman's agreement.
Oh, I completely get it. And I think that what is being suggested to be (possibly) implemented is going to send us down the wrong path. For years, we have always wanted to have not only as competitive of a meta as possible, but a simple one as well. This is why, once again, for years we have tried to stay away from complex bans as much as possible. Now, we're unironically entertaining "House Rules". I have always been a big policy guy. Whether something is broken or not can be discussed, however, I do not believe we should warp policies in order to cater to a broken mechanic, move, pokemon, item, whatever the hell it is. Should we retroactively go back and change Dynamax in SwSh? How will this impact lower tiers? Will they also be implementing their own "House Rules"? If the answer to those are "no" because they sound ridiculous, then you're seeing my point.

This will have a massive impact on the future of this format, all to save a mechanic that is either agreed to be "broken" or not. If it's not broken, let it stay. If it is broken... then we have our answer don't we?
 
An option that I don't believe has been mentioned before is to ban OU Pokemon from terastallizing (i.e, only UU or below Pokemon can tera in OU).

This could have several benefits such as:
  1. Reducing the number of mons on a team that can potentially tera (this roughly aligns with the "Limiting the amount of Pokemon on any given team that have access to possibly Terastallize during a battle" restriction) which reduces unpredictability
  2. Preventing already strong Pokemon from abusing tera
  3. Increasing team-building creativity and diversity by promoting the use of mons in lower tiers
  4. This also has a built-in "self-balancing" feature since if a lower-tier mon is too strong and has high usage, then it will become OU and lose the ability to tera
I can't think of any real downsides to this but would love to hear others' thoughts. I am also a fan of the idea to ban same-type terastallizing (the opposite of the "Limiting Tera typing to previously existing STAB types") since the adaptability boost of is one of reasons why it's broken on some mons.
 

1LDK

It's never going to get better
is a Top Team Rater
ban OU Pokemon from terastallizing (i.e, only UU or below Pokemon can tera in OU).
Step 1: OU mon drops to UU, or UU is good outside of terra
Step 2: It rises to OU because usage
Step 3: Now it doesnt have tera anymore, and mons who dropped now have
Step 4: now you have to manage a consistent cycle, with just UU in mind
Step 5: Gamefreak vomits dlc
 
Time playing both cart and smogon during the time, threads like this, back logs of long since lost or forgotten forum posts, the hundreds upon thousands of comments and post on other sources such as Reddit or youtube, as well as the period of stagnation directly after Dynamax's ban followed by the simultaneous exponential growth of cart 3v3 and VGC to record levels. Again, this is all from my experience playing. I have been playing competitive since generation 3, so seeing how low Showdowns numbers dipped during early Gen 8 after the ban, after seeing some incredibly high usage numbers definitely raised some eyebrows. In terms of VGC and SwSh singles, I know there is an article on serebii somewhere I could try to find supporting my claim on that at least.
You are drawing a lot of conclusions based on social media and forum posts, from... Where? Reddit and youtube stuff is not a reliable source of anything since so much of both come from more casual players or people who don't play at all and just want to moan about smogon. The uptick in vgc and 3v3 is much more likely to be related to the fact that gen8 made leaps and bounds in making comp much more accessable. Also i wouldn't source serebii on anything comp related if i am being honest. Honestly, with all due respect, a lot of this is just theorying based on personal perspective. To be clear, i'm taking issue with the claim that "people lost faith in smogon at the time" as it isn't something you can easily prove. Forum and social media postings don't necessarily truthfully reflect this as a lot of of people who moan about smogon bans, tend to be people who don't actually play and don't try to understand why things happen, and these people inhabit those forums and sites.
 
You are drawing a lot of conclusions based on social media and forum posts, from... Where? Reddit and youtube stuff is not a reliable source of anything since so much of both come from more casual players or people who don't play at all and just want to moan about smogon. The uptick in vgc and 3v3 is much more likely to be related to the fact that gen8 made leaps and bounds in making comp much more accessable. Also i wouldn't source serebii on anything comp related if i am being honest. Honestly, with all due respect, a lot of this is just theorying based on personal perspective. To be clear, i'm taking issue with the claim that "people lost faith in smogon at the time" as it isn't something you can easily prove. Forum and social media postings don't necessarily truthfully reflect this as a lot of of people who moan about smogon bans, tend to be people who don't actually play and don't try to understand why things happen, and these people inhabit those forums and sites.
I don't disagree at all, I am simply stating what I have experienced. But the counterpoint I unfortunately have to make, as much as I hate to admit it, is that decisions made on a large scale to the player base, don't always what the majority of players want either and that has been proven in the past.

An option that I don't believe has been mentioned before is to ban OU Pokemon from terastallizing (i.e, only UU or below Pokemon can tera in OU).
That simply does not work. The reason we can ban things to Ubers and allow it to stay in Ubers is because is Ubers Pokemon rarely ever come back down from the tier back too OU. Ubers Power level is far beyond anything in OU. OU on the other hand often has mons fall from it too lower tiers once a meta has developed. By defenition, an OU mon is used because it is overused and powerful, so you really can't quantify what a UU mon or lower is in that regard, bar ZU or some PU tier mons. It then becomes a revolving door, said Pokemon in question becomes OU, stripping it of it;s ability too Tera and then it falls back, or something else takes its place. Rinse and repeat.
 
The no OU tera idea is really interesting and what I would go for in theory, but it sadly wouldn't work with how tiering works in general. If it wasn't such a complex ban maybe Pokemon with certain BSTs couldn't tera, or certain stat levels, but I still doubt that would work well or be anything people are satisfied with.
 
The turn at which a Tera takes place continues to be the focus, from 50/50 guessing games on "when they tera"
Honestly, the whole discussion about the precise moment when will they pull the trigger doesn't make a lot of sense to me.


Matter of fact, I'll tell you right now when any offensive threat will want to Terastallize.

When they can get the jump on a check.


Switching in a mon that you want to sweep with is not a trivial thing. You not only have all kinds of hazards and other conditions affecting the field you also have an active opponent trying to sock you in the mouth.

HP is a crucial thing when you're Terastallizing. It doesn't matter if you turn a 4x weakness into a resist if you can't tank the next hit and KO the opponent before they can just slap you with a coverage move.

Do you know what that means? It means that people will do it when they get in their intended sweeper as healthy as possible and preferably against something that threatens it so they can get it out of the paint ASAP.

Another thing about these "50/50's" the pro-ban crowd are so desperately afraid of is that they don't mean jack or shit if a Tera mon doesn't land a KO or otherwise heavily cripples the opponent with a burn or something like that.
If they can't secure a KO after Tera, you're free to just bonk them with a coverage move for super-effective damage or deal with it in whatever way is best at the time.

So basically, if you're looking for the precise moment the opponent is looking to Terastal, you're playing yourself. The moment is ASAP, the question is the mon they want to Tera.

Most people are building teams with the correct idea that "I want to Tera this mon because that's my win con. That's the mon that can really run through teams if it gets going." Terastal aside, people have win con mons since RBY. It just makes sense to have a focal point when you're building an offensive core, especially with a mechanic that can only buff one mon. Any other Tera options are failsafes and plan Bs.

Between trying to put a mon into a position where it can sweep and the fact that your opponent also has access to Terastallization, you can expect people that aren't terrible to not blow their load early. And if they do, you still got your own Tera to mess them up.

If any of this reminds y'all of how you've been playing for the past 20 years or so, it's because Terastal, while undeniably strong, isn't breaking the game.
 
The developers already don't care what we're doing; they wouldn't have mandated the stupid 20 minute timer or removed 100-All battles if they did. So why are some players tethering themselves to the notion that we should care about preserving what the developers did to the game? We're here to inject order into chaos, essentially, not sit amongst the chaos and say "Welp, that's just how it is."
This is a misconception which needs to be cleared up. Why did the devs reduce the stats of Zacian and Zamazenta? Why did they lower Wicked Blow's base power by 5? Casuals don't care in the slightest, nor would most players even realize. Unless you think this is a clever underhanded ploy by Game Freak to make competitive players who look at numbers think that they care.

The improved distribution of entry hazards and nerf to recovery PP are clear moves to make the game faster paced. Spike stacking isn't even prevalent in VGC formats; why would they tweak it so heavily if they didn't give a damn? Tera contributes to a faster paced metagame. Defensive Pokémon can still have a role in a fast-paced metagame, just less so as live forever stallers, and rather to change the shift of momentum.

If Tera is truly competitively untenable, then it can be banned, sure. Though it's a shame the cart and Smogon communities would have to be split again... As broken as Dynamax was, establishing gentlemen's rules when playing with non-Smogoners isn't fun, nor is introducing them to Smogon when the rules and analyses are don't account for a core mechanic. But there is no "chaos vs order" debate. Smogon could easily ban hax, they could make Covert Cloak the only legal item, they could do anything to make Pokémon into a more chess-like experience, but that's not the goal.
 

Finchinator

-OUTL
is a Tournament Directoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Top Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnusis a Past WCoP Championis the defending OU Circuit Championis a Two-Time Former Old Generation Tournament Circuit Champion
OU Leader
We will not tie usage stats into Tera legality. It will just decreep part of the metagame and make things develop unevenly. Usage stats are not a binding, tell-all statistic — we see many things not used because singular Pokemon obsolete them in the tier that are still quite strong and could abuse the mechanic significantly. It’s just not that simple, unfortunately.
 

Finchinator

-OUTL
is a Tournament Directoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Top Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnusis a Past WCoP Championis the defending OU Circuit Championis a Two-Time Former Old Generation Tournament Circuit Champion
OU Leader
Work ethic isn't their strong suit, I put it? You don't just reject all other options because they might take a bit of time to test. Did Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stop protesting because he was met with resistance in Selma and Montgomery? No, he valiantly continued to practice his cause and his efforts have allowed us to live peacefully today.
sir this is a wendy's
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)

Top