Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]

[Bold School]

So seriously, what options are there to minimize the impact of double STAB?

Even something like making same type Tera negate the item or requiring the pokemon to hold a useless item or no item in order to Tera into the same type. Whatever version of that is most cartridge friendly or "gentlemen's agreement" friendly or whatever you want to call it. Just something, anything, that takes away combining the double STAB multiplier with both abilities and items. Items seem like they are the more realistic choice to do this with.

We aren't going to have any sort of compromise measures that works here unless we deal with this issue somehow. It's simply too much.

 

[Iodyne]

tl;dr outright ban
If the desire to maintain Tera as an option is too strong for the council I would simply suggest simply having a separate ladder (I don't think it would be a bad thing to split the userbase, considering how large it is currently) or just keeping it to National Dex and Randoms.
Of the remaining alternate options I think limiting Tera to a single pokémon in the builder (but not shown to opponents) would be the best.


Knowing my tendency for long-winded posts, I'd really like to keep mine as short as possible and get to my position. As such I'll admit, while I'm sure many of you have made great arguments for your positions whether the same or opposite as mine, I have not read any of them aside from Finchinator's main post. I will probably browse them sometime later, but for now I think everything I want to say is mentioned or implied in the OP. From that I think I can gauge Finchinator's position himself but I will speak nothing to it, only mine.

Here is how the new mechanic functions:

• Any Pokemon can utilize it, but it can only be done once per battle
• Upon Terastallizing, a Pokemon will retain the effects even if they switch out, lasting until they faint
• Each Pokemon has a "Tera type" that you can strategically pick in the teambuilder
• This type becomes your sole defensive typing
• You retain initial STABs, but also gain STAB on your "Tera type" if it is a novel type
• If your "Tera type" is one of your STABs, then you get an additional boost akin to the ability Adaptability
• "Tera Blast" is a new move every Pokemon learns that is 80 BP and will take the form of your "Tera type"
• "Tera Blast" will take the form of your highest attacking stat at the time of usage

Just looking at the characteristics of Terastallization, the combination of a double-base-power Hidden Power that can be special or physical OR gaining Adaptability OR gaining STAB on an existing move all meanwhile changing your typing, literally the most fundamental aspect of Pokémon, is inherently broken. In ways it can be seen as a combination of (permanent) Z-Moves and Dynamax (when Tera is used defensively too) with even more tacked on. The ability to permanently use Tera without an item, on any 6 pokémon, and with no drawback is something that I can not see being healthy for the metagame in any capacity whatsoever.

Even if we were to assume that GameFreak had type-changing in mind for this generation and the new pokémon they gave us, it is for certain that all the pokémon released over the past 26-going-on-27 years did not have this in mind. Ferrothorn is meant to be Grass/Steel, Heatran Fire/Steel. Pokémon are intentionally given limited movesets (whether fairly or unfairly) to limit their use. I'm not trying to suggest that GameFreak intentionally had in mind to not give Volcarona, say, a Ground-type move so it would be countered by Heatran. But rather, pokémon's and Pokémon's identities are deeply tied to typings, and the metagame up until now has been as well. Tera turns this on it's head.

I'm not saying that the metagame would be unable to adapt; we have seen the start of that already. Obviously it is possible to familiarize oneself with and memorize the new common sets just as any other, but I don't think that means that something isn't broken. There is always counterplay to something. Speaking just of infamous pokémon themselves: Dracovish was handled by any of the few Water Absorb mons; Spectrier was unphased by Snorlax and a few other Normal- or Dark-types; Taunt Palafin-Hero was outperformed by Dondozo spamming Body Press; and Iron Bundle was easily walled by a neutral-resisting high SpD mon like Florges, Blissey, or Sylveon. But of course that doesn't mean that none of these pokémon weren't broken in one or more ways, not to mention bannable. The discussion is whether Tera warrants bannable measures and I believe so; I don't see how someone can look at those game-changing abilities and think otherwise. (I know there is an argument that it can be used defensively or in-counter to another's but that is an extremely unpractical and unrealistic, or infrequent, case of how it would play out. Of course it's possible to plan for opponents' Tera like this to a degree, but to what degree that edges into what is more realistically just uncompetitive I can only imply.)

I do not believe Tera is healthy for the metagame nor in-line with the fundamental nature of the game we play. We know that GameFreak could care less about making the most balanced metagames let alone good, fun, and functional video games; we are by no means obligated to prescribe to the gimmicks they now brand each new generation with. There's a reason why we all play 6v6 Smogon Singles OU instead of VGC.

While I can understand why some people label generation 8 as boring, others (including myself), after the initial outrage regarding DexIt, came to appreciate the multiple metagames we saw after the releases of Home and the DLCs (and I look forward to that with gen 9). I don't think the lack of the previous generations' gimmicks of Megas and Z-Moves subtracted from the metagame. In fact, while I certainly didn't appreciate the speed creep of generation 8, I found it much more tolerable than the sheer power creep Megas and Ultra Beasts brought; in my opinion said power creep was too much that I felt both bored and annoyed by Megas in the gen 6 and 7 metas to the point that I made a rule for myself to not use any Megas or Z-Moves (among other self-restrictions I mention here) out of pure conviction (and I did so for the entirety of both generations; see my othe. Obviously this is all my own experience and opinion but that's what this thread is for. There is objectivity melded into what I am saying, however.

Even if we take the stance that generation 8 was boring, and even if/when Tera is banned, I still believe generation 9 will be anything but. Firstly, at 103 new pokémon, we have not seen this many introduced since Black and White. Of these, practically all of them have either a unique ability, move, typing, or combination thereof; this alone has led to a great amount of variability in the metagame and viability of mons with niche uses. There are 14 paradox pokémon and the 4 legends all with 570 (or 590) BST as well as several other mons with BSTs above 500; and this says nothing of how good many of their distributions are. There are very few new fully-evolved pokémon that have seen little to no use. Why do I not feel there is power creep here? Probably because of the combination of the uniqueness of the lower-BST mons and the less extreme (compared to ultra beasts) stat distribution of the high BST mons. While I don't think that Booster Energy makes these mons broken (especially now that it has been Nerfed), I think it is too difficult to tell while Tera is still around. I think the same can be said about most, if not all, the pokemon we think of as broken or potentially broken as of now. Additionally, Shed Tail and Booster Energy are already huge, defining aspects of the Meta, and we haven't even experienced Revival Blessing yet, probably the biggest change to the meta since the physical/special split, if not ever.
(BTW coders, if it really is a coding issue and not a policy to hold off on the implementation until after the Tera discussion/ban, I really don't see how difficult it would be to copy code from the crazyhouse gamerule and splice it with some code from pivoting moves like parting shot. I was literally able to guess the format of onFaint() before I even looked it up.)

My point is that I don't think banning Tera would make the metagame less fun; for as much as situations have led to an enjoyment of Tera, just as many— if not more— have led to annoyance, frustration, or even a sense of unfairness. And that is where I think the spark of truth lies. When a sense of unfairness develops outside of simply a skill difference, that is when suspicion towards ban should begin. Naturally, anything that is broken can go both ways; it can be unfair to go against or can give you an unfair advantage when used. Just because some counterplay exists or you can return with your own measures doesn't mean that they are not an unhealthy presence overall. My Iron Bundle could Tera Ice or Water and annihilate whole teams, but then you could Tera Fighting your Palafin-Hero to live a Freeze-Dry and return with a Close Combat. But that doesn't mean in the slightest that either of these pokémon nor Tera itself are not broken. It also means that we can't say for certain that without Tera these mons themselves still wouldn't be broken, though we can say for sure they would be less powerful (though still perhaps also less counterplay-able).


On preserving Tera:

The underlying idea behind these prospects would be that it preserves the core mechanic of the generation, granting the metagame some defining characteristics while maintaining a playerbase drawing feature to some degree. It is true, however, that neither of these two pieces of reasoning have any direct correlation to competitiveness, which is the foremost focus in any tiering discussion.

As I said I don't think we have any obligation to preserve GameFreak's careless gimmicks nor should Smogon make tiering measures to draw or keep playerbase counts. I don't think that keeping Tera would even lead to a further stay of the playerbase nor eventual boredom some players feel. In fact, there are and will be many players who think of Tera as broken and stop playing because of it (I personally know of a few people already). It can certainly be argued that Tera is broken (at least by some, hence the existence of this discussion); in contrast, no-one can make the argument that a meta without Tera is inherently broken. Regardless of how many pokémon or mechanics a metagame has, player counts will ultimately fall off anyway. Thinking that keeping Tera will significantly bolster them for longer is unfounded. I am reminded of the case wherein a man who won the lottery and a man who lost his legs both scored the same in happiness/contentedness after 6 months.

This would neglect to address any of the above points about the burdens of type changing on counterplay or the potential issues with the additional strength provided to Pokemon through boosted STAB or a novel STAB type as well.
…It is important to us that many players see Terastallization as a draw to participating in our metagames; while it is the first and foremost priority to maintain competitive integrity and balance, it is also a factor to have generations motivate players to participate and have an identity. This premise is a large driver behind the potential for no tiering action or limited restrictions, and additionally add a potentially higher burden of proof to the outright ban side as well.

Neglecting to address the problems of Tera just to entertain the playerbase, however good-intentioned it may be, is frankly upsetting; blitheness in spite of the health of the metagame isn't something that should have even been considered in the first place. It's only been a week so all things considered it's not too bad, but I feel this discussion could not have come soon enough.


My remaining thoughts can be summed-up by excerpts from the OP.

In terms of practical outlook, a lot can be said as to having the ability to change defensive typing making finding consistent counterplay to Pokemon an impossibility. Terrstalization fundamentally alters how we approach handling the wide array of threats our metagame presents us, occasionally forcing the metagame to resort to extremes with a surplus of revenge killers to minimize prospects or a surplus of extreme walls to outright blank Terastallization options on more dynamic offensive presences. It is possible to argue that this concept as a whole does not belong in a competitive metagame due to how much it warps how we play and how even with the closest attention to detail, it can be seen as an unreasonable ask to handle both Pokemon in their original state and these Pokemon with altered types.

On Tera preview clause:

Cons include the fact that it is still not a perfect solution to the guesswork required to play around Terastallization and it would require potential display modifications that are seen as undesirable in many circles.
…it is still inherently challenging to line-up your counterplay with the timing of the opponent and their use of the mechanic. When a Pokemon's defensive profile can do a flip-flop on command, changing the entire type chart on whim, it makes counterplay as a whole unreliable. Surefire revenge killing methods can be dwarfed by sudden resistances and immunizations while an additional STAB typing or boost to previously existing STAB can tear through counterplay even with prior knowledge of the possibility just because all game will be played in fear of the prospect and it adds a premium offensive bonus that is not seen through other means regardless of what information is disclosed.
This restriction may cut closest to the core of the problem, but it still does not assure the balancing of Terastallization and implementation is controversial.

On STAB-only Tera:

However, adopting a Tera type within your STABs for a Pokemon with two types can still drastically shift a Pokemon's profile as you can shed weaknesses if timed properly. In addition, granting every Pokemon boosted STAB to the point that it is like they have Adaptability can be seen as problematic in it if itself.
…it also leaves a lot there that can prove troublesome for the playerbase, especially when this is considered to be present on top of one of the least forgiving power creeps we have ever seen.

As should have been clear from my ramblings, my stance is to outright ban Terastallization from OU (and similar tiers like UU/RU/NU/etc.).
Given Smogon's desires to keep player interest high, especially among casual players, I think adding a separate ladder/format/tier where Tera is allowed (with or without restrictions) would be the best option. I can't imagine many players care that much to play with Tera in a restricted dex over National Dex, so I think just allowing it there and in Random Battles (and Ubers/AG) should be enough (though perhaps my appraisal of public opinion is unfounded).
Not that I support ranked-choice voting but if I had to pick from the alternative options for keeping Tera I think that restricting the teambuilder to only allow a single pokémon the choice of choosing Tera would be the best way to go. It would still allow the once-a-game use of Tera with full in-game functionality, while maintaining the "competitive" degree of unpredictability and unfair revealing of sets. The advantage this has over allowing all 6 pokémon to consider Tera in the teambuilder is that it forces a decision before valuable information such as team preview and actual reveals during battle. No longer would any pokémon be able to turn the tide of the battle in a single turn. It would lead to specific teambuilding strategies akin to sweeper-centred building or in generations 6 and 7 with Megas. I think the akin-to-Megas analogy plays well; some may still build offensively and plan their Tera for Chien-Pao like they did Megas with Charizard-Mega-X or Loppuny-Mega; others may play defensively and save it for Quagsire like they might have done with Slowbro-Mega or Sableye-Mega.

Why would I argue then for an outright ban over this? I already stated how I felt even Megas were too power-creepy and presented a sort of if-you-can't-beat-them-join-them mentality, and I have no doubts that this would carry over even if Tera were to be Nerfed in the way I describe. So long as Tera exists, as Finchinator points out,

Finally, banning the most broken abusers of Terastallization is a concept that we should be avoiding at all costs as an alternative to any of the above options as a long-term best practice. This is not an actual solution as we would just end up de-creeping the metagame to the point that the new top abusers would assume similarly troublesome roles potentially. If we are approaching a suggestion of this, then it is best to shift focus onto considering an outright ban or restriction!

we will just continue banning the top abusers. He says that they've been avoiding banning this at all costs, and while the pokémon that have been banned so far can certainly hold their own without Tera, they utilized it just as much and it was certainly considered when they were banned (just read the posts). That's another thing: the existence of Tera obscures the "real" meta. I can certainly posit that pokémon like Garganacl or Annihilape would be much less troublesome if they couldn't remove their resistances on a whim, or pokémon like Flutter Mane or Houndstone could be much more reliably revenge-killed if they couldn't change their typing to resist a priority Sucker Punch or the like.

Lastly, just as a note I don't think Tera Blast itself or a restriction thereof would have much of an effect at all. Of course there are some pokémon that utilize the move such as Choice Band Dragapult or Espathra notably, but most uses for Tera are either defensive in nature and/or offensively to boost an existing attack in a pokémon's movepool. I find the defensive uses of Tera to be the most fun but also the most egregiously broken (as I mentioned, Garganacl and Annihilape), though it is important to note the non-Tera-Blast offensive boosts it provides have also contributed heavily to the pokémon who have been banned or are seen by some as bannable (i.e. Tera Ice/Water Iron Bundle, Tera Dark Chien-Pao / Roaring Moon, Tera Fire/Dark Chi-Yu, etc.).


In all of the alternatives to an outright ban there are still cons or concern of potential cons for the health of the metagame. The only "con" of fully banning Tera is its effect on the playerbase counts. Obviously while the ban of Tera would lead to controversy and flight of some users, any of the outcomes will do so as well. Choosing the option with least controversy and/or effect on playerbase numbers isn't the proper course of action with the metagame in mind; they are three separate things. Of course a good metagame should include fun elements but also must not overwelcome broken ones. Historically I have often been very much against most bans; however, in retrospect I can recognize what may not have presented a challenge for me (i.e. Spectrier, Kyurem, Palafin-Hero) were objectively more banworthy than not. Even pokémon like Pheromosa or DarkShifu who presented considerable challenge to me I did not support the ban for, but I admit now very much overstayed their welcome in the meta. The reason these mons get banned is obviously because they are overpowered. Were these mons overpowered? Yes. Is Tera overpowered? Very clearly yes. Did counterplay exist around these mons? Of course (I already named some and you should be familiar with others), albeit sometimes few in number. Does counterplay exist around Tera? Sure, if you play right; but in no way does it always (given even grounds). There is always similar controversy over bans of pokémon; always people who disagree, sentiment of less fun, or people who don't play now that they can't use a mon they like or that's (too) easy to use. The case will be the same with Tera (albeit to a larger degree, sure), but in this case I think it is more warranted than any pokémon ban. Variety is one of the most important things for a metagame and while by nature Tera leads to variety it also has led / will lead to further bans of each newest abuser; each time we'll end up going down the list and banning the next pokémon. I would rather see Tera banned before a single pokémon.

Pokémon are the core of this game, not Tera, not Z-Moves, not Megas. When Home comes we will have many many more pokémon and many changes to the meta; there will be many more abusers and many more mons that fall of because of them. And the culling of threats and counters and abusers will continue ever still. Tera presents too great a change for the metagame, not that we can't adapt to but that we shouldn't have to.

I just hope that after the banning of Tera and the release of Home we see the recently-banned mons brought back to OU (not slowly or never suspected but immediately released). (Some of the other Ubers I think should be given a chance as well, though probably with a suspect.)


This ended up a bit longer than I had originally intended (as is my signature, I guess). There may be some typos or parts that could warrant elaboration. Please let me know and feel free to respond!

 

[A_Wild_Noob_Appeared!]

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.

It's worth noting that any rule which isn't built into the game will be difficult to enforce on the cart without prior agreement, which is why that factor isn't really considered. The singles formats that you'll typically see on cart (i.e. those whose rules are actually enforced by the cart) are Battle Spot Singles and Anything Goes, both of which have always had significant differences from OU, UU, etc. regardless of whether the generational gimmick is banned or not. There are in fact communities and analyses for these formats on this site, it's just that the "mainline" Smogon stuff is more popular around here.

 

[Alternator]

So, rather than back-and-forth between "Give it a chance" and "I hate this mechanic, kill it with fire," I'd like to open up two topics:

1) What defensive pokemon can make especially good use of terastalization? This might be a wall picking up a better type (Avalugg into, frankly, anything), a defensive pivot shedding a weakness (Slowtwins going mono-water to better check ghosts), hard walling a threat (Water Absorb mons going tera ghost to wall Palafin, may he rest in peace), or something more creative.

2) Which pokemon look like they might be pushed over the edge due to terastalization? I can think of three possibilities - Roaring Moon (removing weaknesses to so many priority moves is huge), Dracopult (specifically for physical ghost STAB), and Annihilape (every extra hit sponged is a massive offensive boost).

 

[DaemonChop]

So, rather than back-and-forth between "Give it a chance" and "I hate this mechanic, kill it with fire," I'd like to open up two topics:

1) What defensive pokemon can make especially good use of terastalization? This might be a wall picking up a better type (Avalugg into, frankly, anything), a defensive pivot shedding a weakness (Slowtwins going mono-water to better check ghosts), hard walling a threat (Water Absorb mons going tera ghost to wall Palafin, may he rest in peace), or something more creative.

2) Which pokemon look like they might be pushed over the edge due to terastalization? I can think of three possibilities - Roaring Moon (removing weaknesses to so many priority moves is huge), Dracopult (specifically for physical ghost STAB), and Annihilape (every extra hit sponged is a massive offensive boost).

Tera Normal Dragonite is fucked right up and one of the best uses for the mechanic in the meta rn

 

[Chameleon]

It's worth noting that any rule which isn't built into the game will be difficult to enforce on the cart without prior agreement, which is why that factor isn't really considered. The singles formats that you'll typically see on cart (i.e. those whose rules are actually enforced by the cart) are Battle Spot Singles and Anything Goes, both of which have always had significant differences from OU, UU, etc. regardless of whether the generational gimmick is banned or not. There are in fact communities and analyses for these formats on this site, it's just that the "mainline" Smogon stuff is more popular around here.

This is certainly true! But I still feel there's some benefit to an alignment between cart legal play and Smogon formats.

6v6 is Pokémon's "in-game" mode, and there are plenty of cart players who, in asking for a Pokémon battle, are asking for a 6v6. And when dueling a reasonably mature player of this sort, a few things will be common:

- They recognize Box Legendaries are overpowered, and either won't use them or agree to not use them
- They won't have a team based around abusing Spore to put every mon to sleep, OHKO spam, long BP chains, or evasion boosting
- They won't have more than one copy of a species on a team

Normally, the only difference is that they might be running a banned Pokémon. And personally, that's fine. Teambuilding knowledge and experience garnered from Smogon still apply, regardless if one or both teams are using banned Pokemon - most likely, skill will determine that outcome of the match. Asking the opponent to change their team when it includes Pokémon they like is pretty awkward.

But if one team is built around say, Dynamax, and the other isn't... that seriously changes things. The game fundamentally changes to abuse and counter the mechanic, and no longer are you accounting for a few extra unbanned Pokemon, but rather an entire new realm of possibility. I'll probably need two sets of teams, one for Dynamax and one for non Dynamax, which also means more grinding on cart. And Tera is next up to the plate.

 

[Gekokeso]

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:
(Replay where the guy just made a singular good play before opponent forfeits)
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.

 

[alephgalactus]

So, rather than back-and-forth between "Give it a chance" and "I hate this mechanic, kill it with fire," I'd like to open up two topics:

1) What defensive pokemon can make especially good use of terastalization? This might be a wall picking up a better type (Avalugg into, frankly, anything), a defensive pivot shedding a weakness (Slowtwins going mono-water to better check ghosts), hard walling a threat (Water Absorb mons going tera ghost to wall Palafin, may he rest in peace), or something more creative.

2) Which pokemon look like they might be pushed over the edge due to terastalization? I can think of three possibilities - Roaring Moon (removing weaknesses to so many priority moves is huge), Dracopult (specifically for physical ghost STAB), and Annihilape (every extra hit sponged is a massive offensive boost).

1. Garganacl with Tera Flying is pretty based. Gaining a Ground immunity and a Fighting resist screws over a lot of the good attacks that usually scare Garganacl. In particular, it makes Great Tusk go from winning the Garganacl matchup to outright losing it. Flying is also leagues better as a defensive typing than Rock. I’ve also seen it use Water instead, which combines with its built-in Ghost resist and Salt Cure to make a surprisingly effective answer to Gholdengo.
2. Aside from the ones you listed, which I all think will probably be suspected eventually if Tera stays, there’s a reason Dragonite gets banned in every OM where it can possibly gain STAB off of Extreme Speed.

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.

Did… did you just compare a debate about a mechanic in competitive Pokémon to the Civil Rights Movement?

 

[kosecant]

Yo I think we need some mods to reign in the debate a bit if Tera is getting compared to the civil rights movement. Both sides have gotten unnecessarily hostile at points, and it does nothing to help the reason we’re all here, to discuss what should be done with Tera.

I still think that doing the ban in stages is far and away the best option, and those saying stuff like the Tera clause would do nothing are being a bit silly considering that we haven’t played with that rule at all and don’t know how it would impact things

 

[gregdawiz]

I want to offer a potentially overlooked perspective to this thread and instead talk about why we ban in the first place. The OU council focuses on banning pokemon who mainly promote an uncompetitive metagame. To put it simply, this means it bans pokemon who give less skillful players the ability to win more games simply due to its presence. Often pokemon that end up on the OU ban list are omega-threats prior to their bans and as such dominate team structure to focus on counters to this specific mon. For Dracovish, this resulted in water absorb users (mainly seismetoad) to rise in usage and feel like a necessity for every team.

While OU's reasoning behind any such ban boils down to uncompetitiveness, I feel like the more overlooked aspect of banning is to promote variety. As someone who played OU at the time, did it ever feel like i had no choice but to lose to dracovish when i saw it? No. I didn't even feel like I was at a disadvantage. Why? Because I had Seismetoad, which hard countered it. Was Dracovish ban-worthy in the sense that using it made less skillful players win? No. It was instead ban worthy because it forced players to almost always run a counter to it. The better question would be, did i ever enjoy playing OU at this time? The answer was also no, because I was constantly forced to run one pokemon on my team to answer Dracovish. This was incredibly boring because it not only pre-selected one of my 6 slots, but it also heavily restricted what could be used in the game at the time. When this was banned, I suddenly gained way more options in terms of what I was able to run, and the amount of interest I had with the tier skyrocketed.

Dynamax was a very similar experience to this. When dynamax was allowed, players had to be focused on the most threatening dynamaxers. While one could argue a potential reason for dynamax ban was allowing ANY pokemon on the opposing team to dynamax, the far scarier and more ban-worthy reason imo was on the number of omega threats that existed as long as dynamax was allowed. If my opponent had both a Gyarados and an Amoonguss, I was far far less concerned if the Amoonguss were to dynamax than if the gyarados were to. Setup sweepers like Gyarados had the ability to setup and steamroll opposing teams far more easily by gaining stats or setting terrains while simultaneously throwing off massive attacks. Defensive pokemon while dynamaxed simply did not have the level of potential or options offensive dynamax pokemon had. Gaining momentum from an offensive dynamaxer felt required to offset the momentum your opponent gained from their dynamaxer. You wanted to dyna your offensive pokemon and only dynamaxed your defensive mon as a last resort. Once this was banned I felt once again like I had more options to build different styles of teams, which meant potentially not needing to run pokemon that heavily benefited from dynamax at all (more defensive or even stall teams).

The point im trying to make here is ideally the greatest interest I have in OU and subsequently my interest in bans revolves around promoting pokemon diversity. The funnest generations to me are the ones the most number of pokemon are viable. Banning broken threats like dracovish allows players to choose whether or not they want to run a certain defensive option. With dynamax, the only truly great dynamax pokemon were offensive mons (particulary already great offensive mons), and defensive pokemon were left in the dust. For terrastylization, this is not the case. Terrastylization gives any pokemon a competitive edge by adding an element of surprise to any match. With terrablast, even mons with horrible movepools are viable. With type changing, a mon with the worst type combination can become a great wall. There is quite literally massive amounts of options, creating one of the most potentially wild but also most interesting metagames we have been faced with yet. Unlike dynamax however, can any form of terrastylization be considered better than any other? The potential hyper offense has with terra is as great as the potential balance or stall gains from terra. Every mon has something to gain from terra, and the amount one mon gains from terra over the amount any other mon in the same tier gains is debatable at best. That, is the balance we can only wish to acheive.

With terrastylization, the options for building are insane. While some sets become prevalent, those sets are also countered by other pokemon, some potentially opposing terra. This fosters a metagame that breeds creativity, adding again many more options and making this one of the funnest and potentially most diverse metagames. Every mon has options to break or resist anything. This may need to be limited in order to make games more consistent and not result in games won by whomever got the biggest "gotcha" on their opponent (which is effectively a win secured by teambuilding). But we should not ignore that this game played between opponents while teambuilding is one that is not only real, but also very competitively interesting. It would be very very stinky doo doo if this was entirely removed and the gen turned into just another gen 8. The best way to limit it imo would be through either seeing terra types at preview, or by restricting who might be able to terra.

PS: I think its really lame to remove mechanics game freak put in the game. I know we removed dynamax so there's precedent for it, but I think we can all agree dynamax was just really really dumb (for singles), and most of us knew that by day 2. This has the potential to be something far more competitively interesting, and I would hate for this to get the same treatment as dynamax but with less time and less consideration just because theres precedent for scrapping an in-game mechanic now. Its debatably not even our place to rule on this. Dynamax was just an exception to this as it was exceptionally mind-numbing.

 

[Moyashi]

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.

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.

Your whole post is comically self assured and arrogant, not to mention pretentious, between the pompous "you think tera is broken? Well you just haven't played enough" and trying to dismiss people's actual experiences (dragonite has multiple viable types so your smugness is hilariously unearned).

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.

Skeledirge primarily runs fairy but can comfortably run other tera types (to say nothing of ita ability to 1v1 mons it should on paper lose too because of unaware but that is another subject). Tera isn't simply "what am i weak to", it's more complex than that.

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.

Anytime someone accuses another of not wanting to adapt and learn, they are often so up their own backside. The fact that you accuse pro ban people of being lazy instead of logically and rationally responding to their points is more a show of your pretentiousness. Oh and comparing a debate about a competitive game mechanicnto the civil rights movement is uh... Tactless to say the least.

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.

And then if time went by, Skeledirge players adapt by using tera water and turning the tables on Gholdengo. Whoops. Point is, most viable pokemon have multiple viable teras which greatly expand the amount of possibilities which results in more guesswork rather than logically solving things based on team comp.

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.

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.

No offense but this borders on disingenous. These scenarios of "check tanks attempt to surprise KO them" are not only not consistent, but also dependant on things like the opponent also terastilizing. you also act like you can just magically be able to handle what is functionally a different pokemon after they terastilize even when you don't prepare for it. This all ignores the fact that teams can and do run multiple offensive threats. You don't just have to worry about one threat doing so. And this makes games extra volatile.

 

[ant4456]

Yo I think we need some mods to reign in the debate a bit if Tera is getting compared to the civil rights movement. Both sides have gotten unnecessarily hostile at points, and it does nothing to help the reason we’re all here, to discuss what should be done with Tera.

I still think that doing the ban in stages is far and away the best option, and those saying stuff like the Tera clause would do nothing are being a bit silly considering that we haven’t played with that rule at all and don’t know how it would impact things

while we talk about that am I the only one severely annoyed about the emote options

why is the only disproving options "Laughing At You" and "Angry At You"; why can't I simply like... have a basic disagreement emote. And if you say "well reply", well one, I'm not gonna reply to literally every post I disagree with, and I know that a lot of people use it as a dislike button lol

If I've done the laugh emote on your post, there's a 90% chance I am not really laughing at you, it's just like... one of the only options lol

and personally, I think it creates a way more hostile/toxic attitude than what a simple disagreement emote addition would do lol

 

[Nagari]

I think the most balanced compromise is one single Pokémon can Tera and its type is down at team preview. You get the creativity of team building like a mega Pokemon and most likely, a counterplay can be improvised for every game (with all Pokemon being able to Tera, you cannot form a specific gameplay against the opponent at all).

In the case of an outrightban, I think a Tera ladder should be made.

 

[alephgalactus]

while we talk about that am I the only one severely annoyed about the emote options

why is the only disproving options "Laughing At You" and "Angry At You"; why can't I simply like... have a basic disagreement emote. And if you say "well reply", well one, I'm not gonna reply to literally every post I disagree with, and I know that a lot of people use it as a dislike button lol

If I've done the laugh emote on your post, there's a 90% chance I am not really laughing at you, it's just like... one of the only options lol

and personally, I think it creates a way more hostile/toxic attitude than what a simple disagreement emote addition would do lol

There are also the “sad” and “shocked” emotes but I agree, this gen has hammered home how much we need a downvote button on this site.

 

[ant4456]

There are also the “sad” and “shocked” emotes but I agree, this gen has hammered home how much we need a downvote button on this site.

with how radically different the opinions have become with way more varying philosophies on how the game is to be played/managed, sfuff like the fact that positions are now labeled leads to a lot more toxicity imo

this thread doesn't feel co-operative in any way, it feels more like "everyone go here and hash it all out", and yet it's become even more split seemingly

except tera blast ban we all agree thats the worst proposal lol

 

[ayevon]

I wanna push back on the idea that terastylization inherently improves the diversity of pokemon because it's ability to compensate for something a pokemon lacks (whether it be typing defensively, coverage etc). To me this seems like faulty thinking, and could maybe even be worse for diversity. To keep it short and sweet, you no longer need to rely on type diversity in order to build well structured teams. You don't NEED a ghost type to be spinblocker, your Garchomp or Glimmora can be a ghost type. You don't NEED a sucker punch resist for Chien Pao and Kingambit with fighting tera Gholdengo. Obviously, pokemon will still have niches, the ability to cover threats with your natural types is still important, but I think what terrastylization allows for is a smaller pool of the very best pokemon cover a more significant portion of the metagame than they would have in the past. I think you saw a similar phenomenon with heavy duty boots in sword and shield, where it often become optimal to simply opt out of playing with hazards in mind by using a team centralized around multiple magic guard and boots users. So pokemon that could have had effective niches as removers in the metagame probably had much more obsolete roles due it simply being a better strategy to not bother with it all. I think that same thing could happen for pokemon that could or did have niche roles due to their typing, where it simply because more optimal to use the most viable pokemon with tera to cover type weaknesses as oppossed to more niche pokemon who fill roles with their natural type.

 

[Piplz]

1) What defensive pokemon can make especially good use of terastalization? This might be a wall picking up a better type (Avalugg into, frankly, anything), a defensive pivot shedding a weakness (Slowtwins going mono-water to better check ghosts), hard walling a threat (Water Absorb mons going tera ghost to wall Palafin, may he rest in peace), or something more creative.

I don't want to expand on this too much because it isn't the point of the thread, but personally, I've actually enjoyed keeping Avalugg as an ice type in a Slowking/Avalugg core. In that duo I tend to tera the slowking more than the Avalugg, if any of these two at all. In Snow, Avalugg's physical bulk is so big that a SE hit on snowlugg deals less damage than a neutral hit on 252/252+ pex. I know it sounds absurd.... but it's actually the case. Staying Ice also lets it get extra damage on body press for free when Snow is up and as a result i've removed iron def in favor of EQ to hit non-Air Balloon variants of Gholdengo when they inevitably come in expecting a free spinblock. Sadly it deals like 50% so it turned out to be far from being a clean solution to Gholdengo, but hey it's something.

Either way, having played a bit of stall past few days, I've liked Poison-Clodsire if used as an unaware wall in order to get rid of its water weakness and to keep the immunity to toxic and ability to remove tspikes which probably isn't there on any other member. Ground Dondozo to stay in on stray Thunderbolt users seems okay, kinda, especially if you have cursed enough to survive EQ. Poison Scream Tail is funny (budget clef), but not that good either. Grass Florges is kinda fun. I haven't really found anything really noteworthy though, personally.

 

[Cdijk16]

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.

I think this post here summarizes the arguments to ban terastal very well. I would like to add that while predictions have always been part of the game, Terastal takes it to an absolute extreme. The Gen 9 meta is very volatile as many setup sweepers can sweep easily if given just one free turn. Most Tera abusers have multiple viable types and it's almost impossible to know which one they're using. If you guess wrong you can pretty much lose on the spot. The lack of information leads to 50-50 guessing games of the time. Unlike most other predictions, the stakes are very high in that you can win or lose on the spot if predicted wrong.

I think that we should create an alternative OU ladder with Tera allowed so that we don't alienate newer players.
I'd like to note that these are just my first impressions, the gen is still new, so my opinion may change with time.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

Aren't you limited to only one Z-Move per battle?

You can bring multiple mons with Z crystals. You can only use it once. You can also only Terastalize once.

 

[gregdawiz]

I wanna push back on the idea that terastylization inherently improves the diversity of pokemon because it's ability to compensate for something a pokemon lacks (whether it be typing defensively, coverage etc). To me this seems like faulty thinking, and could maybe even be worse for diversity. To keep it short and sweet, you no longer need to rely on type diversity in order to build well structured teams. You don't NEED a ghost type to be spinblocker, your Garchomp or Glimmora can be a ghost type. You don't NEED a sucker punch resist for Chien Pao and Kingambit with fighting tera Gholdengo. Obviously, pokemon will still have niches, the ability to cover threats with your natural types is still important, but I think what terrastylization allows for is a smaller pool of the very best pokemon cover a more significant portion of the metagame than they would have in the past. I think you saw a similar phenomenon with heavy duty boots in sword and shield, where it often become optimal to simply opt out of playing with hazards in mind by using a team centralized around multiple magic guard and boots users. So pokemon that could have had effective niches as removers in the metagame probably had much more obsolete roles due it simply being a better strategy to not bother with it all. I think that same thing could happen for pokemon that could or did have niche roles due to their typing, where it simply because more optimal to use the most viable pokemon with tera to cover type weaknesses as oppossed to more niche pokemon who fill roles with their natural type.

I feel like it would be a similar situation to TerraBlast. Like its a good option but having to rely and basically forcing something like Glimmora to be the one you terrastylize means that you dont have the option to terrastylize something else. And if you choose not to terrastylize Glimmora into ghost that means you may potentially not have a spin blocker which may be a very vital role missing on ur team. I think youre right regarding small roles but any major role would be tough to have to solve with terrastylization every game

 

[alephgalactus]

I think that we should create an alternative OU ladder with Tera allowed so that we don't alienate newer players.
I'd like to note that these are just my first impressions, the gen is still new, so my opinion may change with time.

That would please both sides, but it runs the risk of splitting the playerbase.

…is what I would say if we hadn’t had a successful Natdex OU ladder running alongside the regular OU ladder last gen (and the arguments being used against it were pretty much the same as the arguments being used against a separate Tera ladder here), proving that OU spinoffs don’t really split the playerbase to a significant degree. I’m all for this. It would also allow us to observe the evolution of the meta with and without Terastal in tandem, instead of something like “whoops we banned a whole bunch of stuff and turns out Tera was the problem after all, time to suspect-then-leave-unbanned-then-suspect-again-and-finally-ban Tera and drop each thing individually over the course of probably months, sorry guys, everyone go play Randoms until we fix the meta” or “whoops we banned Tera and now the meta is garbage, time to argue for months about whether to retest it” a year from now.

 

[Rothj]

That would please both sides, but it runs the risk of splitting the playerbase.

…is what I would say if we hadn’t had a successful Natdex OU ladder running alongside the regular OU ladder last gen (and the arguments being used against it were pretty much the same as the arguments being used against a separate Tera ladder here), proving that OU spinoffs don’t really split the playerbase to a significant degree. I’m all for this.

I actually agree that if a ban has to happen, another ladder with tera would be really good. Or just some version of ubers that can be played without the box legendaries.

 

[Brainfly]

Honestly I just love new mechanics. I loved Megas, I loved Z-moves, I *was okay* with Dynamax and I find Tera very fun. Is it the most competitive? I don't know, but last OU post-Dynamax was some of the most boring shit I've ever seen (and I p much did not play at all) and so I'd personally like to keep Tera around and see how the meta shapes around it. It adds an extra layer to the team builder and honestly it just feels very exciting, even if I'm on the opposing end of a Tera I wasn't expecting.

 

[ayevon]

I feel like it would be a similar situation to TerraBlast. Like its a good option but having to rely and basically forcing something like Glimmora to be the one you terrastylize means that you dont have the option to terrastylize something else. And if you choose not to terrastylize Glimmora into ghost that means you may potentially not have a spin blocker which may be a very vital role missing on ur team. I think youre right regarding small roles but any major role would be tough to have to solve with terrastylization every game

Yeah I don't think it actually would affect the pool of viability greatly, but as with most any powerful mechanic, the better pokemon are going to abuse it a lot better than the weaker pokemon can, as oppossed to it being something that lifts weaker pokemon up to be able to compete with the more viable ones. Heavy duty boots didn't increase Charizard's viability in OU as much as did it Zeraora's. Yes, Quiver Dance Butterfree can now break through steel types with Tera Blast fire, but the terastylization mechanic probably widens the gap between Volcarona and Butterfree as opossed to making it closer.

 

[alephgalactus]

You know what would be really interesting but also completely unworkable because it’s too complex and no one would want to code it? A clause saying “only Pokémon in UUBL and below can Terastallize”. I feel like that’s bordering on OM/Pet Mod territory at that point, but I’d be really interested to see a meta where everything gets the new mechanic except the things that could abuse it best. (Theoretically, of course. This isn’t an actual proposal. No one would ever accept this.)

The biggest problem with this, besides the obvious one of “we don’t do this arbitrary nonsense”, is that it might create a vicious cycle where a Pokémon from a lower tier gains enough of a niche in OU to rise into the tier proper because it can Terastallize, but it then loses the ability to Terastallize because it’s in OU, but it’s unviable in OU without Tera so it drops back down, but then it gets Tera again so it rises back up, and so on ad nauseam.