Can we not dilute our arguments to “oh well we get more likes and you don’t therefore your argument is wrong haha”? I’d prefer if we actually had a debate about this instead of half-assed arguments from both sides. I’ll just extend this post with some tera ban arguments:
Ok, yeah, sure, if we ban some stuff from OU like Roaring Moon, that would stop the problem a bit. But hey, Dragonite is right there, too! And if we ban Dragonite, who’s to say we can’t just spam Baxcalibur? With Baxcalibur gone, just use Garchomp and we’ll be fine! Suddenly, like 60% of OU is banned, and it’s all because of one thing: Tera makes them way too fuckin’ strong. I’m not saying that any of these examples are outright broken, of course not, but I think they all easily have potential to be broken when you factor in Tera’s double STAB boost or a free 3rd STAB on their coverage move like Earthquake or whatever. Defensively, it’s also horrifying on bulky sweepers. Your Volcarona answer is great until it goes Tera Water, sets up a million Quiver Dances, and sweeps you. You can handle Annihilape fine, but then it goes Tera Steel and just rips you open with Rage Fist. You got your fighting in on a Garganacl, great work! But now it’s gonna Tera Fairy and set up a billion IDefs. Of course, you could Tera defensively to stop them, but that can easily come back to bite your ass later when you don’t have a Tera to stop the OTHER sweeper. In total, here’s all the mons I think are broken or have potential to be broken with Tera:
Annihilape
Roaring Moon
Chi-Yu
Dragonite
Garganacl
Chien-Pao
Volcarona
Iron Valiant
If you think we should just ban these instead of banning the mechanic, that’s great, think how you’d like. But to me, banning 7 Pokémon when there’s one root cause to them being broken is just too much.
can we stop making bullshit slippery slope arguments that make no sense and are relatively demeaning
slippery slope is, by definition, a fallacy. if you want people to take the debate gloves off, here's the facts we have:
there is no evidence that terastilization is making the worse player win more than say, gen 8
there is no evidence that terastilization is a mechanic that would make many more pokemon that wouldn't be broken before, broken
there is no evidence that terastilization has centralized the meta
as stated at the beginning of all of these types of threads on Smogon, the onus is on those who want something banned/restricted in order to prove that the mechanic/pokemon/item in question should/must be banned or restricted.
there has been no real proof given by the anti-tera side of the argument besides hypotheticals (often times silly) or a fallacy, a literal fallacy.
there has been many replays, arguments and retorts by tournament/top ladder players that indicate that highly experienced players don't as a whole want a ban
there have been more of said posts with more likes than the opposite side
the argument of "uncompetitiveness" in this thread has entirely been an argument on "vibes" rather than anything tangible, while there are many examples of the opposite side.
In conclusion: from a debate perspective, if we were to take the thread as a whole?
you'd probably have at best the conclusion of restriction, nothing close to the ban argument
there's this really funny fallacy I always see all over these threads and it's the idea that "competitiveness is not subjective"
just saying that something is uncompetitive because an interaction is possible in the game is not an objective statement
it's also not indicative of any deeper meaning.
it's only indicative that that play might be arguably uncompetitive in a vacuum, nothing about an actual 6v6 game unless proven with replays, data, more deeper analysis.
