Swagplay is a garbage play style, not gonna sugar coat it. As much as I like hax (I AM the King of Hax), relying on confusion to work is flimsy, and Substitute / Foul Play / Swagger is skilless and makes the competitive scene look bad. It's annoying all around and stagnates the metagame.
Eron said:
Today I was battling there in the Battle Spot, it was as always, people using Ubers, Legends, OU, but, something new, a ParaFlincher, Togekiss to be exact, it was as annoying as SwaggPlay, now I know how people feel when I use SwaggPlay, so, if they ban SwaggPlay, then, they should also ban ParaFlinching.
I can tell you are new if Paraflinch is new to you. Paraflinch has been around since 4th Gen, and only two Pokemon make use of this strategy, Jirachi and Togekiss. This gen it got nerfed, now if you have at least an electric-type (which is common), paralysis is non existent, and you resist both flinching moves (Iron Head/Air Slash). Albeit not as good, Ground-types also are immune to T-Wave and only really fear Body Slam, albeit Jirachi still fears Ground-types, as all of them carry Earthquake. With Paraflinch at least you have a common and reliable way of countering, unlike Swagplay.
Also, a +2 attack each turn is an advantage... to the SwagPlay user. Why? Because it's pointless for the opposite side if all you're going to do is hide behind a sub until you can get off Foul Play/need to Swagger each turn, you're only really boosting yourself up (with a 50% chance (luck) recoil) to sweep.
The entire game is luck based. The issue is that people in smogon don't want to adjust their play style, there ARE counters to EVERY strategy, but instead of evolving naturally with the games smogon insists on holding on to the status quo, banning anything that threatens it.
Allow me to tell you this: Ice Beam's 10% Freeze chance is low, happens rarely and you don't use Ice Beam for the Freeze chance. Same goes for all other luck-based things like crits, or Focus Blast accuracy. You're not forcing a luck event. You just accept there might be hax, and you use the move skillfully to make the best out of it. On the other hand, you use SwagPlay on purpose in order to get into a series of luck-based events that can help you win or lose regardless of your skill level. And I'm not gonna talk about how ridiculous it is in Ubers, since it's already bad in OU.
Now, tell me how to counter SwagPlay.
Own Tempo has bad distribution and Pokemon can still get paralyzed by the T-Wave that always accompanies SwagPlay users. The only Pokemon that resists both Swagger and Thunder Wave is Numel. Plus, if a team is forced to carry an Own Tempo Pokemon 'cos SwagPlay, that's overcentralizing the meta, which again leads to a ban.
Lum Berry is one-use, can't counter since it will be used on switch, and even if you kill one Prankster, there will be others. Also, unless you use a Ground or Electric type, you can still get T-Waved first, probably fail to KO, and then get Swaggered. And again, if you're forced to run a Ground/Electric type with Lum Berry 'cos SwagPlay, that's overcentralizing the meta, which again leads to a ban.
None of the above are solid counters.
The entire game is luck based. The issue is that people in smogon don't want to adjust their play style, there ARE counters to EVERY strategy, but instead of evolving naturally with the games smogon insists on holding on to the status quo, banning anything that threatens it.
Do you have any idea how much that sounds like a conspiracy theory? The reason Smogon does these suspect tests is to test if they really are broken. It is true that luck is a part of every battle, but that doesn't mean it should be allowed to become THE deciding factor in every battle. There is, by definition, no point in competitive battling if competition, itself, is discarded in favor of primarily luck-based strategies that require ultra-specific counters (hampering the ability to prepare for anything else). The flaw in a lot of arguments is that there are only two options: complete ban or unrestricted use. This fails to account for an all-too-viable solution (for many - but not all, mind you - scenarios) of moderation in all things. In the case of luck, it's unreasonable to try to completely remove it from the game, but it's just as undesirable to leave it completely unregulated, which could be loosely compared to anarchy in a country.
I don't see an easy solution to the swagplay problem (yes, it IS a problem and definitely needs some form or regualtion) but I can guarantee there will be those unhappy with whatever decision is reached. I do admit, 'moderate' regulation on swagplay likely won't work, but that doesn't change the fact that participants on both sides of the argument are still vulnerable to flawed thinking, no matter what form it may take. All I ask is that we all take a moment and think WHY we hold the position we do.
I suspect some simply hate Smogon because they're Smogon while others are supporting Smogon for equally as unfounded reasons, and in such cases I'm asking that real reasons for an opinion be developed rather than this (or any other argument) devolve into an unintelligent, baseless war of empty threats, name-calling, parroting of empty opinions, or whatnot. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here and I have no way of knowing what reasons anyone here has for their opinions unless they openly share. As such I wont jump to any direct assumptions or accusations. I hope to bring this to the surface simply because I know such people exist, as I have encountered prime examples in the past who outright declared their sentiments. It's up to you to discern why you REALLY hold the position you do. If there's one thing I've found, it's that admitting it when I'm wrong about something is perfectly alright and something is wrong with anyone who looks down on another for admitting an error. Fighting irrationally just to avoid being the one who was 'wrong' is not something I'm willing to stoop to, and I hope you - as a reader - can see my point if you didn't already feel similarly. Also, please note that not all arguments have a side that is completely right and another that is completely wrong. There are cases where both sides may be wrong, or even those where both are correct, just misunderstanding the other and/or just approaching the situation in a different manner. I only ask that you treat those you see as your opponents with the same respect as someone you see as an ally in the discussion. Sore winners are just as unappealing as sore losers, after all.
In the spirit of declaring the reasoning for an opinion, here is the general reasoning for my stance:
While I may seem to side with Smogon on most things, this isn't always the case (nor has it been). The decisions they made that I support are ones I find that are indeed justified. I personally find a sort of honor in playing fair (not to say those who don't play by the rules I do are dishonorable) and as such I generally avoid the 'down and dirty' strategies that require no skill to use. I also realize there is a difference between simply using smogon sets because they're "better than the rest" (with no thought into how to use them. Players like this, I feel, are almost worthy of some of the derogatory names flung at users of said sets, but tend to fall to experienced players who know what they're doing) and actually putting thought into the design of a team, using smogon sets because that's what the team actually calls for and because they serve a definite purpose on the team. I see Smogon itself as nothing more than a reference; more of a scientific journal of successful experiments worthy of consideration than a law book of the only available possibilities. Few who treat smogon as metaphorical law have beat me, though it isn't impossible that I can be outplayed even when I can deduce exactly what my opponent is using (I have lost several times to some deemed "smogon worshipers" because they had the skill and planning needed to back up their team). By occasionally deviating from the tried-and-true, I run the same high-risk, high-reward game that most competitive players do even with standard sets. The key is knowing the game, the mechanics, what to expect, and how to counter as much as possible with the pokemon you choose - standard sets or not. Smogon stuff does work, but it wouldn't if the set designers were not open to trying new things and/or possibilities. Without the immense effort, testing, and thought put into the sets, they could easily be countered by the average player using something abnormal when the smogon sets were used as intended. What some fail to note is how often smogon updates to account for new threats and remove obsolete ones. What works today may not work as well tomorrow, and that's what keeps this game interesting, and what warrants suspect tests and occasionally bans/unbans
The fact that overcentralization is being mentioned as a reason this isn't broken is like saying dictatorship isn't bad as long as nobody is being oppressed.
Just throwing out the obvious here that the metagame is determined by the majority of players. The banning process is voted upon by the majority of good players. The competitive game itself is nothing more than what the players decide for it to be. Stop making out every suspect test to be a "oh no Smogon is trying to metagame the way they want it boohoo". If it's not broken then the majority of players who qualify for voting, and thus have a firm grasp on what makes a good metagame, will determine it as such. What Smogon does is no different than the guys who fill out the ballots for you at election booths.
Yes, but the degree of luck is the key point. Misses, crits, random status afflictions, etc are nothing because it's not going to win you the game all the time. A strategy that forces luck upon the game and ultimately makes the battle a coin flip (that's a best case scenario btw) is a major concern as it removes any sense of competition from the game. There's a healthy amount of luck that can add surprise and variety to the game, then there's the luck that can be abused to the point where there's no fun, no competition, no skill, nothing.
"What Smogon does is no different than the guys who fill out the ballots for you at election booths"
What makes you think there isn't corruption at the ballot boxes?
I don't use swagplay. or evasion or multiple sleep, but I don't have problems with people using, because there are always counters.
smogon is nice for using actual bad pokemon in a competitive manner, but I have an issue with banning moves abilities and strategies because it's annoying to some people
What evidence do you have that there would be corruption?
If you're proven to be good at the game (you have a high ladder score that you need to be provide proof for), you get to vote. Everyone's vote is worth the same.
The fact that overcentralization is being mentioned as a reason this isn't broken is like saying dictatorship isn't bad as long as nobody is being oppressed.
A little off topic, but brief history 'lesson': dictatorship was actually welcomed in the past (not universally, mind you, but enough worth noting. Take Sparta vs Athens as an example), especially in Greek and Roman times. Julius Caesar would have been a perfect example, too, if it wasn't for his assassination. At the time, dictators generally overturned an unstable, selfish, and/or oppressive government and would usually bring about favorable changes for the general populace before eventually stepping down voluntarily. Caesar's political rivals feared he was too popular with both the people and the military and wouldn't ultimately step down, hence they planned the Ides of March incident. In any case, it has only been in relatively recent times that dictatorships have obtained a negative connotation due to various political leaders abusing or otherwise misusing their power in such a position. Be it on a technicality, I'd say the analogy needs to be rephrased :/
While you make a valid point, you failed to note the miniscule quantity of users/wielders that are viable on a variety of teams. Many such users are frail or need significant support to be effective against many other forms of team strategies.
Chandelure said:
I don't use swagplay. or evasion or multiple sleep, but I don't have problems with people using, because there are always counters.
Again, the issue is not whether such counters exist, it's whether or not you are forced to sacrifice vital team slots to counter a strategy, and the support such a replacement would require, potentially disrupting more of the team's strategy. This is the basis of what we mean by 'over-centralizing' since you are essentially forced to carry one of a select few specific pokemon on every team to counter a highly specific set of threats that would otherwise rip through everything to the end result of sacrificing against a wider range of "normal" threats. Not a perfect example, but imagine if a threat emerged that only Dunsparce could stop effectively. This would mean you'd lose to any team carrying the pokemon unless you carried Dunsparce, who then unbalances your team so much you would lose to every team NOT carrying the new threat. There may be a way or two to skirt the problem with clever thinking, but regardless, the hypothetical threat would severely limit what was usable and what wasn't to a mere handful of teams, resulting in a "you have to use this team if you want to win" type of metagame.
"What Smogon does is no different than the guys who fill out the ballots for you at election booths"
What makes you think there isn't corruption at the ballot boxes?
I don't use swagplay. or evasion or multiple sleep, but I don't have problems with people using, because there are always counters.
smogon is nice for using actual bad pokemon in a competitive manner, but I have an issue with banning moves abilities and strategies because it's annoying to some people
So, let me get this straight. You expect me to carry Espeon or Thundurus-I in every single one of my teams? That's overcentralizing the meta and limits teambuilding. Landorus-T can counter Mega Blaziken. Should we allow Mega Blaziken in OU?
First, not everything in the game has counters, and second, if something is threatening to all playstyles and forces all players to carry specific Pokemon to counter it or play it themselves, then I can't see how that something is healthy for the game. I very much doubt you'd like someone to Spore your entire team. What are you gonna do? Carry Espeon in every team you make? Maybe carry an Own Tempo Pokemon, an Insomnia Pokemon and a Pokemon with Aura Sphere? That's a bit restricting, isn't it?
And PG-24 simply compared the job of smogon to that of those aiding in the election booths. There is no flawed analogy. Whether they do their job correctly or not is irrelevant. And in Smogon's case, the votes are public anyway.
And iSharingan, as an expert in my history, I can guarantee you dictatorship wasn't welcome in ancient Greece.
Edited to clear confusion. In places like Athens, of course it wasn't welcome, but that one city-state didn't speak for the whole region. Also dictatorship and democracy were not the only two options either, and the issue is not what was predominant. I also wasn't speaking as if the populaces were consistently in favor/out of favor with the form of rule. The politics generally followed cycles. Thank you for calling me on my oversight, though. I do not wish for this to become an off-topic history debate, whether my memory is faulty on some of these issues or not. I (and anyone else interested enough to pursue it) will just begin browsing our history again in more depth for our own satisfaction.
No problem. Now, I'd like everyone (including me) to stay on topic.The matter at hand is SwagPlay. Not whether Smogon is good or not, not dictatorship and elections. Thank you.
All megas should be allowed.
--
You already build teams based on roles alone, many that already are on teams to serve utility purposes already counter swagplay well enough.
Since you want on topic I'll just say I don't think swagplay should be banned, but I suppose I mean little overall since I don't play by their rules anyway. My only rule is no legendaries.
But why? Legendaries can be countered. Jirachi can counter Dialga. So should we allow Dialga? Of course, if by legendaries you mean all event-only Pokemon too (most of which aren't stronger than, say, Garchomp and don't deserve a ban), then I stand corrected. If you play by VGC rules, then it's your choice and we respect it. But if that's the case, don't judge Smogon's decisions, as we don't judge GF's decisions.
I swear moltres would rather be Fletchinder than itself it sucks so much. On topic, ban it. I mean, actually, don't, I need to have fun on 1v1 somehow.
