Announcement np: SV OU Suspect Process, Round 12 - Moth To A Flame

[ant4456]

This is not an opinion that one would expect of me, but I find myself unable to find any actual compelling reason that Volcarona is more broken than the average power level of OU, or creates dynamics that are not otherwise present.

Finch's argument that broken check broken cannot be used as an argument for anti-Volcarona ban, especially, feels pretty off to me when that is essentially this meta. We have had actual, top level players, who influenced massively the course of this tier, pretty explicitly say that they wanted the meta shaped around extreme threats that check extreme threats. Volcarona may have a better matchup against less bulky Offense, but I for one welcome any recourse against the ladder infested full of the same HO cores, and I cannot find a reason that Volcarona is uniquely bad.

Like, deadass, I can think of less actual, consistent checks to Kingambit than Volcarona. Kingambit with its own sets can find itself tanking high-powered attacks, getting free Sword Dance boosts and then using priority in its favor. From there you have Encore and maybe status, but that's about it, and that's less than Volcarona having actual Pokemon that you can use to check it, and Pokemon that can be used on several teamstyles. Running Clodsire on a Balance team is not going to kill you, and in fact it is pretty damn good. Kingambit's recourse is essentially around limiting it by not just attacking it, or trying to catch it into Tera Catch 22's that are not consistent. And right now is considered one of Kingambit's weaker periods through the tier. If that Pokemon at its best was not broken, I find it hard to think Volcarona is uniquely busted.

You wanted your Tera Broken check Broken metagame, and that's what happened. Volcarona is a broken that checks some other brokens, which is the same as most other top tiers in this meta. Do not say "this is not what we wanted", because that is what literally a member of the council advocated for, and berated the rest of the council at the time for banning this thing. Volcarona is on its way to a DNB 50% 50% vote and the council back at square one, and at this point I just think it's funny. Use the Metagame Knowledge :tm: by playing in order to just know the Tera, EZ.

Now to be clear, because some would categorize me as saying "it should be banned but I don't want it to", this is not me saying that Volcarona should be banned, but that it should not be banned because it is literally just an average top tier in this metagame, let's be serious. Almost every top tier can do almost anything provided, this one literally has more counterplay on average.

 

[Ctann]

It would be nice to see replays of why people can’t deal with Volcarona. Outside of some completely unexpected things like giga drain on a Tera fairy Volcarona bypassing your attempt to alomolola flip safely into full HP cinderace with gunk shot and preserve all 5 of your remaining Pokémon’s, and now you just lost almomola, which can no longer alomolola flip out of the opponents dragonite.

I used that example because that’s an example of when a not so great set becomes great haha

I can see so so so many replays on high ladder of roaring moon wrecking teams with checks like skarmory, balloons, etc. those games often become 50/50s on whether you roost when it knocks off, or are you gonna get it taunted away from you. This is an example of an actual broken pokemon with actual demonstrable replays in high ladder of how it comes down to 50/50s on a regular basis.

I might know a teams entire sets, and it will have roaring moon, and I’m still on the edge of my seat about how I’m gonna win this MU on the critical 50:50 turns. Meanwhile if I know a Volcarona set, it’s child’s play to beat [volcarona] unless the team is weak to it, in which case the structure of the game flow is imperative to winning.

it’s also much easier to guess a volc set than people imply. The best players follow game flows that match the Volcarona they’re packing. Is volc being used defensively more liberally? It’s possibly a poor MU. Is it getting pivoted in and wearing down your fire checks, fishing to scout for the reaction? Probably has a MU advantage.

if people are complaining about tournament games rather than ladder games, tell me how is the unpredictability different from the unpredictability of almost every other top Tera threat???!!

 

[Dead by Daylight]

Especially in a unique case like Volcarona where prepping for all of its sets is essentially impossible without a fat blob of a Special wall, that really isn't reasonable.

Is this really that unique of a case, though? I can list quite a few potent mons in the metagame right now insofar as prepping for all of their sets is essentially impossible without a dedicated wall, and even those few "dedicated walls" can be beat down quite easily.

all Tera types not bolded and italicized are not mentioned in the set import as choices, but are found in the analysis itself.


Iron Valiant has multiple different Tera types listed on the Dex: namely, its Calm Mind + Booster Energy set lists all of:

Tera Ghost (which allows Iron Valiant to notably 2HKO Galarian Slowking, Skeledirge, and Gholdengo)
Tera Steel (which completely blanks Galarian Slowking and Specs Darkrai trying to Sludge Bomb it)
Tera Fairy (boosting Moonblast's power to high levels)

Now, sure, these can all be beaten by a dedicated special blob like Clod or Blissey. But then you run into the issue of the Swords Dance set, which decimates Blissey. It can run the following Tera types:

Tera Dark (boosting Knock Off to become another nuclear weapon)
Tera Steel (for the same reasons as above)

Ok, what if I use a physical wall and luckily load into a Valiant that reveals Close Combat? Well, it would be a real shame if my Dondozo were to get hit by a Moonblast. The Mixed BE set can use:

Tera Steel
Tera Fairy
Tera Dark

Well. Maybe there are a few counters across all sets of Valiant like Clodsire, but not much that effectively checks all of its sets that can't be teched for.


How about Kingambit, then? Its sets aren't nearly as distinct as Valiant's, but they all have varying Tera types (and items as well) that flip its matchup into things that would otherwise beat it. The Offensive SD set can run the following Tera types and items:

Tera Dark (annihilates anything that's not Dark-resistant and runs through most stalls)
Tera Flying (flips the script on Tusk, Glisc, and CB Zama trying to hit it with a Fighting or Ground move)
Tera Fire (gives Gambit an immunity to Burn, letting it attack stuff like Volc, Will-o Pult, and Tran without fear, as well as gain a Fire resist)
Tera Ghost (completely blanks the Fighting weakness, letting it take full advantage of stuff like CB Zama without the Rock weakness)
Tera Fighting [+ Low Kick] (always OHKOs defensive Tusk at +2 / 5 fallen and 3HKOs Dozo at 5 fallen)

Black Glasses (same reasoning as Tera Dark, just annihilate most everything that doesn't resist Dark)
Air Balloon (set up on Gliscor / Lando)
Lum Berry (avoids Burn and Paralysis)

Well, let's see the Bulky SD set.

Tera Fairy [potentially with Tera Blast] (surprises Zama and Tusk, along with giving Gambit a Fighting resist)
Tera Flying (same reasoning as above)

There are even more things that can use two or more Tera types or items (hell, even sets) to confound unsuspecting counters: here's a list of stuff that can do so.






These are just OU mons; there are potentially other lower-tier threats that can do the same!

To be clear: I am not saying Volcarona cannot pick and choose its counters. It most certainly can.

My point is that it does not do that to such a "unique" extent that the pro-Ban side claims it can.

 

[quacc]

Like, deadass, I can think of less actual, consistent checks to Kingambit than Volcarona. Kingambit with its own sets can find itself tanking high-powered attacks, getting free Sword Dance boosts and then using priority in its favor. From there you have Encore and maybe status, but that's about it, and that's less than Volcarona having actual Pokemon that you can use to check it, and Pokemon that can be used on several teamstyles. Running Clodsire on a Balance team is not going to kill you, and in fact it is pretty damn good. Kingambit's recourse is essentially around limiting it by not just attacking it, or trying to catch it into Tera Catch 22's that are not consistent. And right now is considered one of Kingambit's weaker periods through the tier. If that Pokemon at its best was not broken, I find it hard to think Volcarona is uniquely busted.

Volcarona is a crazy Kingambit check larp tho... On a mon that opts to not run wisp >80% of the time and one that relies on being close to full HP just to fish for a burn chance is not very promising. Yes, you get forced out, and that means you check it exactly once if you're lucky (which is funny because you don't even one shot bulky Kingambit so the old textbook definition of check doesn't really apply if that's what you're referring to), but that's really it. There are way better answers to Kingambit like Skarmory (no tera ghost leftovers which can be played around by knocking off leftovers and bailing), Dondozo (of course), to some extent helmet TIng-Lu which has become popular, and the other flame bodies are just superior at checking it like Moltres, who is also quite good. I'll let calling a check slide, I guess, but it's not consistent at all lmao.

This whole thing gets even funnier when you look at some offense teams, where sometimes the whole way they beat Volcarona is revenge killing it with Kingambit sucker punch and relying on tera fire to ensure it doesn't get out of hand. Not every offense team is like this, sure, but this just goes to show how arguing that keeping Volcarona to check Kingambit is kinda scuffed...

I also think the mindset that "this mon isn't more broken than Kingambit" is really dumb considering that the tier in itself preps for Kingambit as its main cornerpiece and Volcarona is moreso the stray here that becomes problematic with lots of threats to account for. Even if Kingambit is the most broken thing in the tier, so what? It'll get suspected and you can vote ban on it after getting reqs if you want. Even if you choose to use the argument "Kingambit is more broken than x, but it isn't broken, so x is not broken" is a weak ass argument because all you're doing is drawing equivalencies that don't mean anything.

There are definitely ways you can argue for a DNB on Volcarona, but this is just not it.

 

[Ctann]

Volcarona is a crazy Kingambit check larp tho... On a mon that opts to not run wisp >80% of the time and one that relies on being close to full HP just to fish for a burn chance is not very promising. Yes, you get forced out, and that means you check it exactly once if you're lucky (which is funny because you don't even one shot bulky Kingambit so the old textbook definition of check doesn't really apply if that's what you're referring to), but that's really it. There are way better answers to Kingambit like Skarmory (no tera ghost leftovers which can be played around by knocking off leftovers and bailing), Dondozo (of course), to some extent helmet TIng-Lu which has become popular, and the other flame bodies are just superior at checking it like Moltres, who is also quite good. I'll let calling a check slide, I guess, but it's not consistent at all lmao.

This whole thing gets even funnier when you look at some offense teams, where sometimes the whole way they beat Volcarona is revenge killing it with Kingambit sucker punch and relying on tera fire to ensure it doesn't get out of hand. Not every offense team is like this, sure, but this just goes to show how arguing that keeping Volcarona to check Kingambit is kinda scuffed...

I also think the mindset that "this mon isn't more broken than Kingambit" is really dumb considering that the tier in itself preps for Kingambit as its main cornerpiece and Volcarona is moreso the stray here that becomes problematic with lots of threats to account for. Even if Kingambit is the most broken thing in the tier, so what? It'll get suspected and you can vote ban on it after getting reqs if you want. Even if you choose to use the argument "Kingambit is more broken than x, but it isn't broken, so x is not broken" is a weak ass argument because all you're doing is drawing equivalencies that don't mean anything.

There are definitely ways you can argue for a DNB on Volcarona, but this is just not it.

you’re making a fair point, but the onus should be on the ban voters to provide demonstrable, consistent ways that Volcarona is bypassing its checks that aren’t just simple metagame adaptations away from being resolved.

nearly every Volcarona bypass can be solved as the meta adapts. Gouging fire bypassed dondozo with a specific set and the meta adapted because that set came at great cost against other matchups.

what’s the current big-ticket bypasses, its ground and dragon apparently.

most of the rage is coming from fast tempo teams, which are one misplayed turn away from losing to volc. But fast tempo is very over represented right now. This is likely due to how many strong threats there are. This is highly correlated to more HO/offense/hybrid teams.

when fast tempo teams are the ones on the back foot, they often lose anyway. These teams rely on always being in a positioning advantage to win.

the meta is already adapting. Heck its usage isn’t quite up there, probably because of its inconsistency, which is causing more volatility in the Volcarona MU swinging. Doesn’t mean it’s broken, just means it’s volatile.

for broken.. there would need to be some element of unplayable against wouldn’t there?

eleki, urshifu rapid, etc. these reliably put in progress and could auto-win. Volc is a matchup queen, but consistency dud.

ps referring to consistency from a match ending perspective. It’s an excellent and consistent check to some metagame threats like Rillaboom for example.

it’s completely fair to compare Volcarona as it sets a reference point. That’s why I use roaring moon, as that can be predicted and still force progress, force wins. Volcarona doesn’t have the consistency of Chien Pao, magearna or even kingambit lol.

 

[ausma]

My point is that it does not do that to such a "unique" extent that the pro-Ban side claims it can.

While I get this on paper, I feel like this dismisses the fact that Volcarona's access to Quiver Dance and ability to spread Burn are both so innately flexible at mitigating blanket forms of counterplay that... yes, it does do it to a unique extent. Part of my own argument centered around how standard forms of counterplay for Volcarona that non-fat structures tend to employ often wind up falling to the mercy of its Tera type in practice due to the inherent strength of Quiver Dance and its initial defensive typing. Looking at your examples:

Kingambit gets massively disrupted by Encore and unlike Volcarona does actually actively care about being hit by Thunder Wave. Most notably though is that it doesn't (and really can't) exploit Tera Blast in the vast arrays that Volcarona can as a result of its Fire-type STAB being such an insane complement to most types offensively. It makes use of some like Tera Fairy and Tera Flying, but these types are fairly common Kingambit types and both still get blanked pretty hard by common tools used by offense that Volcarona has the ability to outleverage. The fact it relies on Sucker Punch also means that it can be pretty handily limited by fast Sucker Punch resistances which often is an interaction that occurs post-Tera. Frankly I can think of a lot of ways that offense can check it without really committing to checking it.

To your credit, this Pokemon also picks its checks to a pretty nasty extent. However the fact that it can't inflict direct status and none of its boosting moves are capable of boosting its Speed in tandem with its offenses does stand out since that's a huge way Volcarona is able to snowball past Encore and Thunder Wave in a lot of cases.

Regardless of whether you agree with my stance or not, though, is the fact it picks its checks to a comparable extent not an issue? Like Finchinator has said numerous times now, being complacent with its presence in the tier just because it imposes similar stressful dynamics to other top tiers and also happens to help check them is not really a great reason to keep it around. If Volcarona is broken for this reason, then so are Kingambit and Iron Valiant, and if over time they stand out in the way Volcarona does, they too should be given more dedicated assessment. I don't understand ant4456's point about this especially. If there are top tier offensive Pokemon that are comparatively broken and impose a net negative effect on the tier in and of themselves, then all will (and should) be banned over time, no? I feel like being fatalist about the state of the tier in this way and using it as a reason to not push for any kind of action is such a terrible and destructive mentality to have when it comes to improving the tier, regardless of what you believe is best for it.

 

[Ctann]

But ausma the “picking and choosing checks” comes at a price.

by choosing to commit to a high impact play like terastalizing, Volcarona is permanently altering the match dynamic. There is no more surprise Tera value after the high commitment play. Therefore a Volcarona will only commit if it either 1. Cracks open a team, or 2. Is in a match ending scenario. Both of these are idealistic of course, as there could be unexpected counterplay. Valiant doesn’t always share this, as it can use the dark type knock off without using Tera. Volcarona choosing checks requires the Tera. It requires the high-commitment play.

this is only showing high relevance against the over-represented fast tempo teams. The fast tempo teams being highly represented is itself a symptom of the meta of other consistent pokemon pressuring the team builder to the extent that at the highest level games are coming down to 50/50s on plays like whether the roaring moon will taunt or knock off, etc.

gouging fire picked the sets to beat the big whale, it then paid a price as the meta adapted.

my argument is the meta is adapting live to the relatively low usage Volcarona coin tossing matchups. It adapted much faster to things like moon with examples such as the extreme usage in landorus over Gliscor. This was necessitated due to their stronger impact on game ending.

 

[ausma]

by choosing to commit to a high impact play like terastalizing, Volcarona is permanently altering the match dynamic. There is no more surprise Tera value after the high commitment play. Therefore a Volcarona will only commit if it either 1. Cracks open a team, or 2. Is in a match ending scenario. Both of these are idealistic of course, as there could be unexpected counterplay.

As I've also explained in my Tera Blast post, I view Volcarona itself in sort of a similar way, in that having the ability to do it to this magnitude and warping a bevy of interactions in a way that cannot be feasibly played around in a reliable fashion, is not healthy and imposes a negative impact on the tier. Yes there is an opportunity cost, but arguing against pro-Ban by stating there's an opportunity cost misses the point of the argument.

You are also right that things adapt, and Gouging Fire is an amazing example of that, but you can't really adapt to something that will not only be able to adapt easily itself, but also has no one reliable trend for a potential adaptation to latch onto.

 

[Ctann]

The trends are there, it comes with usage. We have another live example to use. Garganacl was almost non existent for quite a while. Suddenly there was a surge in Garganacl and teams were scrambling to deal with it without running the otherwise defunct covert cloak gholdengo set.

Anyone running Garganacl could, for some times, easily climb the ranks of OU, since it had such an overwhelming matchup advantage against top designed teams that were getting spammed on ladder.

now, it’s much more challenging…

As recently as last weak I was running a really mediocre team that was easily 75% WR against teams that had a poor matchup to the Garg. And those teams were likely 75% of teams, so that’s winning a lot of games with just a Garg as the wincon.

now, the top of the ladder has significantly adapted to the surge in Garg, because it was so consistently scoring wins, and you’ll see everything from the return of grass knot on glowking to Tera steel clefable with mild support.

Volcarona is similar and has stolen unexpected games with its dragon sets, alas, it isn’t as effective or as destructive as Garg. And it also requires running Tera blast to really do damage, which sucks in the 50% or more of games where Volcarona isn’t chosen to be your Tera receiver.

but just like Garg, albeit slower, the meta has adapted to Volcarona and will continue to adapt, as teams are structured to deal with the highest impact sets.

and unlike kingambit, when you beat a Volcarona, you really beat it. It’s possible for a volc to be functionally useless when you beat it. The reward isn’t too high because the need to beat volc hasn’t been too high. I’d argue there has been more of a need to beat darkrai at high ladder than volc. Darkrai.. of all things, the alleged 7th best dark type in OU.

then you have the actual brokens, which teams are optimised to beat, and still losing to them. These are the kingambits, the roaring moons, the waterpons, etc. somehow there is harmony because the reality is everything strong is checking everything strong.

 

[CraftyPuddle]

you’re making a fair point, but the onus should be on the ban voters to provide demonstrable, consistent ways that Volcarona is bypassing its checks that aren’t just simple metagame adaptations away from being resolved.

I think that this is a really good point. Volcarona is no doubt a powerful offensive presence in the metagame that has a lot of different sets and teras allowing it to choose what it loses to, but this doesn't automatically mean that it should be banned. Lots of other offensive Pokemon have done the same thing in OU and have remained OU. To ban Volcarona, we need to know that what it does is so completely centralising that it deserves the title of Uber. The evidence in favour of banning has shown so far that Volcarona is good. It has not shown that Volcarona is banworthy.

 

[vibivgc]

I just want to wish luck to the mods and tier leaders with this incoming thread. Volc has probably been the most heated thing in terms of discussions I've seen in this entire gen since its quickban, outside of Tera as a whole or maybe Gambit.
godspeed Finch and godspeed mods

 

[Ctann]

It’s barely centralising when you compare Volcarona to the real brokens.

people are arguing that Volcarona has too many sets and they don’t want to use a 2-check or more combo to bypass its bypass.

Meanwhile, no questions asked, the meta is centralising on things like rocky helmet landorus + momentum partners as one of the few consistent ways to check the dearth of physical threats that are actually impacting the meta in an over centralising way.

If Volcarona was over centralising we would see significantly higher usage of checks like clodsire, heatran and skeledirge. The reality is crickets..

want an example of over centralising? We have kingambit. But it’s on the record that ausma used kingambits defensive profile and switch in value to suggest it shouldn’t be banned, that the argument was made that it provided value. That there were ways to check it! Provided you used 3-4 of those ways on the same team.

sorry Ausma this isn’t a dig, I promise. It’s just referencing comparable where the viewpoints were different in regards to the Tera bypass being okay then, but not okay now. It was okay when every team needed 3-4 checks on it for gambit, it’s not okay now when people are worried about the relatively lower usage Volcarona having a 50/50 chance (at best) to even MU against your team and pull some weight.

nearly any team can check or pressure a Volcarona with simple adaptations. I presume 2 checks if not many are volc weak, and 3 checks if they are. And this is at most. And this is including high viability checks like using Tera fire on a hard hitter. This isn’t threat specific checks like using Tera fighting or fairy just to resist sucker punch.

For example a dragonite will always beat anything not called dragon, ice or fairy volc, and these lose to a 2nd check like dirge.

 

[awyp]

Okay so I got some time, Volc is probably my fav mon since generation 5 so I have a biased perspective in regards to it regarding tiering action.

That being said, I'll break down where it excels and where it doesn't.

Versatile sweeper - This mon usually has one purpose which is to usually setup and take hits from fairies as well as just fish for any contact move, it really keeps offensive teams honest 30% of the time.

It's versatile in the sense where you can run either a bulky set with heavy HP investment / Def investment, you can run a mild bulk set like: EVs: 136 HP / 4 Def / 152 SpA / 216 Spe (shoutout to Finch since I stole it from him). Or you can just run 252 SpA / 252 Spe (Timid / Modest), all these sets are equally viable. Most of the time you run Flame Body for the checking capabilities but if you're feeling extra shiest you can run Swarm + Bug Buzz.

Tera Dragon (Mild Bulk)

Volcarona @ Heavy-Duty Boots
Ability: Flame Body
Tera Type: Dragon
EVs: 136 HP / 4 Def / 152 SpA / 216 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Quiver Dance
- Fiery Dance
- Tera Blast
- Morning Sun

This set provides solid coverage with Dragon and Fire which essentially hits everything outside something like Heatran or Primarina.

'Speed outruns Kyurem, bulk survives 2 Gliscor Earthquake and one max attack Headlong Rush from Great Tusk from full. Leftover is thrown specifically into special attack for a plethora of different reasons.'

-Finchinator

This is a set I will be breaking down deeply you usually want to stay close to this spread and not differ that much and if you do you go a bit more offensive by putting more EVs into Speed / SpA

This set is essentially fishing for SpA boost from Fiery Dance while setting up Quiver Dances, Tera Blast always works as a coverage move on what Fiery Dance cannot cover. You can replace Tera Dragon with:

Ground, Dragon, Fairy, Water, Steel (Tera Grass / Giga Drain) (Tera Bug / Bug Buzz), and (Tera Flying / Hurricane)

So essentially you handpick where you want to excel in and that would be taken into consideration with the team you build for. So what I mean by that is you can make an argument of adding Volc to any team you want if you just want to add a versatile sweeper.

Your tera is also chosen to beat normal counters, such as Clodsire switching in but you can opt into Tera Ground. Of course to counter something like Glowking that always switches in on the Toxic to break it down slowly, you can opt in for Substitute over Morning Sun.

---

Things that Volc doesn't excel in - The most obvious I think it being extremely tera reliant sometimes in order to breakthrough and sweep because the guessing game will always be the opposing tera and guessing what it is.

It just loses to Clodsire (Unaware) probably have to tera, loses to Skeledirge (might have to tera) and Calm Mind Blissey. There's very solid checks to it regardless of Tera you usually just have to prep because Volc is always trying to break its checks.

Its move pool is very limited and always have to rely on Tera Blast for creativity

4x weakness to Rocks forces it to carry HDB 99% of the time (Forced an item)

It doesn't like to get Knocked Off but if you do...heh you might get burned

...

That's it those are pretty much where it doesn't excel in and so the pros easily outweigh the cons.

I will say I'm very 50/50 on this suspect and I am looking to read more of this thread to be persuaded one way or another. Probably leaning ban but I think opinions can change last minute like it has the last 5 suspect tests...

 

[DaddyBuzzwole]

I just want to wish luck to the mods and tier leaders with this incoming thread. Volc has probably been the most heated thing in terms of discussions I've seen in this entire gen since its quickban, outside of Tera as a whole or maybe Gambit.
godspeed Finch and godspeed mods

heh, heated. because it's a fire-type for about half a turn

anyway, i'd like to chime in and remind everyone that:

• voting dnb on something because it checks a lot of things or because something else will become broken in its absence is wrong. "broken checks broken" is not a state of the meta we should accept, and we can never really guarantee that something else will become broken in the future. focus on the present
• voting dnb on something because something else is more broken or better than it, or because you believe something else should have been suspected first, is wrong. sure, maybe something else should have been suspected first, but that has nothing to do with whether what is currently on the chopping block is broken or not. again, focus on the present
• voting dnb on something because other things were not banned is wrong. it doesn't matter whether or not another broken thing exists in the tier, what matters is whether or not the actual thing we're looking at deserves to exist in the tier. once more, focus on the present
• voting dnb on something because it "adds value" to the tier is wrong. value is a nebulous and subjective concept, and arguments for "this adds value" usually circle back to "this checks [other mon]", which is the same broken-checks-broken logic i warned about earlier. besides this, if something is contributing negatively to the meta in a significant way, it should be banned, even if it's also contributing positively in a different way
• voting ban on something because it doesn't "add value" to the tier is wrong. again, value is subjective. even so, there are a lot of things that don't add any sort of value to the tier from any reasonable definition of "value"—to use an extreme example, cosmog adds absolutely nothing to ou. we would lose nothing at all by banning it. but it isn't broken. if something isn't contributing negatively to the meta in some way, it should stay, even if it doesn't positively contribute anything either
• voting ban on something because you cannot see a reason to keep it is wrong. for better or for worse, the burden of proof is on the pro-ban side. tiering errs on the side of the status quo. technically, the no-ban side doesn't actually need any justification at all. (of course, that's only a technicality, in the same way that a defense attorney technically doesn't need to provide any arguments because the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt, but a defense attorney that sits there and says "i don't need to prove anything" will probably not win the case.) make sure your arguments are strong, solid, and backed up by evidence
• voting ban on something because it has a good matchup against a certain playstyle is wrong. now, this one is a tricky one, because if a mon is significantly affecting the viability of an entire playstyle all by itself or 6-0ing a whole archetype on preview, that is a problem and a valid argument for a ban. but simply having a good matchup against a particular kind of team is fine. like it or hate it (and trust me, i hate it), matchups are part of the game
• voting ban on something just for the sake of change is wrong. i know i said this was part of the reason i support a volc ban, but it's nowhere near the only reason. simply voting not for the sake of balancing the meta but because you don't like the current one, or are bored with it, or think it's a garbage unbalanced matchupfest and would accept literally any form of change, is not the right move. if you just want a change in the meta and don't care what it is, there are a million metas you can play that are all very different from this one. vote based on the merits of the mon in front of you

now i'll admit i haven't always practiced what i'm preaching here, but that doesn't make what i have to say any less valid. please remember to keep your arguments civil and logical, because if you do that, you can say you're a better person than me

and if you look at this list and feel attacked, or like i'm targeting you in particular, or you feel the need to justify yourself for doing any of these, well, i dunno what to say except that you should probably find better arguments. i'm not trying to attack anyone or dunk on anyone, i'm legitimately just trying to help everyone stay on topic and improve their rhetorical abilities

 

[Ctann]

Volcarona has traits that are useful to most teams. Such as those mentioned above

It is self sufficient since it’s sets all run HDB and doesn’t really need hazard support.

it has a unique resistance profile that has provided value in almost every meta it’s been a part of.

due to it fitting on so many teams, with so many team structures, whether that’s the most fast paced offensive teams or slower bulkier ones with support from wish/terrains, Volcarona has the potential to be a very high usage pokemon if it was truly over centralising.

High usage and high power is exemplified with some Pokémon’s such as kingambit, which is on a lot of teams, and ridiculously strong, raging bolt, which has excellent usage, and


this is in contrast to other Pokémon’s that have been determined to be over centralising in the past such as speed boost Blaziken, which typically only fit a narrow pool of team structures. these are often present on specific team structures in very high percentages (almost every HO team had Blaziken at its peak)

Volcarona is neither 1. Prevalent on any specific team structure at high usage rates or 2. An extremely high usage general metagame threat

Puttint this out there

this therefore doesn’t support the case that it’s over centralising. This means the remaining ban case is “cannot be dealt with”.

Buzzwole daddy , we use references such as other brokens to better explain what broken looks like, rather than saying “they should be banned and I wanna vote DNB on volc because of that”

The crux of the argument is that Volcarona isn’t broken, none of those other arguments

 

[FayaWizard]

It’s barely centralising when you compare Volcarona to the real brokens.

people are arguing that Volcarona has too many sets and they don’t want to use a 2-check or more combo to bypass its bypass.

Meanwhile, no questions asked, the meta is centralising on things like rocky helmet landorus + momentum partners as one of the few consistent ways to check the dearth of physical threats that are actually impacting the meta in an over centralising way.

If Volcarona was over centralising we would see significantly higher usage of checks like clodsire, heatran and skeledirge. The reality is crickets..

want an example of over centralising? We have kingambit. But it’s on the record that ausma used kingambits defensive profile and switch in value to suggest it shouldn’t be banned, that the argument was made that it provided value. That there were ways to check it! Provided you used 3-4 of those ways on the same team.

sorry Ausma this isn’t a dig, I promise. It’s just referencing comparable where the viewpoints were different in regards to the Tera bypass being okay then, but not okay now. It was okay when every team needed 3-4 checks on it for gambit, it’s not okay now when people are worried about the relatively lower usage Volcarona having a 50/50 chance (at best) to even MU against your team and pull some weight.

nearly any team can check or pressure a Volcarona with simple adaptations. I presume 2 checks if not many are volc weak, and 3 checks if they are. And this is at most. And this is including high viability checks like using Tera fire on a hard hitter. This isn’t threat specific checks like using Tera fighting or fairy just to resist sucker punch.

For example a dragonite will always beat anything not called dragon, ice or fairy volc, and these lose to a 2nd check like dirge.

The different between Kingambit and Volcarona, imo, is that there's a few hard counters/reliable checks that can slot on a variety of teams for Kingambit, while the same... doesn't exist for Volc.

Let's look through a list of counters/checks for Gambit:
Zamazenta, Dondozo, Corviknight, Skarmory, Great Tusk, Landorus-Therian, Alomomola
Encore users like Iron Valiant and Ogerpon-Wellspring, while not counters/checks in the traditional sense, can easily force it out after it clicks Sucker Punch (and in the case of Iron Valiant, can beat non Iron Head variants completely).

While Gambit has ways of breaking some of these checks, like Tera Dark Black Glasses for Dondozo, Lum Berry + SD for Alomomola (or just gambling on Scald burns), Tera Ghost for the Steel birds, Tera Flying/Fairy for non Bulk Up tusk, and etc etc, there are also hard checks/counters. Kingambit struggles heavily into Iron Defense Zamazenta, and similarly against Bulk Up Great Tusk.

Furthermore, both of these mons are very good in the tier right now and enjoy high levels of usage, and the rest of its checks enjoy decent/good usage stats as well.

Now, let's look at Volcarona's checks and counters:
Blissey, Clodsire, Skeledirge, Dragonite, Gouging Fire, Heatran, Ting Lu, Slowking-G, Dragapult, Garganacl, Primarina

Similarly, with Volcarona's pick of Tera, it can break past a lot of these checks, like Ground to hit Heatran, Glowking, Garganacl, Skeledirge, and Gouging Fire, or Tera Dragon to beat Dragonite, Dragapult, Gouging Fire, and the other dragons that might serve as pseudo-checks, Tera Water to hit Ting Lu and Skeledirge, Tera Grass Giga Drain to hit Primarina, Garganacl, Ting Lu, etc etc etc.

As for hard counters/checks, Blissey and Clodsire are the only true hard counters, and you need to keep your Clodsire healthy, as Tera Ground Volcarona threatens a 2HKO after the slightest chip (252 SpA Tera Ground Volcarona Tera Blast (80 BP) vs. 248 HP / 252+ SpD Clodsire: 194-230 (41.9 - 49.6%) -- 86.7% chance to 2HKO after 1 layer of Spikes). However, unlike Kingambit's counters, these mons are a lot harder to fit on a team: Blissey is only seen on stall, and Clodsire can carve out a niche on bulkier balance teams, but similarly appears on stall teams only.

And here lies the difference between Kingambit and Volcarona: Kingambit's better checks/counters are a lot more splashable, with Great Tusk always enjoying high degrees of usage while Zamazenta has been steadily rising, while Volcarona's better checks and counters are relegated to hard stall. Therefore, Kingambit feels less overbearing, because you can always rely on your Zamazenta to beat it, but most teams won't have a Blissey or Clodsire for Volcarona, and thus it's ability to Tera past its checks is much worse of a problem.

I will be voting ban on Volcarona, as I think its unpredictability is unhealthy for the tier and puts an unnecessary strain on teams that are already struggling to cover for the vast expanse of threats in this metagame.

 

[Ctann]

FayaWizard thanks for your reply.

there are no hard counters for gambit, the closest is tusk. Although there’s a lot of performance pressure on a tusk in a match, in general. And gambit gets better late game. But that is a different topic.

so this leaves what you referred to as checks, that can be bypassed. Similar to Volcarona.

I counted 7 check mentioned. Some are blanket solved with Tera types like ghost as you suggested. Although ghost isn’t too popular due to gambit becoming weak to itself.

I counted 11 mentioned checks to Volcarona, of which you mentioned 2 passives that are hard counters, so 9 generally non passive checks. As mentioned earlier we are disregarding the problems stall and bulky have with Volcarona , as they don’t have a problem with it at all. They in fact struggle more against gambit. So the total count is 9 Pokémon’s in the balanced, hybrid and offensive teams.

Volcarona also has adaptable checks, such as the aforementioned SpD Gliscor, which is actually good generally. The closest adaptable check I can think of to gambit is bulky invested Pokémon’s like gouging fire.

you mentioned encore, which is a great move this gen. The battle between valiant > gambit > gholdengo > valiant has been observable the whole meta.

valiant [usually] beats gambit, gambit [usually] beats gholdengo and gholdengo [usually] beats valiant. Although all 3 of them make the best lures for the one that they usually lose to. A gambit dented with coin rain is less scary, a valiant that used its booster up is less scary and a gholdengo that lost its item and/or hp is less scary. All 3 have enjoyed high usage, amongst other reasons, for their ability to check each others high usage.

this discussion isn’t about gambit, so I won’t dwell on it.

however where you mentioned encore beating gambit, we can mention priority beating Volcarona. Where you mentioned will o wisp, you can mention slower Pokémon’s taking a hit and hitting back (eg AV samurott, some variants of roaring moon, etc).

Volcarona also needs to commit strongly, as its peak isn’t always end game, and it needs Tera and Terablast to truly be effective. There’s a lot of commitment that can be punished if it’s not actually a game ender. The closest comparison I can think of is gambit being forced to sucker a teammate only to be encored next turn.

volc plays very all in or nothing… and the metagame is adapting to punish the all in scenarios.

I am waiting to see actual replays of how OP volc is. It was easy to see many replays of Kyurem and waterpon cracking teams a new one, or gambit doing what its been doing all gen. We even saw how Gliscor had a stranglehold on the hazards meta before its ban. We are yet to see replays of volc being consistently ridiculous outside of someone “not expecting” a specific set, which they simply adapt to…

 

[Madam Ferix]

Hello, everyone. First time ever posting on this site, and I'm happy to begin contributing to important discussions and events in the tier.

I want to say right off the bat that I don't think calling Volcarona a "Matchup Fish" is entirely correct nor an appealing name to give them. Even if we give that claim the benefit of the doubt, and say that every Volc set can be accounted for in the team builder, the amount of hurdles one has to jump to accommodate for every viable set + tera type is going to either lead to teams that will end up being predictable to counter, or just teams that are lacking in other fundamental areas. Not many teams right now can fit multiple fast, specially bulky, and/or disruptive utility team members that vary in type and additional checks.

My personal issue with Volcarona is that, more than any other Pokemon in the tier, you have the least amount of control over their Tera capabilities. Unless you are guaranteed to know what type they are, you have little to no control over countering and adapting once they change types (provided they don't misclick or throw or something). This can be seen as an inherent flaw to the mechanic of Tera, and while I don't entirely think that's a wrong way to think of it, this problem is especially egregious on Volc as Q. Dance is debatably the strongest setup move in the game and that one turn of leeway can make or break so many situations. Examples include Tera Fairy to resist Suckers, Grass for AQ resist + Giga Drain damage, Ground for their two most difficult MU's (Heat and Clod), and so on.

While it's true that not one Tera gives you an answer to everything, that's... exactly why I think this is a problem. Alot of people have described Volc being able to pick and choose their counters, but I see it as Volc being able to entirely pick and choose what games they flat out win before the match has even started, which is a subtle but significant differance to just simply doing well against otherwise bad matchups. I don't think Volc is the only mon in the tier that has this problem, but those can be saved for when the spotlight shifts.

If I manage to qualify, I'll be voting BAN on Volcarona. Thanks for reading and good luck to everyone getting those reqs!

 

[DaddyBuzzwole]

what if we try to ban Tera, just to see if all those broken meta threats, arent that threatening without tera?

if tera ever falls onto the chopping block (which based on survey data it likely never will), i'll be glad to discuss the implications of a potential ban all day long. or at least i'll be glad to listen to other people do that—i've voiced my opinion on it at length in the discussion threads and that one tera thread they put up right before dlc1. but this is a thread created specifically to talk about volcarona, its strengths and weaknesses, what it beats and what beats it, its effects on builder and the health of the meta, counterplay and counter-counterplay, and other factors that relate to its banworthiness or lack thereof. we've got plenty to discuss on that subject matter, so let's do that on this thread and save tera for everywhere else

 

[N ™]

I will be voting ban on volcarona, and it's not even close.

My opinions have already been largely voiced by the rest of the ban voters by now, so I won't dwell on how matchup fishy, rng filled and plain unfair this mon is to shoot a dead body, but I'd just like to underline how self centered the sentiment of Volcarona providing role compression is: putting aside the matter of weather it does have reliable defensive value in the first place, this only takes the argument into the perspective of the Volcarona user, and fails to account for the fact that all these tools, which are in large part rng related as well, only make the issue at hand more pressing when it comes to the metagame around it. The hypocrisy of this argument stems from the implication that volcarona would be both a culprit of team building strain and its solver, leading to massive centralization around a mon that creates incredibly one sides scenarios and leads to extremely volatile gameplay. Truth of the matter is that not every team runs volc (thankfully) and the ones that don't have to instead suffer from its presence, and the "adaptation" the no ban crowd likes bringing up so much only translates to volcarona rendering many otherwise perfectly good cores and structures unviable.

 

[Ctann]

I thought to go through some games on the ladder, watched a few games and saved the replays for the volcarona ones. Tried not to have duplicates if a person with the same matchup played twice, although it was difficult not to have the same players repeating due to not many volc games and I don't have all day to watch them!

Here is a list of links and commentary on the outcome of the volcarona. If Volcarona is OP, we can reasonably deduce that in at least some of these games it would overwhelm the opponent. This selection was purely chronological and hasn't been specifically selected.

I welcome anyone else to share actual replays that support their positions. It truly seems like a psychological effect where people hate Volcarona because when they lose, its "one sided".

My request, be fair and show chronological replays, not curated replays where the Volcarona won. I avoided using my own replays to prevent my own bias. My commentary focuses on what Volc did and whether or not it tera'd, and whether that tera resulted in a win. As the contention is mostly around tera boosted terablast.

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103732684
DCT1 STALLER and ☆DCT1 Iaoth

• Volcarona cripples a roaring moon and then faints shortly after
• Volcarona does not use tera

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103765135
DCT1 STALLER and ☆brifye

• Volcarona is used to revenge a valiant, its 61% and switches out
• Returns in later to attack a gambit and faints
• Volcarona does not use tera

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103760164
LaflaredaGod and ☆gigi 1023

• Volcarona sets up as TTar switches out, presumable choice locked into ice punch?
• The next turn it conservatively uses tera blast on a samurott, that flip turns out into TTar and misses the KO
• Volcarona switches out, later returning to get KOd by the Ttar
• Volcarona does not use tera

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103754770
gasxhaxj and ☆LaflaredaGod

• Volcarona is used to revenge an iron moth
• it witholds tera, using terablast against a primarina before fainting
• Volcarona does not use tera

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103751168
Navys_1 and ‽DCT1 STALLER

• Volcarona is switched in and out twice to try and get a burn on tusk
• It fails to get a burn, and faints to a headlong rush
• Volcarona does not use tera

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103743281
brifye and ☆DCT1 Iaoth

• Volcarona terastalises into dragon type as a wake switches out
• The next turn is scared out by a gouging fire and doesn't attack
• Later it comes in to do 33% to a now fire type GF, and gets KO'd
• Volcarona did terastalise and lost

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103742067
mrkillurpokes and ☆drop a baby

• Volcarona fire dances as an ogerpon is scared out, heatran forces out the volc
• Volcarona comes back in to check a valiant, its an SD + spirit break set, and Volc decides to heal up to 100% and switch out as the valiant hits 3x attack
• Volcarona later comes in to trade hits with heatran until it ultimately KO's heatran
• It's forced out by toxapex
• It's brought back in to check ogerpon, before being revenged by dragapult
• Volca did not tera, although notable that it traded hits with heatran and helped assist the sinistcha win. The tera was presumably withheld so sinistcha can end the game

https://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen9ou-2103740445
drop a baby and ☆DCT1 Iaoth

• Volcarona doesn't do much this match, hitting a roaring moon with fiery dance and later failing to set up in front of prim
• Volcarona does not use tera

Summary: in 1 out of 8 games Volcarona used tera, and it lost that game.

I implore you all to also post replays and show how ridiculously overpowered Volcarona is.

In this chronological selection i couldn't see signs of it being OP. Although obviously its a tiny sample size. Watching the games it is clear that other high viability pokemon were notably more impactful.

 

[Ctann]

View attachment 624698

it would be nice if you can make some points and use actual examples. Cheers.

 

[Heatranator]

View attachment 624698

I'm going to expand on what this means. When I reversed searched it, it came up with survivorship bias.
Definition: Survivorship bias is a type of sample selection bias that occurs when an individual mistakes a visible successful subgroup as the entire group. In other words, survivorship bias occurs when an individual only considers the surviving observation without considering those data points that didn't “survive” in the event.
TLDR, they are saying that the sample size does not show the full picture or something. Or that you are missing the point. Either one. Something like that.

 

[N ™]

it would be nice if you can make some points and use actual examples. Cheers.

Survivor bias. If the main issue with Volcarona is strain on the team building process of course once that process is over the end result isn't gonna auto lose to volc when it's done by a competent builder, that doesn't make the issue any less present during the process. The fact that all replays you linked are Vs ho should make that all the more apparent.

 

[Ctann]

Survivor bias. If the main issue with Volcarona is strain on the team building process of course once that process is over the end result isn't gonna auto lose to volc when it's done by a competent builder, that doesn't make the issue any less present during the process. The fact that all replays you linked are Vs ho should make that all the more apparent.

The replays might be HO because that’s the most common type of team right now, I don’t think that’s survivor bias if it’s a random sample of teams. In fact I made the point earlier than Volcarona is best against HO, and HO is over represented right now in the meta due to other reasons like moon and co.

it’s a small sample so if any problems it’s the size of the sample. But I am asking any that think Volcarona is broken to share some evidence. It’s not too much to ask? Maybe we can do play by play breakdowns.