Metagame 1v1 Metagame Discussion

[Adam3560]

Quick correction on population bomb with king's rock.

View attachment 469531
Population bomb can miss after each hit and king's rock's flinch chance will compound with each hit. So while 10 hits does have a 1-(0.9^10)= 65.1% chance of flinching the opponent, you'd need to factor in the fact that it will only land .9^10= 34.9% of the time.
Next, you need to factor in all the other outcomes as well such as landing 9 times all the way down to landing once and add them up.

This comes out to roughly 19.25% chance to flinch.

That said, I can predict that Maushold will get some way to boost accuracy through Hone Claws (or more disturbingly, coil), which would make King's Population Rock Bomb truly terrifying.

View attachment 469569

Please correct my math

Odds of King's Rock = 10%, Accuracy of Population Bomb per hit = 90%. (funny how they add to 100%)
Formula for a flinch per a hit = (Accuracy^Hits) * (1-Flinch Chance^Hits)

Odds of zero hits: (.9^0)*(1-.9^0)
Odds of a single hit: (.9^1)*(1-.9^1)
Odds for 3 hits: (.9^3)*(1-.9^3)
Odds for 10 hits: (.9^10)*(1-.9^10)
Average each outcome to get close to 19.25% flinch chance on average.

EDIT: first way was absolutely wrong, and there is nothing to give you motivation and a clear mind than putting your math out in front of everyone.

I am still in favor of the ban as kings rock, bright powder, & razor fang could allow for the tiniest odds to flat out lose thanks to the item alone.

Hey great post, the math is all very well written and I really enjoyed reading it. I was actually considering making a maushold post cause the math is so interesting but we banned king's rock so quick that I scrapped the idea. Regardless, this now gives me a good an excuse to make a post about math in the meta discussion thread. About 2 weeks ago I used population bomb with kings rock 100 times and wrote down all the data within a spreadsheet, for an idea of what the probability actually look like. Out of 100 hits, population bomb flinched 43 times, and got an average of 5.7 hits per use. Here's the spreadsheet if you wanna take a peek at the data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jss82VdBCnrnwn92anfly_Gosiq-E4iaNrmJEE9tNaA/edit?usp=sharing

While your math and logic is fairly sound, there's just one inaccuracy that really causes some things to go wrong. Here's a comparison we can look at: by your calculations population bomb would have an 81% chance to hit twice and a ~35% chance to hit 10 times. This woul then imply that population bomb will hit 2 times more than twice as often as it hits 10 times. However the data contradicts this and there's a reason why. Once population bomb hits twice, it's not done hitting, and can go on to hit 3 times, 4 times, 5 times, etc., and the chance of it hitting just 2 times is slimmer when taking into account the chance to keep going. However, after population bomb hits 10 times, it's done checking the accuracy, and 10 is simply the stopping point. This gives population bomb a much higher chance of hitting 10 times, and this is shown in the data where population bomb got 10 hits 33 times out of 100, much more than I initially expected.

From this new insight we can actually figure out the population bomb average hit chance pretty easily. The chance to hit 0 times is 0.1 or 10%, which is the chance to just not hit the first one. The chance to hit 1 time is 0.09 or 9%, which is the chance to hit the first one(0.9) times the chance not to hit the second one(0.1). The chance to hit 2 times is 0.081, which is the chance to hit twice(0.81) times the chance not to hit the third one(0.1), and this goes on and on up to 9 hits. 10 hits has a 0.348 or 34.8% chance of occurring, which is just 0.9^10. Here's a picture of each of the hit chances:

. These percentages add up to 100% which is what makes me think my math is right. Averaging out these hit chances, we'll find that population bomb has an average hit count of 5.85, what we can now call the expected value of population bomb hits. Since we have the expected value, we can figure out the flinch chance by plugging 5.85 into your flinch formula 1-(0.9^x), to get the real population bomb flinch chance of 46%. Scary scary stuff.


Unfortunately, just like Chrispy Burns, my math knowledge is still limited and this could very well be wrong. I tried to use real game data to make up for any inaccuracies in my calculations though, and you can feel free to add to this conversation by correcting any of my assumptions.

 

[Chrispy Burns]

Hey great post, the math is all very well written and I really enjoyed reading it. I was actually considering making a maushold post cause the math is so interesting but we banned king's rock so quick that I scrapped the idea. Regardless, this now gives me a good an excuse to make a post about math in the meta discussion thread. About 2 weeks ago I used population bomb with kings rock 100 times and wrote down all the data within a spreadsheet, for an idea of what the probability actually look like. Out of 100 hits, population bomb flinched 43 times, and got an average of 5.7 hits per use. Here's the spreadsheet if you wanna take a peek at the data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jss82VdBCnrnwn92anfly_Gosiq-E4iaNrmJEE9tNaA/edit?usp=sharing

While your math and logic is fairly sound, there's just one inaccuracy that really causes some things to go wrong. Here's a comparison we can look at: by your calculations population bomb would have an 81% chance to hit twice and a ~35% chance to hit 10 times. This woul then imply that population bomb will hit 2 times more than twice as often as it hits 10 times. However the data contradicts this and there's a reason why. Once population bomb hits twice, it's not done hitting, and can go on to hit 3 times, 4 times, 5 times, etc., and the chance of it hitting just 2 times is slimmer when taking into account the chance to keep going. However, after population bomb hits 10 times, it's done checking the accuracy, and 10 is simply the stopping point. This gives population bomb a much higher chance of hitting 10 times, and this is shown in the data where population bomb got 10 hits 33 times out of 100, much more than I initially expected.

From this new insight we can actually figure out the population bomb average hit chance pretty easily. The chance to hit 0 times is 0.1 or 10%, which is the chance to just not hit the first one. The chance to hit 1 time is 0.09 or 9%, which is the chance to hit the first one(0.9) times the chance not to hit the second one(0.1). The chance to hit 2 times is 0.081, which is the chance to hit twice(0.81) times the chance not to hit the third one(0.1), and this goes on and on up to 9 hits. 10 hits has a 0.348 or 34.8% chance of occurring, which is just 0.9^10. Here's a picture of each of the hit chances:
View attachment 469718. These percentages add up to 100% which is what makes me think my math is right. Averaging out these hit chances, we'll find that population bomb has an average hit count of 5.85, what we can now call the expected value of population bomb hits. Since we have the expected value, we can figure out the flinch chance by plugging 5.85 into your flinch formula 1-(0.9^x), to get the real population bomb flinch chance of 46%. Scary scary stuff.


Unfortunately, just like Chrispy Burns, my math knowledge is still limited and this could very well be wrong. I tried to use real game data to make up for any inaccuracies in my calculations though, and you can feel free to add to this conversation by correcting any of my assumptions.

Funnily enough I committed a sin by changing my results based on it looking wrong. I thought that the forums would let people see edit history but since it can't I'll post my original findings here.

I split the chance of each outcome happening by multiplying the (.9^Hits)*(.1) as to only get two hits, you must miss the third. I believed this over represented the tenth hit as there is no 11th turn to miss. This is shown in the 'Odds of each outcome landing' column which adds up to 1. when multiplying each of those odds with the odds of a flinch (1-.9^hits) and finding the sum, I got 41.61%. I am confident that finding the likelihood of each outcome and adding them up will lead to the right answer, but I think I have set up the math wrong. Looking at your table, the 0's, 1's, and 10's line up with what I thought.

0	0.1	0.1	0	0
1	0.9	0.09	0.1	0.009
2	0.81	0.081	0.19	0.01539
3	0.729	0.0729	0.271	0.0197559
4	0.6561	0.06561	0.3439	0.022563279
5	0.59049	0.059049	0.40951	0.02418115599
6	0.531441	0.0531441	0.468559	0.02490114635
7	0.4782969	0.04782969	0.5217031	0.02495289755
8	0.43046721	0.043046721	0.56953279	0.02451651911
9	0.387420489	0.0387420489	0.612579511	0.02373258537
10	0.3486784401	0.3486784401	0.6513215599	0.2271017855
		1			0.4160952689
number of hits	odds of landing each turn	odds of each outcome landing	flinch change ^ hits	flinch chance per each move	total flinch chance of all outcomes

Flinch chance per each move as a graph

Thank you for doing real testing for this, it takes time but helps tremendously for the tier.

 

[Adam3560]

Funnily enough I committed a sin by changing my results based on it looking wrong. I thought that the forums would let people see edit history but since it can't I'll post my original findings here.

I split the chance of each outcome happening by multiplying the (.9^Hits)*(.1) as to only get two hits, you must miss the third. I believed this over represented the tenth hit as there is no 11th turn to miss. This is shown in the 'Odds of each outcome landing' column which adds up to 1. when multiplying each of those odds with the odds of a flinch (1-.9^hits) and finding the sum, I got 41.61%. I am confident that finding the likelihood of each outcome and adding them up will lead to the right answer, but I think I have set up the math wrong. Looking at your table, the 0's, 1's, and 10's line up with what I thought.

0	0.1	0.1	0	0
1	0.9	0.09	0.1	0.009
2	0.81	0.081	0.19	0.01539
3	0.729	0.0729	0.271	0.0197559
4	0.6561	0.06561	0.3439	0.022563279
5	0.59049	0.059049	0.40951	0.02418115599
6	0.531441	0.0531441	0.468559	0.02490114635
7	0.4782969	0.04782969	0.5217031	0.02495289755
8	0.43046721	0.043046721	0.56953279	0.02451651911
9	0.387420489	0.0387420489	0.612579511	0.02373258537
10	0.3486784401	0.3486784401	0.6513215599	0.2271017855
		1			0.4160952689
number of hits	odds of landing each turn	odds of each outcome landing	flinch change ^ hits	flinch chance per each move	total flinch chance of all outcomes

View attachment 469732
Flinch chance per each move as a graph

Thank you for doing real testing for this, it takes time but helps tremendously for the tier.

I fucking love statistics

 

[DEG]

I think it's finally time to ban both Yawn and Spore. Sleep is uncompetitive and already proved that by banning most/all sleep moves in old gens. Spore/Yawn have failed to be banned due to the lack of abusers but in SV both of these moves have strong abusers which aren't as easy to counter. Sylv/Skere for Yawn, Breloom/Bonnet for spore as examples.

Other than that, I think the meta is starting to become balanced for a pre-home meta. Can't wait for home/dlc cause early gen is so boring ngl.

 

[zioziotrip]

brodie is not complaining about breloom in its most power crept gen yet

 

[Adam3560]

Breloom gets real use now beating chi-yu+ting-lu+garganacl and can still sleep things

 

[zioziotrip]

I was going to write a more serious post about how sleep mons have never had more hassle to deal with in any gen but I have been reminded that Custap doesn’t even exist yet throwing 90% of the uncompetitive argument out the window.

Dirge, Sylv, and Bonnet are all mons great independently of rolling for sleep turns.

WP Dirge (the most potent and common Yawn set) hardly needs any turns. It’s mainly for a singular free turn against faster targets to throw off a boosted Blast Burn which doesn’t require (and often isn’t helped by) sleep turns. In the case of slower threats like Ting-Lu it’s the same case of not needing a turn unless you run into AV but I’m pretty sure some spreads can’t eat a +3 blast burn after +2 torch song regardless lmao. Yawn is a short-term solution to the lack of Custap Encore which is the real crack.

Admittedly, of the bunch Sylv is the most dependent on sleep turns. A lot of Yawn MUs need one turn most notably to me is slower AV threats like Iron Hands or Ting-Lu and faster attackers that can threaten 2hko. I still maintain that this RNG is something you just need to account for as malding about losing a MU in your opp’s favor is bizarre. It’s also a pretty common range where similar shit like focus blast/hurricane/moonblast drops/steam eruption burn happen it just feels selective to target one mon that rolls similar odds while punishing a ton of mons that use the move for purposes independent of rolling the dice (in this gen dirge or empo if he returns.) Even beyond the policy scuffle for the time it lacks custap greatly expanding the viability of reliable counterplay. Also considering we’re getting some incredible steels and fires that shit on sylv in home regardless of custap this ban feels like it’s giving sylv too much credit.

Bonnet is the newest of the bunch so I find it odd to call for a ban before people can agree if it’s good or total dogshit. My personal opinion and experience w it is that it’s a solid slow attacker that makes up for its slow speed with sucker and coverage but it has a fair amount of issues. The typing is pretty bad on something so slow there’s only so much weakness berries can patch that. The only boon the typing gives offensively is the incredibly strong suckers, it’s mostly reliant on CC or Outrage to cover these offensive holes which tbf they do a surprisingly good job at. Knowing that it loves it coverage, where are you fitting spore? Seed Bomb/Sucker/CC/Outrage is stretching it, you could drop coverage or grass move but why it doesn’t even utilize sleep that well. Sucker makes it a lot better into faster offensive threats and it’s pretty much boned into any mon w physical boosting regardless of sleep. Maybe if Counter shit starts being real again I can see some use but I think the return and potential of Spore is not there for this mon. But hey, who knows! Maybe I’m totally wrong but it’s certainly way too early to tell for a mon that is brand new and will have to deal w power creep pretty soon.

I only mention Breloom for the sake of completion, this mon is not even good cheese without custap. Incredibly lackluster stats leave loom decimated by anything faster that can tank a mach (most of them) and Spore is not something it likes clicking as a faster mon since it’s fucked if anything hits back leaving it reliant on absurd sleep rolls. Loom is not suddenly real because it can accomplish something any of the amazing new fightings we got can, or hell, anything with fighting coverage and a decent stat spread. I don’t have much more to say, this mon is incredibly bad and it gets custap back at the same time we get real pokemon back.

A shorter section on new tools to deal w it. Ape is an amazing mon with Vital Spirit being one of the best tools to deal with the bonkers ass physical attackers. Encore distribution has never been better making mons reliant on sleep so much harder to abuse. Increased strong prio distribution, general immense speed and power creep, increased access to speed control via Trailbraze, etc.

There is so much new shit to deal with sleep I find myself asking not if it’s banworthy but if it’s even viable.

 

[Here Comes Team Charm!]

Not seeing a lot of discussion about vivillon but that mon is definitely a notable part of the sleep ecosystem, 304 speed traps a bunch of random stuff that's currently best off running ada/modest and hurricane is kinda neat with all the fightings running around. Typing gives it okay odds vs some faster things like great tusk and valiant also. Vivi + donphan is a core that seems to work pretty well.

 

[CashKP]

Yeah, first thing I did on ladder was load up an old Viv + ground type core (like mentioned above by HCTC) and I thought it was viable but definitely not even close to ban worthy. I really like sleep this gen and I'm 99% sure the meta would be worse without it.

SV gave us a bunch of really fat mons that also hit very hard and basically just ohko more offensively ev'ed mons. It's easier than ever to just run hp/def/spdef evs to tank any hit and I think sleep offers up a healthy way to force some of these mons to give up bulk in order to run speed.

Sleep isn't so bad especially compared to booster energy..

 

[Adam3560]

Alright, since Cash brought up booster energy I might as well make the post I've been meaning to make. At scream tail's peak there were a few people arguing that it was booster energy making scream tail broken by giving it a no-punishment scarf, and those people were ultimately proven wrong by the popularity of rocky helmet and I guess scarf trick sets that pushed scream tail over the edge. Now in the event there's anyone who still thinks booster energy is banworthy I'd like to make my point as to why booster energy isn't really broken at all, and that it's ultimately going to be healthier for the tier.

To do this, I'm going to list each paradox pokemon in the order of (in my opinion) their viability right now:

lot of words incoming

Good:
:
This pokemon is in my opinion one of the scariest in the tier right now. The bulk, attack, and movepool make it just plain hard to check it, and it is of my opinion that choice band is just as good, if not better a set than booster energy is. This is for a few reasons. First off, teams I've seen on ladder and teams I've enjoyed using have had to be iron hands check iron hands to fit the pokemon they want, and the player with the iron hands better at beating other iron hands wins in this scenario. Because of this, I switched out my booster energy iron hands for a max speed banded iron hands, and shot up the ladder only stopping at 1650. The power that choice banded iron hands brings is also just better right now than booster energy's ability to switch moves. Iron hands is slow, and with its biggest check being special attackers, slotting bulk up or swords dance isn't very useful and just takes up a moveslot that you really need. Pokemon like ting-lu also can't afford to bulk banded close combat while they can afford to bulk a booster energy, so you kill any ting lu that wants to stand up to a chi-yu.

252+ Atk Choice Band Iron Hands Close Combat vs. 252 HP / 164+ Def Ting-Lu: 434-512 (84.4 - 99.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252+ Atk Booster Energy Iron Hands Close Combat vs. 224 HP / 0+ Def Ting-Lu: 428-506 (84.4 - 99.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

tldr just use band like dude yeah no just use band

:
Again, great tusk much like iron hands, either wants band to kill shit or bulk up to outfat things. Booster energy boosting defense is of course scary, but as a pokemon whose achilles heel is its special defense I don't think a defense boosting item is really that much to worry about. Booster energy great tusk gives us a good defensive wall that still gets taken advantage of by encore ape or a special attacker, and is absolutely not banworthy.

:
I almost put this in eh tier but oh well. Booster energy is a fast pokemon that's a good reliable check to dragapult, meowscarada, and etc. Some people are running encore disable booster energy on this but the bad overall bulk just stops it from being really scary just like mega-alakazam was in sm. I believe iron valiant is a very healthy addition to the metagame, who I'd say is the best speed control we have right now, and a nice reliable check to chi-yu if you can get creative. Not banworthy.


Eh:
: Specs is the best set imo, booster energy speed can't kill the things it needs and flutter mane will always be destined to die to priority. Flutter mane is pretty okay, it's pretty healthy for 1v1, and it's pretty pretty but nobody asked me about that.

: Haven't used this but I think it's just a sort of bulky priority mon. Booster energy probably works well on this but it doesn't make slither wing much better than life orb was.

: Speed boost can't kill skeledirge, your status movepool is limited to like metal sound+screens? Specs is better.
Iron treads: Probably good, doesn't do enough damage to check iron hands or to beat chi-yu
: Not that good, the booster energy nerf hit this and the meta grew to handle brute bonnet perfectly fine
: I used this to beat scream tail but after the scream tail ban specs is just better than booster energy would be.
: If your whole niche is checking fairies/steels, booster energy doesn't make this any better than it would be without it. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.
: Seems fine enough but you need attack boost to kill skeledirge and you're getting outclassed by other grounds regardless.

I wouldn't use this but I wouldn't begrudge you if you wanted to:
: Bad, lose to fairies, don't kill things, booster energy can make you fast but then you're just fast weak and have a bad typing so it won't help you much
: Bad, use hydreigon or roaring moon
: Worse ttar cause no sand, don't even think you want booster energy on this


At the end of the day, if people are worried about booster energy giving a free scarf, they're more worried about booster energy in theory than they are about booster energy in practice. Speed booster iron valiant is a healthy and good addition to the tier, and everything else are perfectly manageable using booster energy.

Bye

 

[zioziotrip]

Not seeing a lot of discussion about vivillon but that mon is definitely a notable part of the sleep ecosystem, 304 speed traps a bunch of random stuff that's currently best off running ada/modest and hurricane is kinda neat with all the fightings running around. Typing gives it okay odds vs some faster things like great tusk and valiant also. Vivi + donphan is a core that seems to work pretty well.

I didn't mention Viv (and to a lesser extent Pluff) cuz it's agreed from last gen Sleep Powder speed traps function regardless of Sleep Turns and w Wide Lens/Compound Eyes their odds to lose winning MUs is miniscule so it's not even worth arguing they're uncomp. I don't have a ton of experience with Viv as a mon honestly but the massive speed creep dissuaded me from trying it, the point that the typing does give it some MUs similar to Venu last gen is interesting it seems cool. I think pluff is total balls it has easily the least flexibility of any sleep user and its useless on its own. Notable things to me is that it's the only Sleep mon that flat out loses to Taunt and Grasses with no room for haggling. Viv seems okay but it doesn't really come up in sleep discussions, I'm pretty hopeful even worse case it isn't removed from the tier as collateral.

 

[Smashman10]

Funnily enough I committed a sin by changing my results based on it looking wrong. I thought that the forums would let people see edit history but since it can't I'll post my original findings here.

I split the chance of each outcome happening by multiplying the (.9^Hits)*(.1) as to only get two hits, you must miss the third. I believed this over represented the tenth hit as there is no 11th turn to miss. This is shown in the 'Odds of each outcome landing' column which adds up to 1. when multiplying each of those odds with the odds of a flinch (1-.9^hits) and finding the sum, I got 41.61%. I am confident that finding the likelihood of each outcome and adding them up will lead to the right answer, but I think I have set up the math wrong. Looking at your table, the 0's, 1's, and 10's line up with what I thought.

0	0.1	0.1	0	0
1	0.9	0.09	0.1	0.009
2	0.81	0.081	0.19	0.01539
3	0.729	0.0729	0.271	0.0197559
4	0.6561	0.06561	0.3439	0.022563279
5	0.59049	0.059049	0.40951	0.02418115599
6	0.531441	0.0531441	0.468559	0.02490114635
7	0.4782969	0.04782969	0.5217031	0.02495289755
8	0.43046721	0.043046721	0.56953279	0.02451651911
9	0.387420489	0.0387420489	0.612579511	0.02373258537
10	0.3486784401	0.3486784401	0.6513215599	0.2271017855
		1			0.4160952689
number of hits	odds of landing each turn	odds of each outcome landing	flinch change ^ hits	flinch chance per each move	total flinch chance of all outcomes

View attachment 469732
Flinch chance per each move as a graph

Thank you for doing real testing for this, it takes time but helps tremendously for the tier.

Hello, I am not a pokemon fan whatsoever. But I do love me some statistics...

I was recently asked by a diehard Pokemon Fan of a friend to find the chances of the population bomb flinch chance or whatever it is and also the average hits of the population bomb. I did my math both with respect to finding the solution with simulations and arithmetically. To do it with simulations, I simply made a for loop in a java script program that ran the simulation of getting a hit with Population Bomb's 90% chance through an RNG and conditional statement and doing this until the loop got to all 10 hits in a row or till it ran into the miss. It then kept track of the hit outcomes of the simulations along with the number of simulations performed and did simple division to give the average number of around 5.86 hits for the use of the move. In a similar fashion, I used another loop to do the chances of getting a flinch for each amount of hits for each simulation and kept track of the total number of times flinched and the total amount of simulations and did simple division yet again to find a number of around 0.416 chance to cause a flinch with the move. These numbers are very close as I left my PC running for about 10 minutes and did 5+ million simulations. Just to double check this, I did the math and found the numbers to be just about the same. The math is just basic statistics using sums which I will leave below:



Average # of Hits:

1*(0.1)*(0.9)^1 + 2*(0.1)*(0.9)^2 + 3*(0.1)*(0.9)^3 + 4*(0.1)*(0.9)^4 + 5*(0.1)*(0.9)^5 + 6*(0.1)*(0.9)^6 + 7*(0.1)*(0.9)^7 + 8*(0.1)*(0.9)^8 + 9*(0.1)*(0.9)^9 +
10*(0.9)^10 = 5.862

OR

Sum( (0.1n)*(0.9^(n), n, from 0, to 9) + 10*(0.9)^10 = 5.862



Flinch Chance:

(0.1)*(0.9)^(0) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(2) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(4) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(6) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(8) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(10) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(12) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(14) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(16) + (0.1)*(0.9)^(18) + (0.9)^20 = 4.160

OR

Sum( (0.1)*(0.9)^(2n), n, from 0, to 9) + (0.9)^20 = 0.416



So in total, 5.86 average amount of hits for population bomb and a 0.416 chance to flinch with whatever the king gadget is or something. Again, not a pokemon fan, but these are the right numbers.

 

[bo_bobson27]

yea i made my own program, and the results are the same. https://onlinegdb.com/qyvoLPWYk

 

[zioziotrip]

I can’t be the only one concerned by these series of decisions by council. Upon discussion with the community, most agreed that Annihilape was not currently problematic and that Yawn was the problematic aspect of sleep. In both cases, this input was ignored.

To address Ape, I’m not against a suspect in a vacuum with the mixed feelings on it. It just seems at an awkward timing when Cinder is being released back into the tier during the suspect. My thoughts on Ape itself aren’t really relevant to the fact that I find this suspect a dubious decision.

On the other hand, the Sleep quickbans went essentially without community input. Anyone will concede Yawn was a problem on Dirge, sure, whatever. But immediate Spore and Sleep Powder quickbans? The most community discussion that happened on either of these was a roompoll. All forms of sleep other than Yawn are absolutely not clean cut cases and to quickban them was ridiculous. If you want to make an argument for Viv/Pluff/Loom being problematic, make the argument and have the discussion. What happened here was skipping due process.

I sincerely hope that this kneejerk tiering is not reflective of the future for this tier.

 

[bilb owo]

I can’t be the only one concerned by these series of decisions by council. Upon discussion with the community, most agreed that Annihilape was not currently problematic and that Yawn was the problematic aspect of sleep. In both cases, this input was ignored.

To address Ape, I’m not against a suspect in a vacuum with the mixed feelings on it. It just seems at an awkward timing when Cinder is being released back into the tier during the suspect. My thoughts on Ape itself aren’t really relevant to the fact that I find this suspect a dubious decision.

On the other hand, the Sleep quickbans went essentially without community input. Anyone will concede Yawn was a problem on Dirge, sure, whatever. But immediate Spore and Sleep Powder quickbans? The most community discussion that happened on either of these was a roompoll. All forms of sleep other than Yawn are absolutely not clean cut cases and to quickban them was ridiculous. If you want to make an argument for Viv/Pluff/Loom being problematic, make the argument and have the discussion. What happened here was skipping due process.

I sincerely hope that this kneejerk tiering is not reflective of the future for this tier.

Yuh, can we push back the suspect until we work out the deal with cinder cos idt anyone knows if that’s shit is still gonna be broken. I think the majority of people think annihilape is probably fine, and dirge being effectively neutered is gonna drop its usage quite a bit as there is more team flexibility to build around the mon.

Also can we stop QBing stuff now the meta has settled quite a bit. Nothing is that urgent to ban anymore and suspects allow for some nice old fashioned community interaction.

shoutouts to Abraham Lincoln for inspiring this post:
‘All men are created equal, the 1v1 council should stop making QB decisions with such little notice and discussion’ Abe like 1850 or something

 

[deddd]

Was arguing about sleep powder in 1v1cord but ill put this here because why not
The two sleep powder users do not rely on sleep turns for most of their matchups
Both Jumpluff and viv run sub + lefties + sleep powder, basically nullifying sleep turns, as even a turn one wake will just result in an attack into a substitute into a resleep(unless miss haha)

oh but encore/taunt users can get haxed by sleep turns waahh

Out of the viable encorers:skeledirge, valiant, ape, azu(stretch), donphan(stretch)
3 of them already win(dirge valiant ape), and while the other 2 can run encore, its far from mandatory that they do so
For viable taunt users(ting lu, corvi, great tusk), while they all can run taunt, specific sets are still walled(bpress corvi, bulk up taunt ) which leaves ting lu

other counterargument about the move being broken because haha tiering policy its the move thats the problem not the mon:
serene grace was uncompetitive last gen but you banned jirachi instead of serene grace(oh but iron head is a stab move /dt meteor mash)
(yes i know rachi could run encore spower but who cares nerd emoji also yall literally say its not based off t he mon
ok fine rachi sucks as an example but who cares im leaving it fuck you)
togekiss was also aids and even then serene grace stayed despite the fact that sg enables scarf/maranga kiss to be absolute hell
If you argue that sleep is uncompetitive no matter the mon but serene grace on kiss is fine idk man
both viv and toge rely on their stats/movepool to use sleep powder and sgrace as well as they do(viv relies on its decent speed and movepool, toge is obvious)
Both serene grace and sleep powder have examples of shitmons like chansey, venomoth, etc
if it isnt related to the mon then ban serene grace
and if it does depend on the mon then sleep powder is mostly competitive in practice so no real reason to ban it

also ape suspect w cindy coming back mid suspect is hella scuffed what the fuck push it back

 

[nolenot]

Solution: unban spore and sleep powder (oh no breloom and jumpluff is gonna terrorize the meta!!!) and wait for cinder to be dealt with, then suspect anhillape and then the sleep moves. Easy, and makes sense! Unfortunately the already broken clock that is 1v1 tiering has now lost its L and now is jerked off twice a day instead of being being right.

 

[RTM]

I'm trying to gauge a basic idea of community opinion so please fill out this short form on the state of the meta.
https://forms.gle/GkZEzy1EmYgmKUwa8

 

[fake tom numbers]

yep swag god (professional plant grower) will care about your opinion 100%

Council thinking annihilape is broken (c tier mon), putting mence, volcarona and ursaring in B+, putting iron valiant in A+ and banning all sleep moves before discussion just convinces me that we are playing 2 different video games, but moreso makes the community doubt the council's abilities, if they even have them.

I can understand what's happening with council, christmas is coming and they're too busy with irl stuff, but it seems weird to me to take quick action on a tier they don't even know yet, especially without community input.

Personally myself I would just wait until global cup starts to see how the meta is right now instead of rushing ahead when cinder is coming in a week, but I'm not the one to talk. Besides, when all hope is lost we'll always have swag god as our backup tier leader

tl;dr #swaggodForTierLeader

 

[bilb owo]

yep swag god (professional plant grower) will care about your opinion 100%

Council thinking annihilape is broken (c tier mon), putting mence, volcarona and ursaring in B+, putting iron valiant in A+ and banning all sleep moves before discussion just convinces me that we are playing 2 different video games, but moreso makes the community doubt the council's abilities, if they even have them.

I can understand what's happening with council, christmas is coming and they're too busy with irl stuff, but it seems weird to me to take quick action on a tier they don't even know yet, especially without community input.

Personally myself I would just wait until global cup starts to see how the meta is right now instead of rushing ahead when cinder is coming in a week, but I'm not the one to talk. Besides, when all hope is lost we'll always have swag god as our backup tier leader

tl;dr #swaggodForTierLeader

Haha reaction

ursa deserves its place in B+ haven’t used the others. Also valiant definitely had the potential to be one of the best it’s just taking a while to optimise given everything it can do.

 

[Adam3560]

I'm trying to gauge a basic idea of community opinion so please fill out this short form on the state of the meta.
https://forms.gle/GkZEzy1EmYgmKUwa8

I used my personal email and swag god stole my identity

Also add cinderace to the poll or wait till it gets released to do anything, it's clearly going to be the biggest point of contention for the tier in two weeks

 

[Blanched]

ok lets start a quick discussion on cinderace:
This guy functionally beats every mon in the tier with 10+ sets like band, bu taunt, passho counter, scarf, specs, etc. etc. Consistent counterplay doesn't really exist, every mon conceivably loses to some cinder set, and with the annihilape suspect currently ongoing its making getting reqs an even more difficult chore. Our options as of right now are leave cinderace in the tier, suspect/qb cinderace after the annihilape suspect, qb cinder now, or qb cinder now and resuspect it after the annihilape suspect. I'm personally in favor of qb'ing cinder asap to reduce the amount of inconsistency and mu fishing on the suspect ladder, and just not resuspecting it later. I think cinder is a clear cut case of broken mon with no viable counterplay that doesn't leave a team with massive holes, especially in the current broken-check-broken meta we find ourselves in. The 1v1 council is interested in hearing the thoughts of the community before taking action, but as the ape suspect is nearing its close a fast decision is the best choice we have right now.

 

[Itchy]

get it out, don't look back

 

[frogfacts]

Idk if this gets deleted for being one liner but cind broken af obviously

 

[Opchurtle100]

I agree with frogfacts