Gen 4 DPP Latias Test (Latias is now OU)

pasy_g

Banned deucer.
Latias only exacerbates the negative aspects of the DPP metagame, like ABR said.
Could you elaborate on this? I still haven't found a satisfying answer to this, MixNape not being that great vs Latias doesnt really do it.

On top of this, Latias changes the metagame -- which has stabilized for 8 years -- significantly. One of the arguments is that Latias won't change much because it is "not that good".
This being good or bad is completly subjective anyway. Current gen lower tiers sometimes change 2 or 3 times during Grand Slam Opens, which makes it impossible for someone like me to compete there. Now i hear the argument, yeah, great, you suck, the one who can adapt properly deserves to win then. Why shouldn't this be applied to "OldGens"? I find it way more desirable to give people who actively deal with the tier an edge over people who collect the best teams they can find from the best players over their days and bringing down the odds with something they did not do anything for.

OldGens also aren't as dead and unplayed as many people make it seem. This has changed over the years with the current gen not being that attractive to many people or also people from earlier days playing in their favorite tier, hell, even the older gens being simply great tiers that are enjoyable to play. So why should we just, out of principles, not touch them? Still beyond me. And as i said in my other post there is a lot of extremely flawed thinking going on which adresses the changes in the completly wrong light, calling the "negatives" reasons to keep it banned and the positives "lol it isn't good enough to make a big impact", which just looks like completly giving it up right from the bat and not even trying.

I personally lean toward old gens not being modified unless something fundamentally uncompetitive like Baton Pass needs to be removed.
Again, why? Speaking about how the SleepTalk nerf has affected ADV (yeah bois i know it was a cartridge adjustment) the metagame was booming, and i think i can speak for most of the active ADV players, its absolutly AWESOME. When i heard about it at first i did not like that that much either, but now that i got actively into the action its simply amazing. I see no reason why this shouldn't be the case with Latias in DPP.

Latias does not necessarily make things easier for offense because of its incredible defensive value and unparalleled role compression for stalls, as stated by many in this thread. Latias on full stalls allows these types of builds to get even closer to covering everything in the meta (see Kevin Garrett's post in the original policy thread).
Not sure how technical i wanna get into this, but Latias on your team frees room to win vs opposing Latias. Think about how you now have a check to special attackers like, say, Zapdos so your TTar doesnt have to that anymore. With a proper team which can beat stall you can run something like a choiced Trick Latias, have healing wish to set something up into position (think of colbur latias healingwish to SD Lucario), remove the annoying Clefable with a CB Tar or whatever people will find out what one can do. I think you don't really see the bigger picture brother, you seem too used to the game you're playing right now and are just afraid of the changes, rather than approaching them with an open mind and putting thoughts into it how it could improve the tier.

The increased barrier to entry is unhealthy for the metagame relative to the community that plays it -- most DPP games played on showdown are not played at the absolute highest level.
So you think fresh input won't change that and its going to be more active if we keep the 8 year stabilized "boring meta" where people play the 5 most recent BKC teams they could get in their hands, if they play at all? Not that this aspect should have a high impact on the discussion anyway, but i think that should be added here anyway.

Being forced to tweak many of our old builds is a bit of a slap in the face to those like myself who have put so much work innovating in the tier over a few years and especially more recent time but also a slap in the face to those who are not as capable at building but have to somehow adjust their old builds. This is not something that can be brushed off.
Having the chance to explore even MORE and innovating even more sounds like the best thing that could happen to you, to me. I absolutly don't get why you insist so much on bad players benefitting from other peoples work. If they're not capable of building then... they should work on it instead of scouting their opponents and "counterstyling" and "analyzing their plays to see how you play the most effective against them. Or they just don't deserve to win then. Don't we wanna be as competitive as possible?


Latias doesn't fix any of the aforementioned issues and arguably has an overall negative impact on the metagame if anything, as it highly promotes trapping strategies
Like mentioned before, this reasoning is extremely flawed since those "broken trapping strategies" come with huge backlashes. more often than not you can't even reliably trap the targets you want to trap. For example have fun trapping a scarftran with dug, when Heatran then threatens your broken Latias with boom all game. Its also not easy at all to trap a ScarfRachi, thats mostly only possible as a revenge trap, which means you lost a member, and then gives something the opportunity to set up on its face which Latias will most likely not be able to revenge. DPP trapping is absolutly nowhere close to being broken like it apparently has been in the latest gens and it definitly doesnt even come close to ADV trapping because punishments for trapping something are way more sever and easier to execute.

This whole trapping discussion absolutly blows my mind, i have to say it again, its inherently flawed narrow-minded theorymoning.

I can't help but think this test is fueled by nostalgic old gen players remembering their version of the good old days and that perhaps they're just bored of this stagnant metagame.
And i can't help but think 95% of people posting against Latias simply just don't want another metagame, they dont regularly play, being changed, so if they have to play it in tournaments they don't lose their edge with the collected work of other people. Also i have never played a Latias metagame and i went into this whole problematic unprejudiced and focus on the facts i see and look at every argument i see twice, wether it being for or against Latias, and i really haven't seen a post which speaks out against Latias with any productive or helpful information but mostly people who seem to not be in touch with DPP AT ALL writing down the general paroles, and very few people who just fear their game being changed and possibly losing grip on it.
 
A lot of great and active DPP players support the idea of dropping down Latias, and since this is a hobby with no money involved whatsoever, holding this back because of some policies is ridiculous.
And i can't help but think 95% of people posting against Latias simply just don't want another metagame, they dont regularly play, being changed, so if they have to play it in tournaments they don't lose their edge with the collected work of other people.
Smogon tiering is built on concrete policies. Simply throwing them out the window because "this is a hobby" is a ridiculous argument. The amount of utter nonsense that has happened in the tournament scene is ridiculous. Players have created alts, played for other players, created a bot to gain invaluable scouting information, and completely sabotaged multiple tournaments to the point where 2 of them literally have no winner; one of them even had to undergo an entire bracket reset after an insane witch hunt ensued to locate the origins of Style's IP address. Tiering is an integral part of Smogon and is the foundation of our tournaments. The amount of effort that goes into SPL, whether it be by playing legitimately or by cheating or by trying to finesse activity wins, cannot be quantified. We should not take such a lackadaisical approach to our tiering.

Saying that a lot of people simply "don't want another metagame" is accurate...because there is honestly no reason that we should have one. Older generations should not be touched, in my opinion, unless it is to ban something that has been deemed uncompetitive by today's standards, like Baton Pass. There is honestly no reason why we should have another metagame. It is unfortunate that the DPP players of today feel as though the tier was not handled effectively when it was the main metagame of Smogon, but that should not be a reason to change the tier.

Again, why? Speaking about how the SleepTalk nerf has affected ADV (yeah bois i know it was a cartridge adjustment) the metagame was booming, and i think i can speak for most of the active ADV players, its absolutly AWESOME. When i heard about it at first i did not like that that much either, but now that i got actively into the action its simply amazing. I see no reason why this shouldn't be the case with Latias in DPP.
It doesn't really matter how awesome you think this is. The reason for this change, as you mentioned, was simply because Smogon inaccurately implemented the Sleep mechanics in ADV. This should not be an excuse for us to randomly decide to drop an Uber Pokemon back into a decade-old metagame to induce some supposedly beneficial change.

Tony's post echoes pretty much entirely what I wish to articulate. DPP, otherwise known as the "thinking gen" or the "I hope my last beats his last" generation, is influenced by a distinct power creep compared to ADV, and the lack of team preview combined with the hax-based strategies in the tier simply cause it to have the highest variance of any tier in SPL besides RBY. Many newer players hate DPP because of this, and some may feel that dropping Latias down because it was not given a fair test in the past will somehow provide a patchwork fix to this issue. But the simple fact is, it won't. The innate issues of DPP will linger no matter what you try to change, and that is perfectly fine to me. I like playing DPP, and find to be an enjoyable metagame that provides a stark contrast to many of the other metagames on Smogon. The high variance in the games lends to many tense moments in tournaments, and as long as my player isn't the one involved in the game, I find these fights to be enjoyable spectacles.

As ABR pointed out, it is essentially futile to argue against this test, since it seems that there is no stopping this delusional train of thought. Regardless, though, it is simply a suspect test, and it can still end with Latias justifiably not being added to the tier. Altering old metagames simply because it's just a "hobby" when a plethora of actions that occur in almost every SPL seem to say otherwise is just laughable to me. I just don't think that there is any real justification for dropping Latias, especially since some solid battlers in this thread seem to have conflicting opinions about its impact in the tier. DPP is what it is. It will always have factors that people loathe and meme about every time it's played in SPL and World Cup, but that is alright. There's no reason to change it, in my opinion, especially since dropping Latias will do nothing to alter almost any of the complaints the Smogon Tournament community has against the tier.
 
New generations come out and improve on the last one. Game Freak introduced team preview.....

I just don't think it matters. Reintroducing Latias doesn't address the issues with DPP; the newer generations that came out after it do.
First and foremost, isn't it generally accepted that gamefreak balances the game with 2v2 in mind post gen 4? Any improvement effort from the game developers hardly reflects towards the actual competitiveness of each gen in ou. At least not with smogon's intervention. It's no wonder gen 3 is regarded as the most balanced gen.

Regarding your concerns about not having team reveal being uncompetitive: wouldn't you say that Latias's more centralizing factor improves on this? At least this has been my experience from the ladder so far. This was also stated in August's analysis of the latias meta (great post btw) and i'm finding it manifesting quite nicely so far in my ladder run.
 
Responding to pasy_g (His quotes are boxed)

From my post: "Latias only exacerbates the negative aspects of the DPP metagame, like ABR said."
Could you elaborate on this? I still haven't found a satisfying answer to this, MixNape not being that great vs Latias doesnt really do it.
My post both points directly to ABR's explanation and also mentions that it makes Jirachi, Tyranitar, and Heatran, the three strongest Pokemon in the tier, even stronger. DPP is already quite luck based, in my opinion, and while in some ways -- slowing down the meta -- it may help a bit to reduce that, it also strengthens paraspam -- a negative aspect of DPP -- making the meta even more luck based. Have you tried playtesting on the ladder yet? This has been a huge issue that many DPLS ladderers have been facing.


From my post: "On top of this, Latias changes the metagame -- which has stabilized for 8 years -- significantly. One of the arguments is that Latias won't change much because it is "not that good"."
This being good or bad is completly subjective anyway. Current gen lower tiers sometimes change 2 or 3 times during Grand Slam Opens, which makes it impossible for someone like me to compete there. Now i hear the argument, yeah, great, you suck, the one who can adapt properly deserves to win then. Why shouldn't this be applied to "OldGens"? I find it way more desirable to give people who actively deal with the tier an edge over people who collect the best teams they can find from the best players over their days and bringing down the odds with something they did not do anything for.

OldGens also aren't as dead and unplayed as many people make it seem. This has changed over the years with the current gen not being that attractive to many people or also people from earlier days playing in their favorite tier, hell, even the older gens being simply great tiers that are enjoyable to play. So why should we just, out of principles, not touch them? Still beyond me. And as i said in my other post there is a lot of extremely flawed thinking going on which adresses the changes in the completly wrong light, calling the "negatives" reasons to keep it banned and the positives "lol it isn't good enough to make a big impact", which just looks like completly giving it up right from the bat and not even trying.
I agree, this is a very subjective topic. I relate it to politics: some want to change old gens, and some don't. Both are valid opinions. I think that while current gens undergo many changes, that is natural as they see themselves to a "completed" state, and then eventually become old gens. I relate this to games like Super Smash Bros Melee and even older Call of Duty games like Black Ops 1. I'll use Black Ops 1 as an example: this game has horrible issues with gun balance. There are many buffs and nerfs that could be made -- even now -- but the game has entered a stabilization in which it will never change. As an old gens player, I actually seek stabilization in the tier I play. Why? Because sometimes you accept flaws of a game and still love it anyway, without wanting to make drastic changes. Perhaps a change to a smaller degree to improve DPP can be accepted, but not only do I believe the Latias introduction is a massive change, but I also believe it does not improve the meta. I think TonyFlygon's post is amazing with regards to this, so I will reference you there. At the end of the day, some people want to change old gens and some do not. This is an unfortunate issue that cannot be avoided.


From my post: "I personally lean toward old gens not being modified unless something fundamentally uncompetitive like Baton Pass needs to be removed."
Again, why? Speaking about how the SleepTalk nerf has affected ADV (yeah bois i know it was a cartridge adjustment) the metagame was booming, and i think i can speak for most of the active ADV players, its absolutly AWESOME. When i heard about it at first i did not like that that much either, but now that i got actively into the action its simply amazing. I see no reason why this shouldn't be the case with Latias in DPP.
I elaborated on most of this above, and I can't really speak for the sleep talk nerf in ADV, but I think these two cannot really be compared because these situations are quite different. One is a legitimate bug on PS that got fixed, to my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong), and the other is an old-gens-council proposed dropdown that is not necessarily a necessity.


From my post: "Latias does not necessarily make things easier for offense because of its incredible defensive value and unparalleled role compression for stalls, as stated by many in this thread. Latias on full stalls allows these types of builds to get even closer to covering everything in the meta (see Kevin Garrett's post in the original policy thread)."
Not sure how technical i wanna get into this, but Latias on your team frees room to win vs opposing Latias. Think about how you now have a check to special attackers like, say, Zapdos so your TTar doesnt have to that anymore. With a proper team which can beat stall you can run something like a choiced Trick Latias, have healing wish to set something up into position (think of colbur latias healingwish to SD Lucario), remove the annoying Clefable with a CB Tar or whatever people will find out what one can do. I think you don't really see the bigger picture brother, you seem too used to the game you're playing right now and are just afraid of the changes, rather than approaching them with an open mind and putting thoughts into it how it could improve the tier.
You mention in your post that there are no viable healing wish users currently, but this is not correct. Jirachi, Shaymin, and even Cresselia are three examples of viable healing wish pokemon, and there are probably more. I have used scarf HW Jirachi on some teams, for example. While, yes, Latias checks Zapdos easily, Zapdos is a key component of many offensive builds and it is now much worse in this meta with its versatility narrowed. While you don't need Tyranitar for Zapdos necessarily anymore, you now need it for Latias, a just as potent special attacker. Choiced trick Latias is cool and all but can also be a liability because you can trick a scarfed Ttar for example (common on stalls). I think this is by far the least compelling section of your response, as this plays into arbitrary semantics and doesn't exactly address my point of full stalls being able to cover even more threats than they initially were. (Theorymoning here) By doing this, full stall builds may become even more reliable in tournament play because no matter what type of offense the opponent brings, Latias introduces a role compression that allows you to potentially win against almost any sound build. You have brought up theorymoning in your response, but what else are we supposed to do? This test is flawed and the ladder is a heaping pile of nonsense that gives us little to no picture of how the metagame will actually function at a competitive level. That's the whole point of these discussion posts. Tying this in to the last part of your quote, I am afraid of the changes because I do not think they will be positive, as I have claimed in my opinion. Implying that I am close-minded and just afraid of any change whatsoever is not only slightly insulting but also not true as I have openly stated that I support smaller changes that will improve the metagame. My preferences are conservative regarding changing old gens, and I don't think it makes me close-minded.


From my post: "The increased barrier to entry is unhealthy for the metagame relative to the community that plays it -- most DPP games played on showdown are not played at the absolute highest level."
So you think fresh input won't change that and its going to be more active if we keep the 8 year stabilized "boring meta" where people play the 5 most recent BKC teams they could get in their hands, if they play at all? Not that this aspect should have a high impact on the discussion anyway, but i think that should be added here anyway.
I recognize my point here as by far the most controversial and subjective on my post, but that's fine. I expect many to disagree with this. By saying "boring meta" you are playing into some arguments that people want Latias to return to "shake up the boring meta", which is what pretty much everyone on both sides who has made a compelling argument disagrees with the most. It's not a matter of more active/less active here, more so that the currently active DPP playerbase will probably be inconvenienced and burdened by this. DPP currently is the least centralized tier, according to the metric august established, so I really don't think people only play "the 5 most recent BKC teams they could get their hands on".


From my post: "Being forced to tweak many of our old builds is a bit of a slap in the face to those like myself who have put so much work innovating in the tier over a few years and especially more recent time but also a slap in the face to those who are not as capable at building but have to somehow adjust their old builds. This is not something that can be brushed off."
Having the chance to explore even MORE and innovating even more sounds like the best thing that could happen to you, to me. I absolutly don't get why you insist so much on bad players benefitting from other peoples work. If they're not capable of building then... they should work on it instead of scouting their opponents and "counterstyling" and "analyzing their plays to see how you play the most effective against them. Or they just don't deserve to win then. Don't we wanna be as competitive as possible?
If this were the case, then I'd be buzzing with excitement. But that is not the case. My opinion is that Latias reduces innovation around builds that do not utilize pokemon like Latias, Tyranitar, Jirachi, etc. by increasing centralization. I have come to love the current large window for innovation in the tier, and I strongly feel that Latias will close more doors than it will open. Especially since it reduces the versatility of many top tier pokemon like Zapdos and Infernape. While I don't think reduced centralization = better meta, it's what makes DPP a unique meta. Keep in mind this part is especially subjective, because it is based off my experience innovating in the tier. This ultimately ties into my preferences with modifying old gens as well. Also, regarding "if they're not capable of building then... they should work on it instead of scouting their opponents and "counterstyling" and "analyzing their plays to see how you play the most effective against them", this is also very subjective on both our ends, and I understand if you feel this way. To my knowledge, however, I haven't seen you build much in DPP or use any of your own builds in any sort of tournament setting. When I played vs you in RoAST, you just used the standard specszap bandpert team, and during WCoPP, you had snøfall use the same specszap bandpert build multiple times. I know WCoPP was a meme, but you told me personally that you just use old SPL builds for DPP, so I don't see how you're in a position to say something like this.

The last thing I'll retouch on is the trapping scenario. I pointed out Dug + Mag + Safeguard CM Latias. I encourage you to re-read this section, as I don't think this can be debated too much. I have personally experienced ridiculous trapping scenarios with Latias in testing with very capable players. You can trust me when I say it's really quite bad, and will definitely be a problem if Latias returns.

Just want to say at the end that I have no hard feelings towards you for having a completely different opinion than I do and I hope I didn't come off too harshly. You're chill af and this is separate from that <3.

Edit: I 100% agree with Tsunami's responses to pasy_g above.
 
Last edited:
1544015298582.png

Alright, I just made the requirements for the vote (second only to the efficient robot we call Luigi) so as a means of getting closure from the whole ordeal I'd like to share my experience so far:

Lots of good players started their run early this week which made it pretty hard to accumulate gxe. Many often I'd find myself trading games with M Dragon and Fear, encountering the odd ABR, Osgoode, Excal etc.

After initially trying a few fat balances to get a feel of the meta and the type of teams getting played on ladder I quickly realised that this approach wasn't gonna cut it. I'd say contrary to popular belief regarding the rise of Dug, it is Magnezone who seems to be the biggest beneficiary out of the two trappers. So much that despite how bad it is not having Leftovers on Skarmory (thinking Iron Head Jirachi here), Shed Skarm is likely to be the better ladder set right now for these type of fat teams.

My Run:

Teams i laddered with ordered from most used to least used:
1544016034006.png

So after playing around with teams 3 and 4, both having some hidden perks in them, I went with teams 2 and 1 for the majority of my run.

I made team 2 as a response to ABR's post regarding offenses not benefiting from the Latias injection. Lots of players opt for nidoclef skarm teams so this team tries to account for it, despite having two choice locked dragons and no mag. Shed Skarm usage is beginning to soar so I went with a different approach to unlocking the dragons. Magma Tran makes progress vs non-milo nidoclefs and is coupled to Breloom and Rachi for breaking. Admiteddly the team suffers from not having a speed boosting cleaner for the endgame so it relies on Flygon for picking things apart/letting Loom and Rachi in. Overall this team got me to 81 gxe in 30 games which is when i started having issues with it/people adapting to it.

I used Ciele's known offense for my remaining games, a team I have experience in using quite well. It feels slightly improved in my eyes as the nerfed Zapdos usage allows this type of teams to flourish. I had issues with Hippowdon + Shed Skarm in a few games but I suppose that's the nature of the beast sometimes.

On the Metagame:

The run was painstaking, facing paraspam and nidoclef every other game can be taxing to the mind. The metagame however felt like typical DPP to me albeit with slightly elevated Magnezone usage and the odd Latias here and there. Team patterns felt more easy to see than usual, despite this being held on Ladder of all places. I don't think Latias has even something to do with the elevated Magnezone, moreso people counteracting all the DPLS accounts trying to nidoclef for a steady run.

Outside that, my personal experience using Latias didn't make me feel like I was wielding something overpowered, nor did the metagame seem to shape to an uncompetitive/RBY-esque type of system. And neither did it seem like only defensive builds have to gain from this addition. Having Latias patch up that Electric/Water/Fire/Ground weakness has been a godsend for team 2.

Latias + Dugtrio wasn't as bad as we initially feared in the policy review threads (nor encountered too frequently on this test). If anything I'd say Cress still remains the best sand balance disruptor poke in this type of strategies as it's less trap prone and fares better vs Big 5 builds.

Good luck to everyone trying to meet reqs!
 
Last edited:
Is the suspect test meant to be this difficult?

I have a friend with a W/L record of 30-7, (81.08% wins), and a GXE of 78.5%. His real ratio of wins is actually higher than his GXE, should that happen?
 
Is the suspect test meant to be this difficult?

I have a friend with a W/L record of 30-7, (81.08% wins), and a GXE of 78.5%. His real ratio of wins is actually higher than his GXE, should that happen?
Yea that's normal. GXE is your assigned probability estimating you'd win your game against a random ladder player X% of the time rather than a win-rate.
 
Last edited:
Sorry if I'm out of the loop on this, but I want clarification on the basic premise for deeming a Pokemon's ban from a tier.

It seems here that people are putting up the argument that Latias in OU gives way to an unhealthier/more stagnant/centralized/etc metagame in comparison to a metagame without Latias. For example: "trapping" is apparently more prevalent now.

However, even if true, does that even matter as a factor to reasoning if a Pokemon is broken or not?

I thought a Pokemon is banned from a tier for only one single reason: Does the Pokemon have no hard counters?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the single metric by which we measure whether a Pokemon should be banned from a tier? Everything else, states of the metagame, metagame stats effect on the metagame, waaa this new metagame isn't as fun to play as the old one, etc... these are all just opinions on the state of the metagame. If we can bring up concrete examples of counters to Latias, doesn't that mean the Pokemon is not broken? And vice-versa if no counters are found. It's good to have and talk about opinions, but we need concrete evidence to appropriate an actual ban of a Pokemon.

If I am confused as to what constitutes what makes a Pokemon banned or not, please tell me or link me to an appropriate description.
 
Last edited:
I want to chime in and say that I agree with what’s been said by people like Excal, PDC, ABR, etc. and I do not think Latias should be unbanned. Excal already brought up some reasons why the ladder right now is not a great way to gauge Latias’s impact on the metagame—it’s dead, full of luck-based strategies, and not representative of DPP at a competitive level. To add to that, I feel like innovation is at a low point because everyone on the ladder is just spamming old tried and true teams to get reqs. I’m not seeing a lot of Latias and certainly not seeing a lot of innovation utilizing Latias, either. What I have been encountering is more Tar/Jira/Heatran, more trappers, and more para spam, which only exacerbates some of the already potent and “less desirable” aspects of DPP as others have mentioned. (I know I just said that the ladder isn’t a good place to draw conclusions from and then subsequently drew my own conclusions from it, but it’s one of the only things I have to go off of and is undoubtedly what many of the suspect test voters will be basing their opinions on.) I think the old adage of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” certainly applies here—there’s nothing actively wrong with DPP and it’s unclear if Latias is even having a positive impact on the meta.
 

MANNAT

Follow me on twitch!
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I want to chime in and say that I agree with what’s been said by people like Excal, PDC, ABR, etc. and I do not think Latias should be unbanned. Excal already brought up some reasons why the ladder right now is not a great way to gauge Latias’s impact on the metagame—it’s dead, full of luck-based strategies, and not representative of DPP at a competitive level. To add to that, I feel like innovation is at a low point because everyone on the ladder is just spamming old tried and true teams to get reqs. I’m not seeing a lot of Latias and certainly not seeing a lot of innovation utilizing Latias, either. What I have been encountering is more Tar/Jira/Heatran, more trappers, and more para spam, which only exacerbates some of the already potent and “less desirable” aspects of DPP as others have mentioned. (I know I just said that the ladder isn’t a good place to draw conclusions from and then subsequently drew my own conclusions from it, but it’s one of the only things I have to go off of and is undoubtedly what many of the suspect test voters will be basing their opinions on.) I think the old adage of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” certainly applies here—there’s nothing actively wrong with DPP and it’s unclear if Latias is even having a positive impact on the meta.
This post kinda contradicts itself in that you start off by saying ladder isn't a good way to gauge Latias's impact on the metagame then in the following sentence you proceed to say that a large reason not to ban Latias is that the ladder lacks innovation and has a lot of undesirable team types. I get that you addressed that point, but why make that statement at the start if you're using the ladder to justify your argument, it just makes you look indecisive and selectively choosing points as you see fit. Also regarding "if it ain't broke don't fix it", I agree that DPP is a pretty solid metagame at the moment, but if there's room for improvement, why not make an effort to improve the tier? I feel like the tier just kinda makes more sense with Latias in it and can be an amazing addition to a ton of teams that makes teambuilding in this tier considerably easier and allows for more flexibility on offensive and defensive teams alike to fit other slots, such as breakers on offensive teams. I do agree that the ladder isn't the best place to gauge Lati's impact on the tier, and even if it is, more "annoying" teams popping up on ladder isn't really a valid complaint against Latias. Having an abundance of bulky teams isn't an indication of an unhealthy metagame, it just indicates the current state of the metagame. I've seen a lot of complaints that "nothing but stall is viable/consistent" but that's simply not true. Asta got reqs using nothing but offense, and when I played Luigi he was using machamp offense too, so there's clear evidence that you can win consistently without using these "undesirable/fat" teams on top of those teams being common not indicating an unhealthy metagame. I feel like a lot of the issues people are complaining about with this metagame are a symptom of people being too lazy to build their own teams or try to innovate rather than actual issues with the tier itself. I really do think that Latias is a positive addition to the metagame and encourage people to go out and use it more because it can really be an asset to a myriad of teams and allows more flexibility for creativity in teams atm.
 
This post kinda contradicts itself in that you start off by saying ladder isn't a good way to gauge Latias's impact on the metagame then in the following sentence you proceed to say that a large reason not to ban Latias is that the ladder lacks innovation and has a lot of undesirable team types. I get that you addressed that point, but why make that statement at the start if you're using the ladder to justify your argument, it just makes you look indecisive and selectively choosing points as you see fit. Also regarding "if it ain't broke don't fix it", I agree that DPP is a pretty solid metagame at the moment, but if there's room for improvement, why not make an effort to improve the tier? I feel like the tier just kinda makes more sense with Latias in it and can be an amazing addition to a ton of teams that makes teambuilding in this tier considerably easier and allows for more flexibility on offensive and defensive teams alike to fit other slots, such as breakers on offensive teams. I do agree that the ladder isn't the best place to gauge Lati's impact on the tier, and even if it is, more "annoying" teams popping up on ladder isn't really a valid complaint against Latias. Having an abundance of bulky teams isn't an indication of an unhealthy metagame, it just indicates the current state of the metagame. I've seen a lot of complaints that "nothing but stall is viable/consistent" but that's simply not true. Asta got reqs using nothing but offense, and when I played Luigi he was using machamp offense too, so there's clear evidence that you can win consistently without using these "undesirable/fat" teams on top of those teams being common not indicating an unhealthy metagame. I feel like a lot of the issues people are complaining about with this metagame are a symptom of people being too lazy to build their own teams or try to innovate rather than actual issues with the tier itself. I really do think that Latias is a positive addition to the metagame and encourage people to go out and use it more because it can really be an asset to a myriad of teams and allows more flexibility for creativity in teams atm.
I admit my post had some internal inconsistencies, so I’ll try to elaborate on the point I was trying to make. I don’t think the ladder right now represents what the Latias metagame will ultimately look like. So whether you think Latias improves this meta or worsens it (it doesn’t really matter which), if you’re basing this opinion primarily on ladder play then you’re probably misinformed to some degree. Given our inability to fully assess the “true” Latias meta—what will eventually emerge once people stop spamming the same tired old teams during the suspect window and really start utilizing/abusing Latias to its fullest extent and perhaps in more creative ways—I think it would be best to err on the side of caution (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it). Re-evaluating Latias in a few months’ time would act as a fail safe, but I’d rather not have it come to that if it can be helped. Even if we were to evaluate Latias’s impact based on what we experience on the ladder, there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on what that impact is. Some players feel that it allows for innovation on offense and stall alike, while others think that it centralizes the tier around already strong builds. Some people think that Latias fits nicely into the metagame and some think that it’s too strong and versatile and is not a healthy addition. It’s my opinion that we shouldn’t tamper with the tier and unban Latias unless it has demonstrable and robust benefits, and I’m not convinced of that yet.
 
Posting this on behalf of BKC. You can PM him for a paperback edition.

When some of the players posting in this thread have gross misunderstanding of DPP as evidenced by some of the shocking sentiments they express then it follows that they misrepresent the generation. I suspect there is an agenda of bias toward laziness and what is easy as opposed to what is right to these sentiments as well but rather than throw around theories I will attempt to show why I find these posts to be so distastefully incorrect.

I'm very confident that Latias has an overall negative impact on it. The theory of it compressing roles for offense and thus creating freedom is not what's practically happening. What's happening is an improvement to already potent strategies, particularly the trap based ones. Nothing abuses dug/mag trapping like Latias does. There's also the fact that it's extremely easy to bypass its counterplay. Specs picks up a KO every time but the CM sets really push it over the edge. Trapping and hazards make removing its answers an easier task, whether its dug trapping rachi, zone trapping zong/sciz, spikes or tspikes wearing down anything, stuff like tar getting roared in, etc.
I myself am quite confident that Latias' impact is hardly felt enough in either direction to call it positive or negative. These "complaints" about DPP are merely buzzwords for things that people who don't play the gen if they don't have to for an official tournament (so for most people this extends to Classic and for some others it might to helping their teammates in SPL/WCoP) dislike when their teammate struggles with them in SPL and WCoP, pulling the sideline spectator expertise that our community so excels at. Lead matchup, no team preview, paraspam, trapping, Jirachi, Breloom, Machamp, Infernape... I'm not saying that these aren't prominent things that need to be taken into consideration but when the complaints come largely from a portion of the playerbase that makes no attempt to deal with these issues and instead just complains then they don't see how they can be dealt with other than blindly going into games with what they've been handed and thus it should be no surprise that their views are so off. It's the equivalent of when someone goes into a current gen tier, whether playing it for some tournament they signed up for or spectating and being loud and going wow this tier sucks; in Smogtours-esque fashion, "how are you supposed to beat xyz" and of course the people who actually play the tier and understand it go "well if you actually played you'd know xyz" and this is pretty much what's happening here. It's very popular to shit on DPP these days and while I'd never say it's immune to criticism - I've been known to get frustrated myself - the criticisms largely come from ignorant places where the player's own shortcoming and/or misunderstanding of the metagame is ignored and the tier is bashed instead. If someone who mainly plays another tier whose main experience of SM was his teammates' SPL/WCoP games and maybe some random games in Tour started shitting on the tier because AshGren Magearna Zyg Pex whatever then he would (rightfully) get shit on too.

This isn't meant to be some gotcha journalism-type exposure of the psychology behind the influential circlejerking that so plagues our community though, so let's talk facts of the metagame. Contrary to what is being claimed here, Latias actually helps defend against these horrific threats without doing anything out of the ordinary to help them in the sense that it's not pushing anything anywhere near an edge. Its influence will be felt but you will hardly have to bend over backwards to account for it; I can think of about 15 things that I will likely have to go out of my way to handle when making my next team. In addition to being very familiar with Latias in OU from prior tournaments and just my own general interest, I have played the hell out of the ladder and I have also watched a lot of games from it. It really isn't that different.

MagTrio + Latias being overwhelming is a myth at best and false propaganda at worst. Cresselia on those teams, while still not consistent thanks to the incredible matchup-based nature of both the strategy and the effectiveness of the trappers, is still superior to Latias - matter of fact, Latias would provide a great weapon against these teams (a recurring theme that we'll revisit later in this post). It's got much, MUCH better bulk, and does not possess some of Latias' nasty weaknesses - I mean, the Scarf Flygon thing is bad enough, but when your unbeatable trap team is perfectly poised to get completely bent over by Mamoswine then I have a hard time buying it. I'll cover my bases here and throw in a plea to not read this as "latias loses to mamo lol what's the big deal." That's just one example. If you know the tier, there are SO many ways to fuck with Cress (or Lati) but when the players complaining about it aren't familiar enough with the tier to explore options (very likely because they don't build their own teams and also don't play with awareness of the threat which is another matter I'll get to soon) then it is hardly fair to blame Lati. I mean, half these trap teams struggle with something as simple as Roar Swampert (and Hippowdon), for Christ's sake.

I mean some people want to ban Dugtrio alone for Christ's sake because they play on autopilot without thinking with teams they did not build and then they get picked apart by it. This isn't me slandering people for not making their own teams, this is explaining that if you don't understand how the team works against certain styles such as this one (because if you build a DPP team this is something you must consider and what's more is that it's not even that hard to prepare for) then maybe your opinion is colored a bit by the fact that you don't get it and you're attributing the problem to the wrong things. The options that deal with these teams are plentiful both in the teambuilder and in the fact that you can absolutely maneuver your game in such a way that you don't fall into the trap your opponent is trying to lure you into. However, to do so, you must play with awareness, and that is another thing many newer players fail to do and thus blame the tier.

"Oh well how was I supposed to know he had that?" By experiencing the tier and thinking right from turn 1. You don't have to predict their entire team before you've made your first move but you should be considering what they could have. When I see Metagross lead I'm thinking a lot of things, but one thing that's very likely is Tyranitar/Dragonite/Starmie-type bulky offense, often with a Scarf Rotom or Heatran. In the opening turns as I scout my opponent I'm thinking further still as to how he's playing and how much information I can get from him, kind of like trying to fill in a team preview if that helps it make sense. If you want to just autopilot games and take things as you see them then no wonder you struggle with DPP. You can't be consistent while ignoring one of the most important aspects of the tier. I get that if you started in the current Tour gens and you're used to team preview then it's a new idea to you but that is not the tier's fault and it does not make it less skillful. (Nor am I saying it's more skillful. It's just different.) This is something that applies to earlier gens too, although no one ever seems to complain about it there even though figuring out whether that ADV SkarmBliss stall team has an Aerodactyl, Starmie or Dugtrio last is a real bitch, I promise you. This leads me into another point misrepresented by the current generation: "DPP is too powerful to not have team preview." I get it, but at the same time I fervently disagree, not least because the power of defensive teams contradicts this brutally and offensive teams have more than enough ways to check various stuff. You not knowing the metagame as well and expecting to succeed regardless via autopiloting good teams from good players does not fly here like in the preview gens. That is not a flaw, if anything it's a positive. You cannot be consistently good at the gen without knowing it at least to some degree (please don't misrepresent this as me saying it can only be done by the elites from Shoddy days) whereas in the current gens you see a lot of players who grab the easy-to-pilot teams (half the reason they're as easy to pilot is not just because they're built well with good flowing synergy but because even if you're not an expert you know roughly how to pilot them before turn 1 based on what you see) and do pretty well (this is not a knock against those generations at all, I think they are excellent - again, it's just different). The tier is not flawed because a team you had was brutally violated by a top threat. In a similar vein, a team is not weak to something because you unnecessarily threw your answer due to not knowing the tier. I would never say the tier is immune to matchup but to me it is crystal clear that if the team is built well then you should be able to play your way out of anything (and this almost seems self-evident because being able to play against anything is part of what makes a good team, and DPP has a plethora of options for you to be able to do this well). If the extent of your yearly DPPing is "hey can i get some teams for cup" once a year before you lose and go "w/e dpp is trash lol" and the rest is armchairing it up where possible then your opinion doesn't mean much, especially regarding Latias. Just because you do not personally like an aspect of a tier doesn't make it or the tier bad. This kind of thinking is what I see when someone complains about these things, and when I see the claims that Latias makes these awful aspects worse when in fact it helps defend against them while not particularly exacerbating the issues themselves, to put it lightly, it just screams of ignorance or willful bias.

What I'm saying is "not only are these qualities of DPP you perceive as negative not so, but Latias hardly does much to enhance them, and thinking otherwise is the result of probably not looking past the surface; matter of fact, Latias helps with these undesirable strategies." Lead matchup? Latias checks things really nicely (but not in an overwhelming way whatsoever), so it's less important. The fact that Latias is really not overwhelming is so important here because it means that the extra option it gives us to deal with threats does not come with the undesirable side effect of being overpowered or even anything out of the ordinary for the tier, thus meaning you don't exactly have to run it, but it is nice to have (the fact we get along more than just fine now is a testament to this). No team preview? Similar sentiment; Asta made this point as well -
Regarding your concerns about not having team reveal being uncompetitive: wouldn't you say that Latias's more centralizing factor improves on this? At least this has been my experience from the ladder so far. This was also stated in August's analysis of the latias meta (great post btw) and i'm finding it manifesting quite nicely so far in my ladder run.
Para spam? First I should mention that the "it gives jira clef tar another victim" argument blows my mind - it's not good enough to be unbanned? It's not like you're forced to use this shitty Pokemon that leaves you open to everything, like say Rotom-H "countering" Genesect for anyone who remembers that period. Not to mention if a Pokemon is making you weak to those guys and your team can't handle it... don't use that Pokemon, and if the team isn't working out, oh well. That happens all the time now, and I especially don't think there'd be an excuse with Latias considering that it is hardly providing some defensive utility that doesn't already exist; it just helps out a lot and not at all in an overwhelming way. Anyway yeah if you sit around passively against those teams then sure Latias will just be a victim, but if you get out in front then it can topple them pretty easily. They'll have to tread lightly around the Pokemon that can just as easily mess them up as can be messed up by them. This is an example of how it can go either way depending on how the players play... which is what Pokemon's all about. See the Breloom/Ape vs. Latias dynamic for another example, or Jirachi vs. Latias for yet another, or Machamp vs. Latias for another still. Already went over how it assists with trapping too. Hazards are hardly pushing Lati over the edge either with the prominence of Clef, Skarm, Zong. Tar/Jira/Tran don't exactly immediately crumple and there are ways of dealing with hazards, a threat which should be accounted for in general.

Latias isn't a special case to prepare for nor play against. Not that the so-called negative qualities can't be frustrating at times, but I have a hard time even considering them as negative. In any case, Latias does not make them significantly more powerful at all. Matter of fact, its biggest value is providing a great, non-overpowered weapon to fight them with.

Some say Latias will be a godsend for dealing with these problematic Pokemon; others say Breloom and Infernape are not issues pre-Lati. I think BKC nails addressing these misconceptions. Breloom and Infernape are still amazing, and while Latias provides really valuable defensive features to deal with Breloom and Ape (namely bulkier CM roar sets for loom), Breloom and Infernape have not gotten worse in the meta because they both also can be threatening to Jirachi, Ttar, and Tran, the three most popular Pokemon in the current meta by usage. Since BKC does a great job describing this, the only thing I will add is that it limits Infernape's versatility a bit. At this point, choice band/choice scarf ape is by far the best set. Mixape, one of the best answers to stall, is significantly nerfed because it is easily walled by Latias if it doesn't use u-turn, which reduces its coverage. Breloom will run the same main two sets: subpunch and superpower+mach.
Mixape is hardly a great stall remedy. It's a reasonable threat for sure, no denying that, but Latias is hardly turning it from an unstoppable stall killer into a waste of a slot. Starmie, SpDef Hippowdon and SpDef Nidoqueen all really get in the way of MixApe's antics, in addition to various other Pokes like Milotic and bulky Zapdos that can stop it in its tracks, Scarf Rotom always being a threat, moveslot syndrome making it account for ScarfTar as well, and not even being able to kill healthy SpDef Jirachi... plus, with Latias being vulnerable to Pursuit (like many other Pokemon on stall that are tasked with handling certain Pokes that are paired with the Pursuit to do their job) then if Ape really is such a stall killer just bait it in and trap its ass and then you should be good to go. Band Ape was the best set even pre-Latias because of U-turn bypassing just about everything except Nidoqueen's Poison Point (and in situations like that or faced with lots of Protect Pokes its real value lies in setting up its teammates anyway).

Not having anything directly to do with Infernape + Loom but regarding offense and stall, I wanted to briefly talk about my opinion on the theory august presented: that Latias will give offensive builds more freedom. It's very compelling and makes sense on the surface, but I actually disagree with it for the reasons ABR posted above, but also the issue attributed to needing Latias to fix the "problem". I do agree that defensive builds -- full stalls -- are conventionally the most sound builds in DPP, as they check the highest number of threats typically compared to more offensive builds. However, if this is the case, then why is offense significantly more popular in DPP play than stall? From my experience in tournaments, while stall is amazing and safe, (quoting one of my earlier posts) "the right stall will completely invalidate a decent size subset of offenses, but it's about bringing the right offense for your opponent that will capitalize on their preferences." I personally quite like this dynamic between offense and stall pre-Latias. As I said, I agree that stall at, let's say, the highest level of play is the most potent playstyle in DPP. While Latias could free up some room for some offensive builds, in my opinion it is an even better asset defensively. So I think Latias only makes stall better, making things harder for offense. My most consistent team right now in the Latias meta is a stall build with Latias on it, so I guess that means something.
Latias checks a variety of offensive Pokes which can ease you up to take on stall (this isn't even mentioning it can be a significant weapon against stall itself). I don't think the dynamics of offense against stall particularly change (at all, but definitely not for the worse). Latias doesn't particularly help defense too much... it's a nice Poke to have for offensive-defensive purposes, but Pursuit is already a significant component of making several types of DPP offense work and a Pokemon so vulnerable to it (even moreso than Starmie) isn't going to make waves either way. It gives defensive teams some nice options to work with but offense hardly has to go out of its way if at all for the kinds of needed-Pursuit-anyway styles to function. It's not pushing anything over the edge. Notice the theme: it's good, great even, nice tool to have on a variety of different teams across all styles, but not overwhelming anyone with a good team and a brain by itself anytime soon.

The only Jirachi that can reliably beat CM safeguard Latias (safeguard has 40 PP btw, that's a ton) is scarf Jirachi.
I left out most of the rest because I already addressed why trapping is hardly a big deal, Latias or no and it'd actually be less of a big deal with Lati, but this part stuck out to me especially. Dragon Pulse has 16 PP, and does 37-44 to SpD Jira (38-45 if you're using the one that hits 244). This is getting stalled out barring some seriously absurd consecutive crits. Even if it's something ridiculous like max SpA for some reason, that's got 23% to 2HKO through Lefties (11% with max SpD) and Wish + Tect is still gonna mess with it hard. Wish CM (which is already a great set) similarly fucks with it. So does Sub CM (same thing). Sub flinch still forces it to waste Pulses and it has to Recover a lot, not to mention it needs 2 CMs to even break the Sub. Some mix sets (with Shuca Berry for Dug and a Hidden Power for Magnezone) even run Icy Wind. Let's not exaggerate.

I strongly feel that the metagame has changed significantly since the freeing of Latias. I've heard many people say "Oh, I've barely seen any Latias on the ladder!" I really don't think this comment is insightful or means anything because despite maybe not seeing too much Latias, it is certainly there and influencing players' move choices and selection of Pokemon. Usage stats are pretty accurate to some degree, but also neglect moveset choice and combinations "selection" of pokemon, so that's something to note as well. Latias is certainly influencing the DPP metagame from my experience.
Well, yeah. That's why it's being tested, because it's good enough to help check things. It not being overwhelming while helping do these things (I mean seriously if you want to plop Lati on an otherwise really Breloom weak team and act like it solves your issues then I have bad news for you) is why it's worth a spot in the metagame. It'd be weird if it didn't influence the meta somehow. This isn't a bad thing. It's hardly doing it to a ridiculous extent though... hell, I wouldn't even say it's doing it to a notable extent. Like I'd legitimately be surprised if someone had an already good DPP team that couldn't handle Latias. That's the entire impetus behind the test.

But my biggest issue right now with the introduction of Latias into the metagame is the highly increased barrier to entry for the tier. Old gens right now are difficult enough to get into in my opinion. The playerbases are small and the ladders are pretty dead and not helpful for improvement in the tier (maybe GSC is a decent ladder).
It has never been easier to get into old generations. The resources we have are absolutely endless. Pages upon pages of incredibly specific, high-level discussion in RoA and years of public replays from the best of the best duking it out. People play for fun all the time on Smogtours, most top players are more accessible than ever with Discord and are more than willing to answer a few questions you might have about the tier as long as you're POLITE/not a dick (i.e. "can I have your teams lol") and don't escalate it into a full-on tutoring session, the RoA room is pretty great, Pokemon Perfect hosts tours all the time where good players join... it's almost ridiculous honestly. Latias being added might mean the players who work harder might benefit a little more. What an awful idea.

What's worse is that those who do not play DPP as their "main" tier, or don't play it too often, will find it very frustrating and difficult to have to tweak their already existing teams that they have used for a very long time (I have talked to a few capable players who have expressed this to me).
It legitimately blows my mind that anyone would give a fuck about the people who don't play DPP. I'll just quote pasy's post here
Having the chance to explore even MORE and innovating even more sounds like the best thing that could happen to you, to me. I absolutly don't get why you insist so much on bad players benefitting from other peoples work. If they're not capable of building then... they should work on it instead of scouting their opponents and "counterstyling" and "analyzing their plays to see how you play the most effective against them. Or they just don't deserve to win then. Don't we wanna be as competitive as possible?
I feel that because Latias highly influences the way people are thinking and preparing for the meta (it will always because I think it will probably be either #4 or maybe #5 on the usage stats even when the meta has stabilized), people will have to tweak their teams to adjust to this new meta, not even just Latias itself.
People who build tweak their teams nonstop even in the current meta. I could argue that several natural developments over the past several years have "forced" (I use this term lightly because nothing has been forced, simply a matter of preference) much more significant changes and tweaks to/entirely new teams than Latias. There's really not much of a difference. Also, people who constantly ask for others' teams do so nonstop even in the current meta, even when they have entire arsenals of great teams.
I understand that people have proposed valid arguments for why Latias is not broken -- I do not think Latias is broken either -- but like I said I strongly feel that most people, myself included, will have to tweak many of their pre-existing builds to suit the new meta over time.
I'm sorry man but this is literally "I don't want Latias because I'll have to tweak my teams." Think about that.

You'd end up tweaking your teams for the various meta changes regardless, btw, this is just another one of those that also has the benefit of helping out in the eternal quest to check everything.

You also continuously argue to make things easier for people who don't play the tier unless they "have" to because they dislike it or are lazy. I personally value the player who worked hard to understand the tier because he wants to do well in it as opposed to the guy who had everything handed to him, allowing him to cynically autopilot.

I'll also mention that I believe if your team struggles against Latias there is very likely a significant flaw or two already against current threats of the metagame. It checks things, but hardly overwhelmingly... show me a list of stuff it checks and I'll say I appreciate the option, which is kinda the argument for it, but they can potentially bypass it without really going out of their way. Fair dynamic. Similarly, show me pre-Lati teams that struggle with Latias and I'll show you teams that are struggling with other threats.

So I guess the next question would be something along the lines of why do we care about people who don't "main" or devote themselves to DPP and build. I've seen arguments over semantics about what constitutes a real DPPer and what doesn't, which I suppose might be attributed to who's opinion is valid and who's opinion is not, but at the end of the day DPP is still played by many people in the community who are not proficient builders or who don't devote a ton of time into the tier.
This isn't some "if you're a false don't entry" bullshit. I don't think DPP should be exclusive to some small group of elites or whatever because that's obviously fucking stupid. What I find clearly abhorrent is wanting to lower the lowest common denominator. The part in bold is especially egregious. I mean... really? These are the people you want to cater to and make things easier for?

Fun and popular tournaments that feature all gens like many RoA ones (RoAST, Major League, etc.) and even tournaments like the Smogon Classic will likely have diminished quality due to the revamping of DPP and the increased barrier to entry.
They really won't, since Latias hardly changes the meta to some unrecognizable extent; this isn't some Salamence-level monstrosity. Half the teams I've used were not changed a single bit and Lati was barely a particularly notable threat.

Also, people will just steal the newest Latias teams like they already do in the current meta. Not only do teams get passed around like crazy, if people somehow don't get their hands on those teams, they just copy from replays. This really will not affect this dynamic of DPP at all, I promise. This is why it's so weird that people who barely play the game unless they "have" to are so against change... it's not like their method of getting the most up-to-date SPL teams would change at all.

shake's post
This is just a difference of philosophy. Ojama has made the point many times that "old generation" is a misnomer because that implies some sort of ancient relic. When these gens are still being played nearly year-round at the highest level to the extent that the metagame constantly shifts then it appears clear that they should be subject to evaluation for improvement. "Eh, it's good enough" shouldn't be an argument. These metagames should not have an expiration date for improvement. Of course this doesn't mean we should have monthly suspect tests but when there is a strong enough case then it should be evaluated.

My post both points directly to ABR's explanation and also mentions that it makes Jirachi, Tyranitar, and Heatran, the three strongest Pokemon in the tier, even stronger. DPP is already quite luck based, in my opinion, and while in some ways -- slowing down the meta -- it may help a bit to reduce that, it also strengthens paraspam -- a negative aspect of DPP -- making the meta even more luck based. Have you tried playtesting on the ladder yet? This has been a huge issue that many DPLS ladderers have been facing.
I have, and I've observed the others playing. I didn't struggle with it at all, and I've seen many teams that wouldn't do well against paraspam to begin with (because they are quite flawed)... and that is already a common strategy in the current meta, Latias wouldn't change a thing (reinforcing one of my points here). Others just misplayed to such extents that the only word to describe it for me was violent due to how staggeringly misjudged it was. It was prime example after prime example of "I fucked up with team/play but blame the gen."

I'll also repeat how it's got a fair can-win-can-lose dynamic against those 3 you mentioned. I mean, unless Jirachi's SpDef, none of them particularly like switching into a Specs Surf.

You mention in your post that there are no viable healing wish users currently, but this is not correct. Jirachi, Shaymin, and even Cresselia are three examples of viable healing wish pokemon, and there are probably more. I have used scarf HW Jirachi on some teams, for example.
These HW users do exist, that is true. However, they have a much harder time fitting in than others. Scarf Shaymin's awesome, no complaints there, and it doesn't struggle to include HW. However, it is not exactly the most slappable Pokemon out there. Jirachi, on the other hand... does. It struggles already to fit coverage and U-turn and Trick. Cresselia is insanely niche at this role, and this is from a guy whose Cress screens team is pretty much the only existence of it in the past however many years (Asta's super old RMT is the only other one I can remember). While I'm not saying Latias would revolutionize the meta as a premier HW user, the fact is it "needs" its secondary, tertiary and quaternary moves a lot less to do its job, so it could definitely see more consistent use.

While, yes, Latias checks Zapdos easily, Zapdos is a key component of many offensive builds and it is now much worse in this meta with its versatility narrowed.
Latias checks Zapdos pretty nicely, yes, but I seriously, seriously contend the point that Zapdos is "much worse." Helping handle Jirachi and ganging up on Tyranitar makes it sound like Lati will want to hang out with Zap. As for their standing off, Zapdos can U-turn out, it can Discharge para, it can Toxic, it can even force a Recover with SR + HP Ice, if it's a Specs set and Zap uses Sub then God help you, SpD sets are good and prevent CM + status prevention bullshit with Roar... it's an equal back and forth and the options are plentiful for both sides. Sounds healthy to me.

Choiced trick Latias is cool and all but can also be a liability because you can trick a scarfed Ttar for example (common on stalls).
Scarftar lost its Scarf. Now Gengar, CM Rachi, MixRachi, prio-less MixApe, MixNite, MixGon, CBGyara and what have you can wreak havoc. Don't forget Latias has the option to slam shit too.

full stall builds may become even more reliable in tournament play because no matter what type of offense the opponent brings, Latias introduces a role compression that allows you to potentially win against almost any sound build.
This is a good thing. We WANT to be reducing the amount of matchup in the game. What would you prefer, stall teams to be rolls of the dice to be used only when you've scouted your opponent enough to be confident he won't bring xyz?

And again, you are overrating Latias' defensive presence and ignoring that Latias can be just as scary TO stall.

paragraph about how your preference is room for innovation (which you underrate Latias' ability to enable btw) over competitiveness
Speaks for itself

To finish, I'd like to talk specifically about Latias' good qualities so this isn't just a "you're wrong you idiots" post: there are so many. An offensively-minded check to Waters, Zapdos, Grasses, Fires, with a Fighting resist and a Ground immune... these are amazing qualities, and yet it's not like it switches in and begins to completely dominate them/the game. You can't use Latias to just massacre the other guy unless 1) he lets you 2) his team is bad 3) you outplay him significantly. In all 3 cases, what happened was deserved. In more concrete examples, it serves to HELP with all the aspects of DPP people love to hate and not work towards solving - preview, hidden mons, trapping, paraspam, the trio of Fighters. Not realizing this is what makes me think that people really don't know what they're talking about at all, they just look at the surface and make their claims off that. Really substantiated stuff. Latias is a way to even variance out so the better player can win. Sure, Latias can be one of many Pokemon on Jirachi's hitlist. It can also be the Pokemon that smacks a cocky Jirachi around and rewards its user with a nice advantage. Think of Infernape as potentially being threatening to stall, but if you use it badly it's going to get the tar kicked out of it. Neither Pokemon is anywhere near overpowered. It's time we gave Latias a fair shot on the biggest stage and I urge you to consider what I have written way too much on when making your vote.
 
Last edited:
togaquest
The existence or non-existence of "hard counters" is not a determining factor in tiering. The current "tiering policy framework" appears to be what has been stickied in PR here. Arguments revolving around a lack of hard counters to a Pokemon (as opposed to a moveset) tend to become too theoretical in nature, where uncommon sets that only work in certain circumstances are not countered by some sets of the usual counters, or in certain game states (e.g. hazards being up or not) and therefore it is argued that the Pokemon is not hard countered. For this reason discussion tends to occur in more general terms and is based on personal experience which better reflects actual gameplay.
 
togaquest
The existence or non-existence of "hard counters" is not a determining factor in tiering. The current "tiering policy framework" appears to be what has been stickied in PR here. Arguments revolving around a lack of hard counters to a Pokemon (as opposed to a moveset) tend to become too theoretical in nature, where uncommon sets that only work in certain circumstances are not countered by some sets of the usual counters, or in certain game states (e.g. hazards being up or not) and therefore it is argued that the Pokemon is not hard countered. For this reason discussion tends to occur in more general terms and is based on personal experience which better reflects actual gameplay.
This makes partial sense. However, looking back to previous suspect tests, aren't Pokemon like Garchomp and Salamence considered to have "no counters" in OU, thus they are not allowed for play in the tier because of this? If I recall correctly, this is why they were banned. No matter what game state (movesets, hazards, etc), it was deemed by the community that Garchomp and Salamence both did not have counters. They did not have counters in the sense that no mater what situation, a player using these Pokemon would always have an uncompetitive advantage due inadequate counters. This is why those two were broken and considered uncompetitive.

Keep in mind that in the Smogon Dex there is a "Checks and Counters" section for every single Pokemon in the game. If Latias was OU officially, what would the "Checks and Counters" on the DPP Dex page for Latias say?

If we are treating Latias in the same vein as the two Pokemon I've used in my example, we should generate a simple list of counters to Latias. It couldn't hurt, could it? This list can also incorporate theoretical situations since the community seems to need that as padding.

I feel we need a more structured approach to this banning. I don't feel like reading everyone's long winded arguments after a certain point. They do have merit, but still, they are only opinion. I want Damage Calcs, I want more math.

And for further clarification, does "counter-ability" play any role in suspect testing? Your post tells me in does not: "The existence or non-existence of "hard counters" is not a determining factor in tiering." However, if it in fact does, how much weight does it hold in the final decision? A good player once told me, "The key to this game is having an answer to every single Pokemon in the tier."

Apologies if asking for a list of counters is against the interests and goals of the community.
 
Last edited:
Hello guys,i'm not posting to add in depth analysis but to make a quick suggestion : why wouldn't we drop some replays of games including Latias in addition to the discussion people are having right here ? I know there's been a latias tour but now we have a suspect ladder, and 3 live tours on top of that so i think it wouldn't kill us to have a little bit more data since we're suspecting the eon gal. I'm not a great player myself and i got into dpp quite recently but fwiw i brought Latias twice in the suspect live tour of sunday (09/12/18) and i could provide my two replays for the sake or contributing if my opponents ( eg SoulWind and DeepBlueC) are ok with that.

Edit : i saw a lot of "old gens should not be touched" like it's a sacred statement but best case scenario Latias makes dpp good and we keep it, worst case scenario she gives us aids and we send her back in the shadow realm. Majin Buu won't spawn out of nowhere to break our necks if we suspect Latias (and suspect != Unban in the first place)
 
Last edited:
This makes partial sense. However, looking back to previous suspect tests, aren't Pokemon like Garchomp and Salamence considered to have "no counters" in OU, thus they are not allowed for play in the tier because of this? If I recall correctly, this is why they were banned. No matter what game state (movesets, hazards, etc), it was deemed by the community that Garchomp and Salamence both did not have counters. They did not have counters in the sense that no mater what situation, a player using these Pokemon would always have an uncompetitive advantage due inadequate counters. This is why those two were broken and considered uncompetitive.

Keep in mind that in the Smogon Dex there is a "Checks and Counters" section for every single Pokemon in the game. If Latias was OU officially, what would the "Checks and Counters" on the DPP Dex page for Latias say?

If we are treating Latias in the same vein as the two Pokemon I've used in my example, we should generate a simple list of counters to Latias. It couldn't hurt, could it? This list can also incorporate theoretical situations since the community seems to need that as padding.

I feel we need a more structured approach to this banning. I don't feel like reading everyone's long winded arguments after a certain point. They do have merit, but still, they are only opinion. I want Damage Calcs, I want more math.

And for further clarification, does "counter-ability" play any role in suspect testing? Your post tells me in does not: "The existence or non-existence of "hard counters" is not a determining factor in tiering." However, if it in fact does, how much weight does it hold in the final decision? A good player once told me, "The key to this game is having an answer to every single Pokemon in the tier."

Apologies if asking for a list of counters is against the interests and goals of the community.
I'm far from a DPP expert, and I don't particulary enjoy the metagame, but when it comes to tiering stuff I like to think that its not having a hard counter to everything, but moreso have sufficient and viable counterplay, that doesnt make you build your teams around some random defensive mon (see Magearna in SM OU, though I do consider this mon a little ridiculous at times) never will you have a counter to every given set, which theres about 10 variations of, all being answered by something different, but usually one won't have to go out of their way to fit something specific to answer them all. The situation with Latias seems similar: builds in Latias meta don't seem too off of what they looked like before then, and still, most teams handle it fine, while Latias even provides its fair share of positive traits for the metagame as BKC listed above.
If you really feel Latias is overwhelming for the metagame, that's what the suspect test is for. I still don't believe that suspects in non current gen are a good thing to pull off, but seeing how many people care about this and got involved changes the whole situation in my opinion. I'm curious to see what this suspect ends like.
 
I'm far from a DPP expert, and I don't particulary enjoy the metagame, but when it comes to tiering stuff I like to think that its not having a hard counter to everything, but moreso have sufficient and viable counterplay, that doesnt make you build your teams around some random defensive mon (see Magearna in SM OU, though I do consider this mon a little ridiculous at times) never will you have a counter to every given set, which theres about 10 variations of, all being answered by something different, but usually one won't have to go out of their way to fit something specific to answer them all. The situation with Latias seems similar: builds in Latias meta don't seem too off of what they looked like before then, and still, most teams handle it fine, while Latias even provides its fair share of positive traits for the metagame as BKC listed above.
If you really feel Latias is overwhelming for the metagame, that's what the suspect test is for. I still don't believe that suspects in non current gen are a good thing to pull off, but seeing how many people care about this and got involved changes the whole situation in my opinion. I'm curious to see what this suspect ends like.
I like your post, but I'd like to expand further. I do agree that it is impossible to have a true counter for virtually any Pokemon due to the possibility of Pokemon running freak sets that go against convention. But I think it makes sense to view standard/most-used sets first and foremost before looking at secondary options. Similarly, this logic can be applied to Team-Building/RMT. Players who are serious about their RMT often generate a long list of all the Pokemon in the tier and how their team responds to each threat. It is virtually impossible to cover every single threat effectively. Oftentimes, fantastic and solid teams often have some obscure threat such as Leech-Seed Sceptile or Life-Orb Modest Swampert with a certain Speed investment. You get my point. We cannot cover every single situation.

I also feel my word choice for "hard-counter" was too strong. Instead I should have said "Hey can we generate a list of Pokemon that fare well against Latias?" Hard counter implies an end-all-be-all answer to a Pokemon and we know that it is rare to have such a case.

Do we have Pokemon that fare well against Garchomp or Salamence in OU? Not really. Can we make a list for those that do for Latias? We will see. Obviously Latias will have less Pokemon that do well against it than say Electivire or Alakazam. Can Alakazam and Electivire run freak sets that will net them free kills against good players? Yes. But in the long run conventional sets are better and the logic that unconventional sets are possible and should be accounted for isn't particularly sound.

Once again, lets generate a base group of Pokemon that fare well against Latias. Then we can dwelve into specific situations. And after that we can get into metagame analysis and experience and what not.

I feel like the more options that a player has against a certain Pokemon, the less overwhelming and possibly broken it is. More options also give way to a more strategic and balanced metagame that players can enjoy being a part of. Generating a straight-forward list can help us visualize these options.
 
Last edited:
Once again, lets generate a base group of Pokemon that fare well against Latias. Then we can dwelve into specific situations. And after that we can get into metagame analysis and experience and what not.
We are way past that point togaquest. If you paid attention to the initial PR threads you'd find the answers you seek.

Not that the list you suggest compiled would take the collective brainpower of all the posters here to come up with either (Hard Counters: ScarfTar / Sdef Tar / Sdef Rachi / Bronzong. Conditional counters: Band Tar, Any non CM Rachi, Any Clefable with Twave or CM, Scizor, Blissey off the top of my head). Not even mentioning disruptors to the CM sets, pivots and revenge killers.

As I said we've breached past the point of Latias's gamebreaking potential and the majority feels that it is not much at all. At the moment I'd say it comes down to ideology amongst different groups:

- Certain parties are afraid of the precedent that this will set for their own tiers, should Latias be unbanned.

- Others are 'old-gen purists' who feel like old gens should remain unchanged when they are no longer current gens.

- And others believe that any actively played gen should be refined if the playerbase feels so.

In the end, it is down to the interested playerbase of DPP to qualify and vote accordingly. The differences between the relevant parties are more philosophical than metagame-based at this stage.
 
Last edited:
We are way past that point togaquest. If you paid attention to the initial PR threats you'd find the answers you seek.

Not that the list you suggest compiled would take the collective brainpower of all the posters here to come up with either (Hard Counters: ScarfTar / Sdef Tar / Sdef Rachi / Bronzong. Conditional counters: Band Tar, Any non CM Rachi, Any Clefable with Twave or CM, Scizor, Blissey off the top of my head). Not even mentioning disruptors to the CM sets, pivots and revenge killers.

As I said we've breached past the point of Latias's gamebreaking potential and the majority feels that it is not much at all. At the moment I'd say it comes down to ideology amongst different groups:

- Certain parties are afraid of the precedent that this will set for their own tiers, should Latias be unbanned.

- Others are 'old-gen purists' who feel like old gens should remain unchanged when they are no longer current gens.

- And others believe that any actively played gen should be refined if the playerbase feels so.

In the end, it is down to the interested playerbase of DPP to qualify and vote accordingly. The differences between the relevant parties are more philosophical than metagame-based at this stage.

So there we have it: Latias isn't broken. Congratulations, you've effectively proved that Latias has multiple "hard-counters." Though without any Damage Calcs as reference I will note.

To quote you: "(Hard Counters: ScarfTar / Sdef Tar / Sdef Rachi / Bronzong. Conditional counters: Band Tar, Any non CM Rachi, Any Clefable with Twave or CM, Scizor, Blissey off the top of my head). Not even mentioning disruptors to the CM sets, pivots and revenge killers."

If Latias has these answers, why is this test still going on? Is it so that we can argue what type of metagame is the more enjoyable to play for certain players? Isn't that pretty subjective? A true test is objective and does not lean to player bias.

Based on your logic, this test was over as soon the initial PR threats were posted. These three pages of posts went way beyond the scope they were meant to.
 
Last edited:

Merritt

no comment
is a Tournament Directoris a Site Content Manageris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Dedicated Tournament Host
Head TD
If Latias has these answers, why is this test still going on? Is it so that we can argue what type of metagame is the more enjoyable to play for certain players? Isn't that pretty subjective? A true test is objective and does not lean to player bias.
Just because something has counters does not mean it isn’t broken, nor does it mean it is not unhealthy.

Tests are important to see how a Pokémon actually performs. They’re also important for allowing the community to actually have input on a tier. What you seem to be suggesting is that the council free Latias without the test itself and, on a personal level, I disagree with that course of action wholeheartedly.
 

Merritt

no comment
is a Tournament Directoris a Site Content Manageris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Dedicated Tournament Host
Head TD
Please give me an example of a current DPP Uber Pokemon that has counters in OU.
I feel reasonably confident that Deoxys-D itself has counters in OU. That certainly doesn’t mean that in practice these answers actually work over the course of a game due to the nature of how Deo-D actually functions or that Deo-D should be freed.
 

Heika

I may very well be the worst player on this site
is a Pre-Contributor
If Latias has these answers, why is this test still going on? Is it so that we can argue what type of metagame is the more enjoyable to play for certain players? Isn't that pretty subjective? A true test is objective and does not lean to player bias.
Looks like you didn’t understand, first of all make sure you’ve read asta’s full post. Then try to understand that what’s playing is a potential evolution of smogon Old Gen Tiering Policy.

Moreover, one pokemon having counter is totally different from it being healthy, like the release of a said mon can, dispite it having counter, promote some uncompetitive strategies, or unhealthies synergy forcing the build in a wrong way. When the first one about competitiveness is not much debatable (nor is it absolute), the unhealthiness of something is often up to ones opinion. Which means suspect testing is opinion related, and it has always been otherwise suspect wouldn’t that often end up with close results.

Please give me an example of a current DPP Uber Pokemon that has counters in OU
Beside being off topic, this post here is kind of showing that you quite not get it. I highly recommand you to read this https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/tiering-policy-framework.3628026/ I know earthworm already tell you this but looks like you didn’t read it.

Sry for extending this kind of Off topic debate.
 
Last edited:

Texas Cloverleaf

This user has a custom title
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Please give me an example of a current DPP Uber Pokemon that has counters in OU.
Were Kyogre in OU, so too would be Quagsire or Lanturn.

Latias itself has counterplay against SDef Rachi and Bronzong in the form of Trick, and Specs Surfs to aid against the likes of ScarfTar.

But this is all missing the point.

Tiering Policy as a whole has evolved past the point of using checks and counters as the main factor to determine if something should be in the tier or not. One of the major lessons of BW OU was that when there are too many threats to cover it's unreasonable to expect something to be able to be hard countered if it otherwise leaves you vulnerable. The take away from that became about the impact on a metagame. Was something, whether it had checks and counters or not, too damaging on the metagame. Did it centralize to the point that the game revolved around that Pokemon.

Kyogre has counters. Salamence and Garchomp have answers and counters. But they revolve the game too strongly around their presence as the determining factor in who wins.


All of this discussion itself being beside the primary point of the test, that being the question of "Do we mess with a 10 year old tier or not?"
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top