Makin' it Rain: UU Rain discussion

[shrang]

You're running a team with a the fastest STAB electric in the game, one of the rain sweepers themselves, a resist berry Torterra, and Raikou, and you're saying it's surprising that you won a lot of games against rain? Give me a break.

And your point is?? I was still able to make a Hyper Offense team that did well against the "norm" (I still leaderboarded with that team) while having a decent chance to win against Rain.

 

[Meru]

And your point is?? I was still able to make a Hyper Offense team that did well against the "norm" (I still leaderboarded with that team) while having a decent chance to win against Rain.

Well I don't know enough about the metagame back then to comment on whether or not you were truly unprepared for the normal metagame because you were overprepared for rain.

Perhaps you can share us your insight to your current team and how it's doing in the current metagame?

 

[Smurf.]

My Current Rain team that I have been using under the alt BEAR GRYLLS_ is:

Spike Qwil / RD Uxie / RD TAUNT Missy / SD Tops / LO Gorebyss/ LO Omastar

Reached 1504 CRE in about 45 mins and beat numerous LB's after taking all of 6 mins to build..


Somewhat ironic that teams relying on taunt missy are often fucked over by my own. The current metagame relies heavily on Milotic, Chansey (Clef), Croak, and Tangrowth to fend of 8 turns of rain mayhem.

+2 Kabutops does 83.2% - 98% to 248/252 Milotic. Now given that I nearly always get 1 layer of spikes and SR, and that many Milos now are calm, its not doing shit. Tangrowth takes 60.4% - 71.3%, rendering it incapable of walling anything else.
Slowbro is dealt 66.5% - 78.4%, can twave, and is then still outsped. lol.
Offensive teams rely on Croak to soak up water attacks, but Gorrebyss ohkos with psychic, and sucker punch is only dealing ~40%. Even if it ran Mach punch, it only deals ~60% on kabutops.

Clefable can be tricky to play around, especially if Missy and Kabutops are dead. The most problematic set i have encountered is the toxic/wish/Seismic toss/ protect set, which fails to touch taunt missy. Unfortunately i often sack it early game with memento to buy kabutops a chance to SD. This was less of an issue in previous metagames when Whorelass provided spikes, allowing Qwil to take Omastars place and sweep.

Switch stalling is suicidal against rain + spike stacking teams such as mine, as your racking up x2 STAB water attacks + approx 20% worth of damage each turn. Its as good as over once the second wave is up, which is almost inevitable as stall teams are the only teams that can viably do this. In contrast, Offensive teams take huge damage from even resisted hits, and one false prediction is fatal.

Being an anti-metagame style, Rain is very difficult to counter. You start overpreparing for special sweepers like specs Gorrebyss, i'll use SD Ludicolo. For example, Specs Gorrebyss caused absolute chaos, 2HKO'ing Chansey 100% of the time. The metagame then changed, and SD ludicolo was the number one threat for rain. Try to cover both ends of the spectrum? You're probably more likely to be swept (a la balance teams)

Ultimately, what makes rain broken is the 8 turns prolonged by damp rock. Ban damp rock, and Rain's dominance is hindered, but does not render it a useless playstyle.

 

[shrang]

I'm not going to go over the detail of your team, but Milotic might give you some trouble?? Apart from booming at the start with Qwilfish, SD Kabu is probably only thing that doesn't allow Milotic to stall you out. Whatever works for you I guess.

Also, another thing on whether to ban sweepers or Damp Rock. Consider what happened in Stage 3-3 and 3-4 with Manaphy. Now, Rain Dance is probably just as deadly in OU, even with Tyranitar coming in and out since he can't switch into you easily anyway (Just like Hippopotas in UU). Now, Manaphy was probably one of the deadliest Rain sweepers to be tested for OU. He was very powerful outside of Rain (Albeit more controversial if he was broken or not outside of Rain). However, he was full on maniacal IN the Rain. Now, we decided to ban Manaphy, not the support condition which is Rain (Which, as I say, still makes stuff like Kingdra broken when it is Raining). This is a time where we banned a sweeper and not the support condition. If you think about it, if we ban Ludicolo or one of the harder Rain sweepers, Rain teams are going to have quite a harder time getting past walls like Milotic and Chansey.

This is not saying that I think Rain is broken, because I don't think it is, but if you guys want to ban something, I'd ban a sweeper and see what happens after that.

 

[Smurf.]

You could ban say, Ludicolo (as the most versatile/dangerous sweeper in Rain), but it's certainly not going to break rains dominance. Ludicolo is not on my team, but Rain is evidently still broken.

 

[shrang]

You could ban say, Ludicolo (as the most versatile/dangerous sweeper in Rain), but it's certainly not going to break rains dominance. Ludicolo is not on my team, but Rain is evidently still broken.

Not exactly. Stop using words like "certainly" and "evidently" like it's butt obvious. It isn't. Just because you've had a good record doesn't mean it's broken at all. Otherwise, we'd be saying BlizzSpam is broken because it obviously has a good record. I'd say ban a sweeper if it is broken, then see what happens.

 

[Smurf.]

I've used 'BlizzSpam', played against it, so I'm fairly qualified to say its not broken.

Similarly, I can say that Rain is evidently* ridiculously overpowered.

* read: In accordance with the evidence available. Oh, its blatantly obvious too.

 

[shrang]

I've used 'BlizzSpam', played against it, so I'm fairly qualified to say its not broken.

Similarly, I can say that Rain is evidently* ridiculously overpowered.

* read: In accordance with the evidence available. Oh, its blatantly obvious too.

Blatantly obvious to you maybe. That is your opinion. That does not mean others have to share it. You will find that many truths depend heavily on our point of view.

 

[JabbaTheGriffin]

Can you guys stop bickering like children and debate like adults please?

Thanks,
Management

PS there was a lot of rain discussion over in the megathread, from now on it'd be nice if that could come back over to this thread completely so it's not being discussed in two separate places.

 

[Eo Ut Mortus]

From the megathread:

If you are using rain you are making a common battle condition for every single battle you enter. The Pokemon then are for sure not suboptimal - quite the opposite. With one little bit of support (A Pokemon with the move Rain Dance, preferably wielding a Damp Rock) you have made yourself a battle condition that will happen in every single battle you enter. Sure, from the defender, non-rain user's point of view, rain is a niche role that you hope pops up as little as possible because of the massive amount of thinking it provokes. But if you are the one using rain, your common battle conditions are vastly different. Your battles all have rain in them, and generally this prevents entry hazards from going up also, as well as provoking a totally different mindset for the defensive player. The defensive player, more times than not, are using a suboptimal Pokemon in using Poliwrath or Gardevoir or Quagsire, but the rain user is always using these "suboptimal" Pokemon to their arguably most optimal standpoint, every time they enter a battle. The person trying to prepare for rain is at a loss every single time they play something not rain, but the person playing rain controls which of their Pokemon is at a loss or not.

Yes, there is some confusion about the terms "optimal" and "suboptimal." Rain sweepers are suboptimal in the context of the typical UU team (ie in "common battling conditions"), but when you control the battling conditions and "make it rain" you have the power to make your 'mons very optimal. On the other hand, the opponent has no control over what team you are playing, and your use of rain turns some mons that are otherwise optimal completely suboptimal in a much bigger way than stall or offense can.

Fair point, but the problem is that you are determining what is suboptimal and optimal (by the way, can we just say "good" and "bad"?) from multiple viewpoints. A Pokemon's quality should be defined relative to your team (as Super Effective said), relative to the opponent's team (rain is optimal vs. team x; however, Poliwrath is optimal against rain teams as well), or relative to the metagame (rain is not a common battle condition in the metagame). In the bold example, you are looking at the point from the perspective of both your team (the rain is provided by one team) and the metagame (where Poliwrath/Gastrodon/Quagsire are considered suboptimal).

I don't think we should put Rain on the same level of organization as stall and offense. Rain is a particular strategy, not a class of strategies - as has been mentioned, there is hardly any diversity to rain teams. It's a lot like Spike-stacking - there are certain pokemon you are guaranteed to have several of, such as Swellow, Moltres, Scyther, Donphan, and remember Froslass? Obviously any other type of weather team is an apt comparison as well. There are other strategies within offense, such as lure + sweeper, which don't take up entire teams but that you still need to be ready for.

So when you're putting Rain on an equivalent level with offense or stall, you're really pointing out that a specific type of offense is just as hard to prepare for as all of offense (excluding rain since you're calling it separate) or all of stall. This is sort of like arguing that Skymin-S wasn't broken because you didn't have to prepare for it any more than you had to prepare for Steel-types.

I didn't say that rain should be compared with other large, prominent playstyles; if I did imply this, sorry for the confusion. I said (or meant to, anyway) rain is comparable to any other "good" UU team; I agree that you can't really compare it on the playstyle level, and comparing it on the Pokemon level just doesn't make sense.

People find it reasonable that you should have to devote a certain portion of your team's focus to beating offense or stall, but find it suspect to have to devote the same portion to beating rain, because "offense" and "stall" comprise way more tactics, teams, and pokemon than rain does.

I don't see how this is possible. First of all, we can't compare rain and stall/offense on the playstyle level. You can't classify every Pokemon as stall/balance/offense. Plus, there are too many possible/unique team types for all of them to be lumped into one general term; rain, on the other hand, varies very little from team to team. Secondly, with the diversity of the UU tier - with so many viable options - I'm skeptical that people would find it harder to prepare for rain than all the possible options on, say, a balanced team.

More important than rain incorporating fewer pokemon, tactics, etc. is that it represents a small portion of the metagame, but is quite powerful when run into. It is like running into Trick Room or Baton Pass or some shit (except not nearly as gimmicky and obviously much more powerful). Having an adequate counter for Baton Pass is already annoying, but a baton pass team can never win if you have an adequate counter to it, while a good rain player can punch through you fairly easily through your checks. Ultimately I don't think rain is overpowered because the better player still wins the majority of the time, but it widens the skill gap much more than I would like to be possible.

I see your point; however, the fact that it is a minority strategy brings up the question of why it is being considered for suspect. Usage is generally a good indicator of effectiveness.

 

[Ghost.]

Think it is too much of a push to hope Kabutops gets Brave Bird in B&W?

Brave Bird/Waterfall/Aqua Jet/Rain Dance or Swords Dance. What wouldn't this wreck in rain...

It gets Aerial Ace but it is sooo weak and outside of rain you might actually NEED the secondary attack for something other than Toxicroak/Poliwrath.

 

[SJCrew]

I see your point; however, the fact that it is a minority strategy brings up the question of why it is being considered for suspect. Usage is generally a good indicator of effectiveness.

Rain is very effective, but it has a one-dimensional playstyle and is pretty easy to get bored of. I've seen this complaint too many times to count to the point where it can probably be considered the only valid reason not to use it.

 

[Smurf.]

Rain is the most effective playstyle there is, the only reason i don't use it heavily anymore is that it's boring and repetitive. Set up spikes, Set up Rain, sweep 6 pokes.

 

[Anachronism]

Weezing is not a common pokemon, yet it is widely used in the inner circle of the OU ladder. Wobbuffet was not a top 5 pokemon when it was banned (it was something like 19th iirc). General metagame usage is not weighted usage, and therefore does not reflect what top players use. In this case, rain is so linear that it is often avoided by battlers, so it does comprise only a small portion of the metagame, but it is often favored in Tours and tournaments for this very reason: people neglect it.

 

[shrang]

people neglect it

Yeah, this is why Rain is so good, because no-one cares about it. It's just not worth it making a team with Rain in mind, just like it's not worth it making a team with Trick Room in mind.

 

[Random Rider]

Yeah, this is why Rain is so good, because no-one cares about it. It's just not worth it making a team with Rain in mind, just like it's not worth it making a team with Trick Room in mind.

Well put, I agree.

 

[Heysup]

Yeah, this is why Rain is so good, because no-one cares about it. It's just not worth it making a team with Rain in mind, just like it's not worth it making a team with Trick Room in mind.

There are so many Pokemon that obliterate Rain that everyone uses for other reasons...without Rain in mind. For example, Moltres (sweeps every Rain Dance sweeper at full health), Scarf Rotom, SD Kabutops, <insert Grass-type>, Registeel, Absol, etc. Those Pokemon are used on most teams. So while people often feel "meh Rain isn't that common so I won't pay attention to it when i make a team"...they can actually get away with it.

Rain was never that good...it's just a ladder tool, Rain is a more effective auto-pilot than stall or offense.

 

[Synre]

I've talked about it on IRC a lot the past couple days, but I think the main reason rain is so prevalent(and perhaps effective) in tours is that the types of players who are threatening in a tour are a little different than what you might find on a ladder.

Since it's part of the main official tournament event you get a lot of players who aren't big UU players but need points. The main result of this is that you get a lot of players who might be better Pokemoners but worse UUers as far as not having great knowledge/experience of the metagame mixed in with many people who UU a lot more but might not be as strong team builders/predictors as the first group. Rain in many cases does well again both groups; the first group usually isn't prepared for it and the second group can usually be outplayed by it.

Barring luck something is seriously wrong when a good player who actually plays a lot of UU loses to it, though. It is not difficult to prepare for, it is not that difficult to play around, and in a tour you know there is going to be a fucking ton of it. You know you will probably run into it. You know your opponents before the battle. There's usually not an excuse for not being prepared for it.

I think a lot of us giving teams to our buddies doesn't much help Rain's tour prevalence either. If people want to teams to play what's easier, giving them a real team and trying to explain the metagame, or giving them a rain team and a handful of dangerous scenarios and letting them go at it? It's even straightforward enough that it's not difficult to predict passably using it with no experience. I know I'm not the only one who just resorts to "eh... you know what, I think I have a rain team lying around here somewhere if you really want to play..."