Smogon Shoddy Server Statistics - September 2009

I'm not saying that Scizor should be uber. But, it has had a huge affect on the metagame. Fast, fragile sweepers are destroyed by it, most walls take a decent hit from its CB attacks, and it checks many common OU Pokemon. However, I don't think that Scizor is metagame reliant. In fact, I think that it is one of the reasons for the current metagame.
 
Scizor's usage is only so high because it checks so many deadly threats, Salamence and Latias in particular. It isn't overpowered in any way. It just happens to be a well-rounded utility Pokemon. I don't think it's uber at all, considering so many Pokemon in OU resist Scizor's main moves, particularly Gyarados and Heatran, who are #3 and #4 respectively.

Frail sweepers may have taken a hit, but when you think about it, only Nasty Plot Azelf/Porygon-Z and Weavile have taken a significant drop in usage. And even then, Azelf is still one of the best leads in the game so Scizor really hasn't killed it off, it only delegated it to being a lead. Weavile's drop in usage can probably be blamed more on Garchomp/Shaymin-S's banishment to OU than Scizor being able to kill it.

Gengar has still been in the top 10, or at least close to it, despite CB Scizor being able to dispose of it easily.
 
I think OU would be more interesting without Scizor just because people would have to find other ways to deal with so many threats. With that said Scizor shouldn't be ubers. I get tired of seeing him/her so much but he/she is not broken or centralizing. There are pokemon that do well alongside Scizor but it isn't necessary to use them at all you could have completely different ideas for a team.

Azelf / Leftovers or Life Orb / Timid / 4 HP / 252 SpA / 252 Spd
Substitute / Nasty Plot / Flamethrower or Fire Blast / Psychic

Sub on switch if they go to Scizor you can flamethrower or go for a nasty plot if you predict a switch (ideal).
 
Then OU will be filled in INCREDIBLY high usages for Salamence, Latias, and more. It would be horrendous lol
Then Ice Sharders would be used more instead of Scizor(like how it was prior to Platinum). We can't make such predictions, because it isn't as simple of a connection as some may think.
 
Then Ice Sharders would be used more instead of Scizor(like how it was prior to Platinum). We can't make such predictions, because it isn't as simple of a connection as some may think.
Ice Shard users are not as "bulky" as scizor or rather, they are wide open for ubers' most used moves. Plus with Palkia everywhere in the UBER meta, ice shard will simply not do. As for the predictions, we can make as accurately sounding predictions as we can with enough info and careful analogies.
 
Ice Shard users are not as "bulky" as scizor or rather, they are wide open for ubers' most used moves. Plus with Palkia everywhere in the UBER meta, ice shard will simply not do.
If you look at my previous post, you will notice you were mentioning Salamence and Latias. This seems to be more of an OU relative statement if you asked me, and bulk is not a revenge killing factor.
 
Just make sure you have a good Lucario check if you're going to use a choice user to counter dragons. Or a good check to all those kinds of things for that matter...

Lol. Have to love it when you realize you just stated the obvious.
 
This community seems to love to get rid of really good Pokemon.
Some Pokemon, by virtue of their typing and stats, will just be easier to slot into the average team and thus will have above average usage.
The reason why certain other Pokemon run rampant in the current metagame is the lack of Garchomp.
Ban something else, and it will open the door for another Pokemon to become the OU of OU.
 
This community seems to love to get rid of really good Pokemon.
There's no precedent for "pokemon #1" having 150% the usage of "pokemon #2," so it's really not fair to assume "if we ban Scizor something else will have equally high usage." We don't ban "really good pokemon," we nominate suspects based on the Uber criteria and then follow a documented process to ban/unban pokemon. Scizor isn't just going to get banned for having high usage, and unless it's nominated as a suspect it's not going anywhere, although its insane usage is kinda unnerving
 
If you look at my previous post, you will notice you were mentioning Salamence and Latias. This seems to be more of an OU relative statement if you asked me, and bulk is not a revenge killing factor.
It is never a good idea to ignore bulk...for any type of role, such as a revenge killer in this case. I would never say bulky is not a revenge-killing factor but it's something that matter everywhere and any type of role. Of course salamence and latias were OU because I wasn't talking about Scizor faring against those two particular pokemons in the UBER. If you read my previous post you will notice that.
 
There's no precedent for "pokemon #1" having 150% the usage of "pokemon #2," so it's really not fair to assume "if we ban Scizor something else will have equally high usage." We don't ban "really good pokemon," we nominate suspects based on the Uber criteria and then follow a documented process to ban/unban pokemon. Scizor isn't just going to get banned for having high usage, and unless it's nominated as a suspect it's not going anywhere, although its insane usage is kinda unnerving
I don't remember saying something will have usage equal to Scizor if Scizor goes.
In any event, at the rate you guys are going OU is going to become a sort of UU and people will have to play Ubers to get a dynamic metagame.
Maybe we should just say anything speedy/wPriority that has a base 130 attack and can reliably Swords Dance is Uber and save a lot of time! </hyperbole>

Anyway, it's seems to me that this easy 'democratic' banning of Pokemon is an experiment bound to go awry.
How are you going to create an egalitarian tier of monsters that are all so strikingly different?
Some are going to have an advantage in any configuration/subset you come up with.

So, in my opinion, this complaining about Pokemon that are non-legendary being 'too good' just seems to go against the spirit of the game.
Pardon the political incorrectness, but I find it sissy too! Garchomp/Scizor used Swords Dance? Deal with it!
If you can't, you lose! Don't cry and try to get the game changed in your favour.
 
I don't remember saying something will have usage equal to Scizor if Scizor goes.
You said something else will be the "OU of OU," I inferred you meant "rising to a dominance akin to that of scizor." Regardless, there's no telling what would happen were Scizor named a suspect and removed, haven't we realized how hard serious metagame theorymon is by now?

Anyway, it's seems to me that this easy 'democratic' banning of Pokemon is an experiment bound to go awry.
How are you going to create an egalitarian tier of monsters that are all so strikingly different?
Some are going to have an advantage in any configuration/subset you come up with.
If you've paid attention to the suspect testing process it's been anything but easy. Of course some will have an advantage, and that's why this is such a complicated and involved process. An "egalitarian" tier isn't what we're after, it's the "most pokemon without any one fitting any one of the 'Uber Criteria'"


Also, we're absolutely not trying to get the game changed in "our favor." We're trying to get the game changed in everyone's favor, hence the process. Really, a pokemon's status as "legendary" or "non-legendary" is totally arbitrary, too. You want to ban Entei to Ubers? How about Articuno? You want Wobbuffet unbanned?
 
You said something else will be the "OU of OU," I inferred you meant "rising to a dominance akin to that of scizor." Regardless, there's no telling what would happen were Scizor named a suspect and removed, haven't we realized how hard serious metagame theorymon is by now?



If you've paid attention to the suspect testing process it's been anything but easy. Of course some will have an advantage, and that's why this is such a complicated and involved process. An "egalitarian" tier isn't what we're after, it's the "most pokemon without any one fitting any one of the 'Uber Criteria'"


Also, we're absolutely not trying to get the game changed in "our favor." We're trying to get the game changed in everyone's favor, hence the process. Really, a pokemon's status as "legendary" or "non-legendary" is totally arbitrary, too. You want to ban Entei to Ubers? How about Articuno? You want Wobbuffet unbanned?
We don't know what we're after because everyone voting according to what tickles their itch cannot achieve consensus on an overarching tier design.
Many will vote to ban Pokemon they do not use but that others are able to beat them with.
The metagame that results from voting according to likes/dislikes is not the aim of the votes but the consequence.
And of course, such a 'democratic' process has the potential to continue denuding OU of good Pokemon.

Only a few non-legendaries have been declared Uber.
I find this generally unfortunate but Wobbuffet is not a great loss since he is very one-dimensional.
The lack of a Pokemon as interesting as Garchomp is, however, a gross impoverishment of the standard game.
Any further moves in the direction of banning effective and thus widely used Pokemon
will be enough for me to conclude that many want to engineer the game more than they want to play it.
I hope there are some job openings at Gamefreak.
 
Before anybody decides to compare scizor to chomp they should look at the old stats to see what over-centralization really looks like. in addition besides scizor the rest of the distribution looks quite good and balanced to me.
 
Things are different now than in DP with garchomp. The metagame now is pretty dominated by a few certain types(water, steel, dragon), and if garchomp was put back into ou then the usage statistics would probably be different than they were back then. Specifically latias usage would skyrocket, and scizor would probably go even higher.

Of course this is just my opinion that garchomp wouldn't over-centralize the metagame because it already is towards dragons and steels. It might exasperate the problem, though.
 

haunter

Banned deucer.
Over-centralization has never been a parameter used to declare a Pokemon uber, and Garchomp wasn't banned because it was over-centralizing the metagame, but rather because it fullfilled the uber offensive characteristic (and it still does imo):

A Pokémon is uber if, in common battle conditions, it is capable of sweeping through a significant portion of teams in the metagame with little effort.
Scizor is an excellent Pokemon, but has several counters and checks, so please don't start impossible comparisons.
 

Mario With Lasers

Self-proclaimed NERFED king
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
In any event, at the rate you guys are going OU is going to become a sort of UU and people will have to play Ubers to get a dynamic metagame.
You know Latias got unbanned and Manaphy has a chance of going the same route too, right.

We don't know what we're after because everyone voting according to what tickles their itch cannot achieve consensus on an overarching tier design.
Many will vote to ban Pokemon they do not use but that others are able to beat them with.
The metagame that results from voting according to likes/dislikes is not the aim of the votes but the consequence.
And of course, such a 'democratic' process has the potential to continue denuding OU of good Pokemon.
This just shows you know naught about the Suspect Process at all. People have to justify their votes, and Jumpman/Aeolus/Doug have access to all the Suspect matches' data, so they know if you at least used the damn pokémon and/or played against it.

Only a few non-legendaries have been declared Uber.
I find this generally unfortunate but Wobbuffet is not a great loss since he is very one-dimensional.
Wobbuffet used Encore! Wobbuffet used Tickle!

Do you want Game Freak to give Wobbuffet Swords Dance, Nasty Plot, Judgment, Earthquake and Outrage for having him banned on the Support Characteristic? Is that it ?_?

The lack of a Pokemon as interesting as Garchomp is, however, a gross impoverishment of the standard game.
Any further moves in the direction of banning effective and thus widely used Pokemon
will be enough for me to conclude that many want to engineer the game more than they want to play it.
Again, Latias got unbanned.

I hope there are some job openings at Gamefreak.
Game Freak doesn't make tiers, we do. Personally, if I could work at Game Freak, Garchomp would be the least important matter in my mind. I'd be more interested in convincing my fellow workers that we should have eight pokémon slots per team in 5th Gen...

(can you hear me, GF?)
 
Both Hippopotas and Hippowdon are physically defensive pokemon used primarily for their Sand Stream. The only reason Hippopotas sees more usage of passive damage and status moves is because Hippopotas can't support direct attacking moves the way Hippowdon can with its much high base Attack. Protect is mostly a support move designed to aid Toxic or Yawn but it could also be because Hippopotas lacks Hippowdon's Defense/HP (though it is still good) and isn't as capable of out-healing incoming damage via Slack Off.

You'd also see similar "phenomena" with something like Dusclops or Magneton. Dusclops is the same as Dusknoir, it just lacks the base Attack to support elemental punches and whatnot, and Magneton is functionally identical to Magnezone. NFE pokémon only tend to significantly differ in usage from their fully-evolved forms when they actually do change significantly. e.g. Scyther, who is a different type to Scizor and much faster. These are pokémon who already tend to be listed separately from their evolution in the site's tier lists.
Well, yes, everybody knows that. My point is, Hippopotas in UU is played quite differently to Hippowdon in OU, and the statistics support my observations. Hippopotas in UU is not 'Hippowdon-lite', like people thought it would be.
 
You know Latias got unbanned and Manaphy has a chance of going the same route too, right.



This just shows you know naught about the Suspect Process at all. People have to justify their votes, and Jumpman/Aeolus/Doug have access to all the Suspect matches' data, so they know if you at least used the damn pokémon and/or played against it.
I am aware of the process but I do not consider it bullet-proof of even entirely desirable.
These uber characteristics are better than nothing but they are still rather subjective.
And indeed, I highly controversial ban on narrow margins is indicative of anything but consensus.

Wobbuffet used Encore! Wobbuffet used Tickle!

Do you want Game Freak to give Wobbuffet Swords Dance, Nasty Plot, Judgment, Earthquake and Outrage for having him banned on the Support Characteristic? Is that it ?_?
Yes.

Again, Latias got unbanned.
I don't know if that is more or less screwed up. ;)

Game Freak doesn't make tiers, we do. Personally, if I could work at Game Freak, Garchomp would be the least important matter in my mind. I'd be more interested in convincing my fellow workers that we should have eight pokémon slots per team in 5th Gen...

(can you hear me, GF?)
No gamefreak make Pokemon and we decide which ones we wish didn't exist (Uber is not a tier, it's a banlist).
I guess it would be far more efficient to be in control of what was made in the first place!

Anyway, I've really taken a step back from what you guys are doing here.
There are many good things about the community but the propensity to axe parts of the game is not one of them, IMHO.
 
It's interesting that Rhydon was used less than Golem in UU last month! I'd choose Rhydon anyday, personally. Explosion isn't enough for me to use Golem.

This month, however, we get to use Rhyperior! :)
 

Jumpman16

np: Michael Jackson - "Mon in the Mirror" (DW mix)
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Team Rater Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
I am aware of the process but I do not consider it bullet-proof of even entirely desirable.
These uber characteristics are better than nothing but they are still rather subjective.
And indeed, I highly controversial ban on narrow margins is indicative of anything but consensus.
good thing stage 3 was actually just modified to ensure people like you wouldn't have this silly recurring argument

I don't know if that is more or less screwed up. ;)
thanks for your compelling opinion

No gamefreak make Pokemon and we decide which ones we wish didn't exist (Uber is not a tier, it's a banlist).
I guess it would be far more efficient to be in control of what was made in the first place!
go write a letter to gamefreak instead of complaining here then

Anyway, I've really taken a step back from what you guys are doing here.
There are many good things about the community but the propensity to axe parts of the game is not one of them, IMHO.
nobody who has any say in the process axes anything without following the only process we've tried to put in place. not that this would please someone who is inherently indifferent on whether latias in ou—perhaps the most tangible symbol that our community is willing to undo bans after given a way to fairly reevaluate pre-existing ones—is a good or bad thing. go post your pessimism in some other forum
 
Meh, I don't care too much for this, but how about everyone stops echoing each other and saying the exact same things you've been saying for 3 pages.

I think we all get that Scizor is a good pokemon, checks many Pokemon, and that half of you declare it Uber for some reason or another. Just stop posting the exact same things about it, and either have a discussion that isn't just random opinions or stop talking about it.

Also thanks for stats Doug, if I may refer to you as such.
 

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

Top