I think a lot of people are kinda reading too much into the porygon vs conversion vote. Just because council voted to ban porygon does not mean we aren't ever gonna suspect a move or an ability this generation. It means that the majority of council members thought porygon should have been banned over conversion for various reasons.
I know I'm going to just be ignored again but I really think it would be beneficial for someone with authority to actually state the policy we're enforcing. Allowing us to vote on Conversion versus Porygon is a half measure. The fact that we banned Porygon resulted in a half measure. We need to be more transparent in what our policy is. We need to make sure council members are actually informed about this policy.
I'll write what I think it is at the end of the post.
Honestly, I'm extremely disappointed with this decision.
Whether cutie was broken, the move was broken, or whatever, the fact is that no aspect of cutiefly was so outrageously metagame defining that I think it justified such a quick reaction that did not involve the community. I would like to ask
Quote and
macle directly to explain the reasoning behind not bringing this to a full suspect, or to have more of a general community discussion. This kind of vote only serves to piss people off, and seems to me to be justifiable only in extreme circumstances.
I was going to write a longer post, but really I'm just interested in the reasoning behind this decision before I start arguing.
Well naturally you can't please everyone, but I think the fact that you call this a quick reaction is an extreme exaggeration. Cutiefly has been usable for like a month now. We've been abusing it to hell like everyone else for the entire month. Cutiefly was in consideration to even be the first thing gone before very smart people figured out you can change Porygon's type while boosting. I think a lot of Porygon's power actually came from being an insanely good recipient for Cutiefly. The most reliable and busted Porygon teams involve Cutiefly for this reason. I actually think it would be more accurate to describe the Porygon teams as Cutiefly teams with a Porygon recipient, seeing how they were built around Quiver Pass. Quiver Pass with Cutie's amazing typing and Speed was already insane, but having to prepare for Quiver Pass + like 3 other dangerous movesets (QD + 3 Atks, LO + 4 Attacks, Bulky Theif) all of which could be run with LO or Eviolite and varying spreads made it really hard to not sacrifice a few Pokemon to it in order to stop it from setting up (ie. if you're Timburr, you get nuked by LO Moonblast just because you can't afford to let a Eviolite QD set up etc). Magnemite, Staryu, Abra, Snivy, Natu etc, made almost unstoppable recipients. It was obvious to me and I'm probably the most anti-ban council member (cuz im old).
Why this wasn't a full suspect, besides its obviousness, is because we are trying to get the metagame stable before SPL and I think it is somewhat now. Besides the length of the process, it's quite clear that many people of the mob do not understand how policy even works or don't understand why it's important. No other metagame has the community making decisions. In fact, we have the biggest council out of all of the metagames.
That being said, I do think community involvement is important and should nominate the suspects (with TL's guidance on what fits within the policy, ie. allowing / not allowing moves to be voted for, etc).
7 of 10 pro-ban votes stated that banning Cutiefly entirely instead of QD/BP is fucking nonsense but muh precedent and muh policies. That's also the only reason someone voted no ban. Mind explaining?
Macle is doing his best to confuse the shit out of people with some contradictory viewpoints, is my simple explanation. If you followed the PR threads about this, there were two philosophies we could follow. One was to ban whatever had the least collateral. That is the path I thought we should take, but unfortunately I was in the minority. As a council, by a whopping 10-3 we chose the path that's philosophy is that we, at the very least, do not ban moves that only break one Pokemon. We ban Pokemon and only resort to other things potentially if there is an extreme situation.
While I think it's quite a weak argument personally (but ily fatty), he thought that Baton Pass was broken on multiple Pokemon. That, or he doesn't understand that we already decided that banning a unique move is not something we do, as a council.
You guys are psychotic lmao
I love you all dearly, but I'm not regretting my switch to TCG one bit
I think most of the problem is input from people who don't have any metagame experience.
On that note is there any plan to make public the councils votes and discussion more than a one liner? I'd love to know who voted for what, how much the discussion here swayed the council and just a more detailed idea of what really makes Cutiefly and Porygon broken.
I agree. I've stated it above already, but Cutiefly's Quiver Pass was an absurdly hard thing to handle. You can phaze it around if you want but it's still hard to stop throughout the match. It's incredibly bulky using it's typing and already high Speed stat, it's EVs can all be dumped in bulk. It will be at 23/21/22/24 before being hit by almost anything in the metagame (including Eviolite, and one Quiver Dance). The most reliable counter is Munchlax because it's not trapped by Gothita very easily, however it is quite trappable with either LO or Reversal Diglett and it's easy to wear it down with all of the insanely powerful Fighting-types and Pawniard floating around, especially with Munchlax's limited coverage from recycle + Whirlwind taking up 2 move slots. Eventually, Munchlax needs to Rest or Recycle.
I mean, Porygon was already insane last Gen, but the +1 and typing change was too much. It 1v1's almost the entirety of the metagame. Again, the only legitimate stop was Munchlax but, the same thing applies as with Cutiefly, except that Porygon hits harder. I'm pretty sure that +1 tbolt followed by a +2 Tbolt 2HKOes.