What's wrong with this reasoning? We play this game for fun, we should play the meta that people prefer."i like this meta more than that".
You check it like we checked dangerous stuff last Gen. Switch in your houndour or misdreavus on an immunity and ohko with the appropriate move, or predict it using a coverage move and stay in to ko. That's what LC was.Tite, Misdreavus, and Scraggy are just as broken without Eviolite, simply because Eviolite gives stuff the defensive ability needed to check them. Imagine taking LO Tite without stuff like Eviolite Slowpoke to check it.
You see the problem with that is, what if half the people like the Eviolite-less metagame more, while the other half enjoy the Eviolite metagame. We would likely never reach a super majority on that as that is pretty much opinionated and that's it. The way Smogon is running suspect tests now doesn't fit into that method, which is what SDS was trying to say.What's wrong with this reasoning? We play this game for fun, we should play the meta that people prefer.
This just seems really biased, like you're still carrying a torch for old LC battles. Although there are some suspects that break the metagame atm, that does not mean that we are not on the right track. I could pretty much guarantee you that these same suspects would still be suspects in your eviolite-less metagame as well.You check it like we checked dangerous stuff last Gen. Switch in your houndour or misdreavus on an immunity and ohko with the appropriate move, or predict it using a coverage move and stay in to ko. That's what LC was.
Scraggy outruns or speed ties a handful of common scarfers after a Dragon Dance, and would likely be running LO in your metagame. Assuming that, it would still have pretty good defensive stats so it would more than likely survive at least one blow, while it would strike back with a LO'd nearly flawless coverage STAB move, while all you have to take said move with is a non eviolite less poke that would likely take a chunk from the move and likely not ohko back, unless they are the somewhat flimsy counters we have that would be worn down so much easier in this metagame. Of course this is just theorymonning though, but it is easy to see how this would play out, after all, it is just somewhat of a repeat of last gen, only with a lot more powerful, and bulkier pokemon thrown into the mix.Scarfers can check scraggy way better if it loses a third of its bulk. If the opponent has a cottonee, dding and letting it get a sub is more dangerous because its hp fire does 1.5x more to everything that had an eviolite previously. Croagunk shits on it. Plenty of pokemon that don't check it using bulk and instead use speed and power to kill it get a lot better at checking it.
Well, then, there you go!3 reliable counters for it: Timburr, Croagunk and Ferroseed.
Don't those two statements contradict each other? Scraggy, Meditite, and all those pokemon in the etc, we've never, ever seen them without Eviolite in the gen 5 metagame. Eviolite significantly improves nearly every pokemon in LC, since nearly every pokemon in LC seems to be running it.You can't argue that Eviolite is broken just because it makes one suspect Pokemon a bit better. Now if it were a handful of Pokemon I would understand, but you can't just place all the blame on Eviolite for just these significantly advantaged Pokemon. Its as if you're saying we should ban Yache Berry, because Garchomp abuses it so well.
In other words, you're aiming for the stomach when you should be aiming for the heart and as I said before; Scraggy, Meditite, etc., are suspects for much more than just Eviolite.
We have seen people running said Pokemon without Eviolite (the etc. part only applies to maybe Misdreavus in my opinion, so yeah), but you're correct, we have yet to see them in an environment where Eviolite is absent from the equation. Although Eviolite is very common, it is definitely not game breaking; and if you're going to use some kind of silly over centralizing argument, you should be reminded that not only was Oran Berry on almost each and every Pokemon last gen, it would most certainly take Eviolite's place if it were to be banned. After that happens are you going to argue that Oran Berry gives Pokemon to good of an advantage because it's everywhere and makes them harder to kill?Don't those two statements contradict each other? Scraggy, Meditite, and all those pokemon in the etc, we've never, ever seen them without Eviolite in the gen 5 metagame. Eviolite significantly improves nearly every pokemon in LC, since nearly every pokemon in LC seems to be running it.
True nobody knows for sure, but you missed the point entirely, why test something if it is not broken. You don't have to experience a nuclear war to know it wouldn't turn out well. If you want to see how an Eviolite-less Metagame vs Current Metagame would fair in opinions, create a poll thread then first maybe, but I'd bet that the community would be split or against Eviolite-less shift in Metagame.Anyway, I don't see any problem behind testing a LC without Eviolite. You say, "half the people like the Eviolite-less metagame more, while the other half enjoy the Eviolite metagame," but again, nobody knows for sure, because we've never seen the flipside of it! I think running a suspect test would make arguments on both sides more than just theorymon, and...that's good.
so yeah.
Outrage broke Mence (and Garchomp to a lesser extent) in Gen IV. Other dragons got it without being broken.The Yache Berry and Outrage analogy are flawed. Neither of them are remotely applicable to the current situation with Eviolite. Mainly because Eviolite obviously applies to multiple Pokemon and arguably breaks them. By definition therefore, Eviolite is broken. Banning it however, becomes a matter of preference and all the arguments I have seen insofar have been to that end.
How about this analogy then: In OU Leftovers is by far the most common item in there. Many Pokemon use it for healing, to prevent SS damage, etc., and it is an all around great item to use when you have nothing else that is really needed. But say you give Leftovers to a Sub Leech Seeder or Stallrein in Hail, they could take this simple 6% healing item and tack on some more healing with Leech Seed or Ice Body respectively, and use them in tandem with Protect/Substitute. They essentially get 100% of their health back and are extremely hard to kill. (I know they are not THAT good in OU, but just go with it, I'm trying to make a point.)The Yache Berry and Outrage analogy are flawed. Neither of them are remotely applicable to the current situation with Eviolite. Mainly because Eviolite obviously applies to multiple Pokemon and arguably breaks them. By definition therefore, Eviolite is broken. Banning it however, becomes a matter of preference and all the arguments I have seen insofar have been to that end.
Really, man? Because Mence existed in Gen 3 no problem, and I think if it only got Dragon Claw, i would certainly not have been banned. Also, you fail to mention the fact that without walls to effectively stop sweepers, they will still be broken, as Oran Berry is still really useful for set-up sweepers as we learned last genThe Outrage analogy is irrelevant because Outrage didn't break Salamence. The fact that it could run two different sets with different counters, both of which were very good, broke Salamence. Yes it had Outrage, and that didn't help, but Outrage didn't break Salamence. That is what makes the analogy irrelevant.
Additionally, assuming that Outrage did break Salamence, it did only that. It broke a single pokemon. Heysup sums it up nicely in this post. Eviolite, by definition, is broken, however, banning it becomes a matter of preference.
EDIT: The same thing goes for the Leftovers argument, it is a case of the single Pokemon abusing the item, making the Pokemon broken, not the item that is broken. In the case of Eviolite, it has arguably broken multiple Pokemon, making it a completely different situation.
The definition of an analogy is relating two situations. The fact that my analogy references OU does not mean it is not relevant here, as, to be perfectly honest, it's all just pokemon, regardless of the significant changes between the two tiers. Also, the fact that that argument is the only thing you can say that logically refute my point, and has just been refuted itself, means my point still stands. Priority already can revenge these pokes, and very few priority moves will OHKO Scraggy (who I'm using as an example here just becase it fits), and with Drain Punch doing more damage to pokes thanks to the lack of Eviolite, you will likely have a very large amount of HP during a sweep. Also, even with Eviolite, Scraggy is OHKOd by STAB HJK, and takes a hefty toll from STAB Mach Punch or combos of other priority moves.Yes, man. Outrage did not break Salamence, I'm not going to say anything more about it because we are supposed to be talking about LC and these analogies are all irrelevant. O.o
I'm not sure if I fully understand your second point. You seem to be saying that if you take away Eviolite sweepers will be even more broken because they have Oran Berry. Taking your reference to last gen, sweepers were just as easy to deal through priority and revenge killing, which was far easy without Eviolite.
Eviolite probably won't unbreak these pokes, and they can always be tested again if it really is banned, which I highly doubt will occur.Well doesn't it seem logical to do the Eviolite before the main suspect test, then we can see if its Eviolite that is 'broken' or the pokemon themselves.
Even after that its going to be, do you like a more offensive metagame or a slower placed bulker one.
IIRC we aren't going to unban anything to retest it. Once something is banned, its banned forever.masterful said:they can always be tested again
It probably won't as LO scraggy and LO Meditite will rip through an Eviolite metagame but it will settle some people's mind.Eviolite probably won't unbreak these pokes, and they can always be tested again if it really is banned, which I highly doubt will occur.
I support this !_!FREE YANMA!