foongus

Untitled

Mar 23rd, 2020
1,038
0
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 7.77 KB | None | 0 0
  1. [13-Feb-20 12:05 AM] levi#6206
  2. If veil is too much
  3.  
  4. [13-Feb-20 12:05 AM] levi#6206
  5. Are we banning apix or the move
  6.  
  7. [13-Feb-20 12:09 AM] levi#6206
  8. The move right?
  9.  
  10. [13-Feb-20 12:09 AM] levi#6206
  11. It paired w hail is what forces the matchup issues
  12.  
  13. [13-Feb-20 12:09 AM] Quote#9846
  14. that's incorrect
  15.  
  16. [13-Feb-20 12:10 AM] Quote#9846
  17. specifically, the issue is having a fast aurora veil user with auto-hail
  18.  
  19. [13-Feb-20 12:10 AM] Quote#9846
  20. we've had auto-hail with veil available since the start of the gen
  21.  
  22. [13-Feb-20 12:10 AM] Quote#9846
  23. but
  24.  
  25. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  26. pix is the only veil user right now, right
  27.  
  28. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] Quote#9846
  29. we didn't have an auto-hail setter with veil, and we didn't have an abuser like zigzagoon
  30.  
  31. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] Quote#9846
  32. no
  33.  
  34. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] Quote#9846
  35. bergmite and vanillite can both use veil
  36.  
  37. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] Quote#9846
  38. but they're both trash
  39.  
  40. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  41. oh oops i didnt scroll down on bulbapedia
  42.  
  43. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] Quote#9846
  44. and we've had snover as auto-hail
  45.  
  46. [13-Feb-20 12:11 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  47. was only looking at level up and tm moves
  48.  
  49. [13-Feb-20 12:12 AM] levi#6206
  50. The release of new and very powerful abusers like ziggy and roost rufflet opens the door to veils becoming even more matchupy than it was before
  51.  
  52. [13-Feb-20 12:12 AM] levi#6206
  53. Before their introduction every single offensive mon had its hard check
  54.  
  55. [13-Feb-20 12:12 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  56. is roost rufflet really a veil abuser
  57.  
  58. [13-Feb-20 12:12 AM] levi#6206
  59. The same reason why dedicated webs wasn’t amazing
  60.  
  61. [13-Feb-20 12:13 AM] Quote#9846
  62. dedicated webs is different though because that's a move that doesn't have a pre-requisite on the field
  63.  
  64. [13-Feb-20 12:13 AM] levi#6206
  65. And mostly carried on cutie itself already being a fantastic mon
  66.  
  67. [13-Feb-20 12:13 AM] levi#6206
  68. I’m not comparing veils and webs as strategies
  69.  
  70. [13-Feb-20 12:14 AM] levi#6206
  71. I’m just explaining why the meta changes might make veils as a whole more threatening
  72.  
  73. [13-Feb-20 12:14 AM] levi#6206
  74. Or at least threatening enough for it to be a real concern as a pure matchup fish strat
  75.  
  76. [13-Feb-20 12:15 AM] levi#6206
  77. There’s an even easier justification actually, it’s that noone cared to use veils until apix brought it to the limelight
  78.  
  79. [13-Feb-20 12:15 AM] levi#6206
  80. It’s always been a pure matchup fishing strat
  81.  
  82. [13-Feb-20 12:15 AM] Quote#9846
  83. ok, but we don't ban things because of matchup fishing
  84.  
  85. [13-Feb-20 12:16 AM] Shrug#7659
  86. why not
  87.  
  88. [13-Feb-20 12:16 AM] levi#6206
  89. We do
  90.  
  91. [13-Feb-20 12:16 AM] levi#6206
  92. Baton pass
  93.  
  94. [13-Feb-20 12:16 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  95. matchup fishing is a relative term
  96.  
  97. [13-Feb-20 12:16 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  98. gothita was a matchup fish if you wanna think about it like that
  99.  
  100. [13-Feb-20 12:16 AM] levi#6206
  101. Matchup fishing is bannable if it generally removes skill from the equation
  102.  
  103. [13-Feb-20 12:17 AM] levi#6206
  104. Stag generally fails to do that in offensive metas bc it carries a cost
  105.  
  106. [13-Feb-20 12:18 AM] Quote#9846
  107. If veils forces a very limited scope of counterplay, then sure we can be in favour of removing it, but I think there's more to consider here
  108.  
  109. [13-Feb-20 12:19 AM] Quote#9846
  110. We have to think about the setters as well as the abusers
  111.  
  112. [13-Feb-20 12:19 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  113. is it a sun situation where if we would have to ban more than one abuser, then we'd rather ban the setter
  114.  
  115. [13-Feb-20 12:20 AM] Quote#9846
  116. do we think a ton of mons are going to be problems under veil? Does getting rid of a single potent abuser solve the issue? Does banning the best setter limit the strategy enough to introduce a proper opportunity cost?
  117.  
  118. [13-Feb-20 12:20 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  119. i mean there are a lot of abusers
  120.  
  121. [13-Feb-20 12:20 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  122. and its hard to tell which ones would be too good
  123.  
  124. [13-Feb-20 12:20 AM] Quote#9846
  125. Which is why we can't rush into this
  126.  
  127. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  128. if the answer is that we would need to ban more than one mon to make veils balanced
  129.  
  130. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] levi#6206
  131. it's a little different from sun because we could solve sun by banning one mon either way
  132.  
  133. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  134. is that worth it still
  135.  
  136. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  137. how do you solve sun by not banning vulpix but banning one mon now
  138.  
  139. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] Quote#9846
  140. I think if multiple mons make it an issue, then no, it's not worth keeping.
  141.  
  142. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  143. cherubi was the answer before
  144.  
  145. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  146. but now theres bulbasaur
  147.  
  148. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] levi#6206
  149. unless there's only a single broken abuser of veils, which i would be shocked of, then i was just suggesting the move versus apix the mon
  150.  
  151. [13-Feb-20 12:21 AM] levi#6206
  152. well banning cherry isn't a solution anymore yeah
  153.  
  154. [13-Feb-20 12:22 AM] Quote#9846
  155. just think of it this way
  156.  
  157. [13-Feb-20 12:22 AM] Quote#9846
  158. would veil still be good if you had to use bergmite and snover in the team?
  159.  
  160. [13-Feb-20 12:22 AM] levi#6206
  161. it wouldn't be good but i think it would still be uncompetitive
  162.  
  163. [13-Feb-20 12:22 AM] levi#6206
  164. is what i mean to say
  165.  
  166. [13-Feb-20 12:22 AM] Shrug#7659
  167. i tried it w the ice cream it sucks
  168.  
  169. [13-Feb-20 12:22 AM] levi#6206
  170. ala baton pass
  171.  
  172. [13-Feb-20 12:23 AM] Quote#9846
  173. That argument feels flawed to me.
  174.  
  175. [13-Feb-20 12:24 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  176. is preserving alola pix that important
  177.  
  178. [13-Feb-20 12:24 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  179. to make this weird exception
  180.  
  181. [13-Feb-20 12:24 AM] Quote#9846
  182. No, it's not, but I don't consider that relevant.
  183.  
  184. [13-Feb-20 12:24 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  185. like if we're gonna make exceptions, the exceptions should be made on stuff like porygon in gen 7
  186.  
  187. [13-Feb-20 12:24 AM] Serene Grace#5243
  188. if broken then ban vulpix-alola
  189.  
  190. [13-Feb-20 12:25 AM] Quote#9846
  191. What I consider relevant is the convenience of alola-pix vs. the overall potency of veil
  192.  
  193. [13-Feb-20 12:25 AM] levi#6206
  194. porygon should have been freed!!!
  195.  
  196. [13-Feb-20 12:26 AM] Quote#9846
  197. and I simply don't see how a team forced to use BERGMITE and SNOVER is going to be that great. If you want to argue "we shouldn't need to have defog timburr on every team" I can somewhat understand that but I don't think it's that simple.
  198.  
  199. [13-Feb-20 12:26 AM] levi#6206
  200. the bp comparison is bad actually bc there were multiple mons (torch and foo) that both met the minimum level of viability and were uncompetitive
  201.  
  202. [13-Feb-20 12:26 AM] levi#6206
  203. veils only does that w apix
  204.  
  205. [13-Feb-20 12:26 AM] levi#6206
  206. bergmite veils is still uncompetitive but it's more in line w swagger probably
  207.  
  208. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] Quote#9846
  209. I get where you're coming from in that veil is pretty fuckin degenerate
  210.  
  211. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  212. well heres one thing
  213.  
  214. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  215. if we did want to deal with gen 7
  216.  
  217. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  218. would we be allowed to ban webs
  219.  
  220. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  221. or not because theres some like E tier web user existing
  222.  
  223. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] Quote#9846
  224. but I personally don't favour banning a degenerate strat that forces your team to be dogshit in the process
  225.  
  226. [13-Feb-20 12:27 AM] levi#6206
  227. in web's case it wouldnt really lose viability at all going from skit to dewp
  228.  
  229. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  230. but then you get to like sewaddle
  231.  
  232. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] BurntZebra#8147
  233. or w/e
  234.  
  235. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] levi#6206
  236. and only a v minimal amount going from dewp to spinarak
  237.  
  238. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] levi#6206
  239. ok i'm pro apix ban actually
  240.  
  241. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] levi#6206
  242. i just wanted to bring it up
  243.  
  244. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] Quote#9846
  245. sjgsdfgjskldfgjsdfgjkld
  246.  
  247. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] Quote#9846
  248. motherfucker
  249.  
  250. [13-Feb-20 12:28 AM] Quote#9846
  251. I get it though
  252.  
  253. [13-Feb-20 12:29 AM] Quote#9846
  254. covering our bases is important
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment