1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Sand Suspect Discussion [Sand Rush Banned]

Discussion in 'Gen 6 NU' started by Weavile, Oct 21, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Weavile

    Weavile Phoenix

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,703
    Likes Received:
    890
    Welcome to the amended suspect discussion for Sand. The previously opened Hippowdon suspect will be closed in light of this new suspect, which will aim to address the issue of sand in the metagame more effectively and in a way that better suits the opinions of the player base. We apologise for the previous suspect and having to re-do this one, but hopefully this one should end in something the playerbase is happier with.

    This suspect shall take a slightly non-standard form. This suspect is to discuss the impact of Sand on the metagame, most prominently the impact of Sand Rush abusers (Stoutland and Sandslash). As such, as a poster you should decide on one of the following options, that you think would best deal with this problem in the metagame (if you believe it is a problem at all).

    The options are;
    Ban Hippowdon
    Ban Sand Stream
    Ban Sand Rush
    Ban Stoutland
    Ban Smooth Rock
    Do Nothing

    Please choose an option or two and make it clear which option(s) you think is(are) best. Back up your posts with knowledge and experience. Do not blind theorymon or simply post calcs as your entire argument, but by all means use calcs to support an argument.

    If you wish you may argue why you think one of more of the options will not deal with the problem of Sand (should you think it is a problem).
     
  2. Afro Smash

    Afro Smash Mfw I'm living the Australian dream

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    854
    PO Trainer Name:
    Afro Smash
    I'll outline my thoughts on all the options below:

    Ban Hippowdon - The only reason this was initially considered for suspect was because of the Sand Support it could give, it is a fantastic pokemon in its own right, but not a broken one.

    Ban Sand Stream - Probably my favourite option as of now, it allows both Hippowdon and Stoutland to stay in the tier, and they both have great niches outside of Sand.

    Ban Stoutland - Like Hippo except Stoutland is on the recieving end of the support, neither is broken without the other, and neither is broken without Sand Stream.

    Ban Sand Rush - Another preferable option, would take away Stoutland's immense power in Sand, and allow Hippo and Stout to stay in the tier. Would also take it away from Sandslash however which is by no means broken.

    Ban Smooth Rock - Doesn't fix the problem with Sand since Hippowdon has Bulk and Slack Off meaning it can set up Sand numerous times in a match, allowing Stoutland to still be a menacing force, albeit slightly less so without 8 turns to play with.

    Do Nothing - I think we definitely need to do something, Stoutland is just too powerful in Sand to ignore.

    Best Options imo: Ban Sand Rush/Ban Sand Stream.

    I mean in a perfect world a complex ban of Stoutland and Sand Rush would be ideal, it would take away the least from the tier, however it's exceedingly unlikely when the other options don't take away too much from the tier
     
  3. [OG] Swanna Lady

    [OG] Swanna Lady Y.......Yo......You.....YOU'RE FAT!

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    46
    PO Trainer Name:
    [OG] Swanna lady
    so I will do basically the same thing as Afro Smash

    Ban Hippowdon: While Hippowdon can set up sand, it is not broken enough to be straight-out banned from the tier. It may have great bulk and attack stats but isn't broken. It would be unfair to just ban hippowdon for reasons of setting up the sand as it can also have sand force, which all in all is useless without a sandstorm but idk.

    Ban Sand Stream: This is probably my favorite option, it wouldn't take away anything from the tier, and it would definitely fix the problem. It makes it so Sand can't really be set up, which stops Stoutland and Sandslash being broken.

    Ban Stoutland: Refer to Afro Smash

    Ban Sand Rush: This one would also work specifically well. It will stop either of the sand users from becoming too strong, while letting them both have great power.

    Ban Smooth Rock: This would only VERY partially cover the problem. While it would stop sand from going on for TOO long, Hippowdon is physically bulky and can switch in multiple times to set up sand. However the argument also exists that Hippowdon has pretty low special defenses in a tier with so many special attackers. This means it would be killed, making it so sand cannot be set up again, therefore making Smooth Rock a decent-ish thing to ban.

    Do Nothing And ruin everyone's fun with broken-ness

    All in All I think the best options are Ban Sand Stream or Ban Sand Rush but In a VERY limited situation ban smooth rock.
     
  4. Proof

    Proof Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    854
    PO Trainer Name:
    Proof/Agufmo/Omfuga
    Ban sand stream. Get on the sun suspect imo,

    Edit: I will make this post more detailed before I get infracted, won't you @Proof

    Of course I will edit this post sometime tonight. As I just said in my last edit,,

    Ban Hippowdon- This is my least favorite option of the 5. Hippowdon is a great stable pokemon in the tier, there's no reason to ban it to solve a problem with more simple solutions. Also Hippopotas with Smooth Rock is doing the exact same thing with less bulk. 68/78/42 Defenses and a nice immunity are good enough for a pokemon that gets 8 free turns of sand every time it comes in.

    Ban Sand Stream- This is my favorite solution. It removes sand completely, and just for all of the people who are confused as to what a complex ban actually is, banning Sand Stream from one tier is not a complex ban. A complex ban is classified as banning 2 things with each other, for example two abilities combined (Drizzle + Swift Swim, or a more accurate comparison in this situation, Sand Stream + Sand Rush).

    Ban Sand Rush- Another good solution, not one I could say I'd be unhappy with. It leaves sand in the tier but without broken Stoutland, or potentially Sandslash to wreak havoc on teams. Not sure how I feel about leaving sand in the tier, even if controlling it... I'd rather ban Sand stream completely.

    Ban Stoutland- Not a bad idea, however not a very good one. Stoutland's possibilities without sand are limited, but it still involves banning a pokemon with a good place in the meta. It also leaves 8-turn sand + Sandslash, which, although is less of a problem than the current Sand, it isn't a complete solution.

    Ban Smooth Rock- Another decent solution. The problem with it is pretty simple: It still leaves 5 turns for stoutland to throw off ridiculous hits with ridiculous speed. Tbh I can't see sand being too bad with only 5 turns, and wouldn't mind this option very much.

    Still, my opinion is swayed towards banning Sand Stream completely.
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2014
  5. Xdevo

    Xdevo Phrasing Super Moderator Tour Director Super Moderator Tour Director

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    2,526
    Likes Received:
    1,616
    I'll start with what I think should be done and why:

    Ban Stoutland: Stoutland is the only of the Sand Rush users that I consider broken. Sandslash is far slower, a good bit weaker, has worse overall coverage, and only has "good" bulk on the physical side when compared to Stoutland. Sandslash has far more (and more common) weaknesses than does Stoutland. But the overall point is that Sandslash simply isn't broken in NU.

    I'm just going to C/P what I said in the other thread because I cba to type it up for a third time.
    As I said in the Potential suspect thread, Stoutland has perfect coverage with three moves (only Pawniard resists Normal + Dark in NU) and a very good attack stat for using that to its advantage. Thanks to the 80 Speed, Stoutland can afford to run Adamant, which gives it about the same hitting power as Heracross. For whatever reason, some people seem to think that a Scrappy set is better than Sand Rush (????), but that's pretty much irrelevant when Sand Rush is so good. Stoutland has the power to threaten stall teams, with its ability to 2HKO things like Weezing, Vaporeon, Defensive Seismistoad, Golbat after Rocks, Miltank after rocks, and so on. Sand Rush gives Stoutland the much needed speed to threaten Offensive teams, while retaining the aforementioned stall breaking power. Stoutland also has good enough bulk to take those priority attacks that normally threaten fast sweepers, taking only about 50% from Fletchinder's Acro (which is about as powerful as NU priority is going to get).
    Stoutland's only real issues are the Choice reliance and the 4-7 turn "sweeping" limit that Sand places on you. The Choice reliance isn't all that big of a deal since Stoutland has great coverage to hit literally everything in the tier, and has more than enough bulk to be able to switch in and out of battle at least enough to net a few kills and wear down a wall.
    The Sand reliance is a larger issue, since 4-7 turns isn't a whole lot of time, and Stoutland does net a lot of 2HKO, but much fewer OHKOs. What does help this is Hippowdon's sheer bulk. Hippo is just hard to kill, and if you do kill it, you're probably in a very bad place to take on a raging Stoutland.



    Ban Hippowdon: Hippowdon itself isn't really a problem, it's fat obviously, but there are still things on both sides of the spectrum that can take it out, and its inability to use a lot of its coverage moves makes it set-up bait for select Pokemon.

    Ban Sand Stream: Banning Sand Stream seems an unneeded way to solve the problem. It would nerf Stoutland, Sandslash, Hippowdon, and Rock-types to a very small extent, which is hitting a lot of things that have no need to be nerfed. The extra collateral damage artificially reduces the number of strategies, which is not the goal (nor should it be) of suspects and banning.

    Ban Sand Rush: Sandslash isn't really broken from my experience, so there is no reason to ban Sand Rush when there is just the option to ban Stoutland. As I've said a number of times, blanket bans should not be used for just one threat.


    Ban Smooth Rock: Essentially the same situation as Sand Stream, but nerfs the entire group less, and /might/ leave a broken Stoutland in the tier (idk if Stout's broken without Smooth Rock).
     
  6. Afro Smash

    Afro Smash Mfw I'm living the Australian dream

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    854
    PO Trainer Name:
    Afro Smash
    Well the thing is by banning Sand Rush you take away a set (or 2 if you include Sandslash), but by banning Stoutland you take away a whole pokemon, which has the option to run a fair few other decent sets.

    That's why I think banning Sand Rush/Stream (preferably Rush) is the best option, as it takes away the least from the tier.
     
    [OG] Swanna Lady likes this.
  7. DAZZY VANCE

    DAZZY VANCE Do you even know Dazzy Vance

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    9
    PO Trainer Name:
    Dazzy Vance
    I have personally never played against a sand team in nu yet as I just got into the tier a few weeks ago, but I agree with @Afro Smash banning a pokemon you take away so much from the tier. Some people might even have to redo their teams as it could create a huge hole. Banning Sand Stream/Rush would by far be the better option as it only takes away the one set for each poke leaving as much as possible still in the tier.
     
  8. snaga

    snaga .

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    520
    Likes Received:
    633
    PO Trainer Name:
    snaga
    welp
    Ban Hippowdon: This could be a reasonable option as hippo is definitely a S-tier nu mon but it isn't over centralizing and or broken. Hippo should stay, just without sand stream
    Ban sand rush/stream: one of these two are the best options imo. both the weather starter and the weather abusers aren't anything more than nu mons without sand. one of the two bans will solve the problem of sand abuse, preferably sand rush because sand stream has more uses other than supporting sand rush mons and has other uses in the tier so the ban of sand rush wont change the tier as much
    Ban Stoutland: Stoutland doesn't deserve a ban, it isn't exceedingly powerful without sand. If sand rush/ stream gets banned stoutland won't be so common, even though it has a decent niche in the tier.
    Ban Smooth Rock: sand rush users don't need 8 turns of sand to be effective. this wouldn't change the sand abuse, at all.
    Do Nothing: something has to be done
     
  9. OUAzumarill

    OUAzumarill Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    45
    PO Trainer Name:
    Mr Snake
    I'd agree that banning Rush is the best. Hippo or Stout may not completely solve the problem (Baby Hippo can set up sand, and Slash can abuse it), Sand Rock won't do enough, and there is a problem so doing nothing won't suffice. This leads to the most realistic solutions with the least collateral damage being either Stream of Rush. Personally, I'd say banning Rush is better for two reasons:

    1. Sand has 3 purposes other than Rush: Sand Veil, passive damage, and boosting Rock SpDef. Sand Veil is already banned, so the argument of banning Rush VS Stream is whether the passive damage and Rock buff are broken enough on their own. I would say that the passive damage is significant and useful but not even remotely broken and the rock buff is irrelevant most of the time. As a result, I don't think that banning Stream will eliminate anything truly problematic except for the stuff that a Rush ban would eliminate anyway.

    2. I'm not sure to what extent this would be a problem, but the fact remains that even if Stream ends up banned Rush users could abuse Sandstorm the move, either by using it themselves or having a partner do it.

    Due to those two reasons why banning Rush is a better idea than banning Stream, I'd have to say banning Rush is the correct choice.
     
  10. Nicehat

    Nicehat PO client damage calc: preview.tinyurl.com/o8e7hss

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    373
    Likes Received:
    77
    I'm not particularly worried banning Stoutland will force people to drastically change their teams, there are so many possible replacements for powerful Normal-type attackers in NU, and even if you really need Scrappy Miltank and Kangaskhan can fit that niche perfectly well. Because of this, I don't think "Stoutland leaving the tier will take away a lot from NU" is a reason to consider banning Sand Rush instead of Stoutland.

    Stoutland is so much better than Sandslash that I don't think it's necessary to presume that Sandslash will be a problem with Hippowdon, the typing synergy is awful because you double down on mono-Ground and thus can't really bring Sandslash in on whatever threatens Hippowdon, the STAB has worse coverage, and the coverage moves you use are worse because they're either inaccurate (Stone Edge) or godawful attack types to be locked into (X-Scissor). Meanwhile, Stoutland hits the vast majority of the tier for neutral with STAB and all of its coverage moves are good by their own merits (Superpower, Crunch, and Play Rough) which means that it is far more effective at running a CB set, which plays best with the limited time weather gives you to take advantage of its boosts.
     
  11. Big Bad Booty Daddy

    Big Bad Booty Daddy Big Poppa Pump

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Messages:
    950
    Likes Received:
    877
    PO Trainer Name:
    -
    Ban Hippowdon: Although it is a great Pokemon and is a huge reason to why Sand is deemed overpowered in the tier (Insane bulk and reliable recovery allows long survival), I don't think it's banworthy like the other options.

    Ban Sand Stream: Probably one of the two best options. Banning Sand Stream obviously neuters the possibility of Hippowdon setting up Sand for 5 or 8 turns depending on your item. Of course this opens up the possibility of manual Sand becoming a playstyle but it's untouched in NU right now since there's no reason to do it when you have Hippowdon. But the Sand Rush ban does obviously negate any possibility of Manual Sand being a successful offensive team, so it's a call Tier Leaders make.

    Ban Sand Rush: Like I said previously, definitely one of the top two decisions regarding Sand in my opinion. Sand Rush obviously negates the possibility of Stoutland ever being a scary Sand attacker, and everyone is underrating Sandslash (Obviously not close to being broken but it's a quality Pokemon under Sand, stfu) but it also negates any possibility of manual Sand being a thing unless people are trying to use it defensively with like Curse Rock-types namely Regirock / Cradily or Sand Veil SD like Cacturne but yeah. Another solid option.

    Ban Stoutland: Like the first choice, obviously a huge reason to why Sand is good but the two options above are better suited to deal with Sand in NU and damage the tier the least amount possible.

    Ban Smooth Rock: I know Afro seemed really against this but it's not as bad as it seems, although inferior to the option to ban Sand Rush or Stream, Hippowdon having 5 turns of Sand to set-up means that you'd need to somehow get to Stoutland pretty quick, and that's hard to do straight from Stoutlandesp. since there's so many hard hitters in the tier, and Hippowdon switches into a fair amount of them depending on the set. It neuters the possibility of Sandstorm being set-up by other Pokemon (manually), but obviously a Sand Rush ban completely negates that so I don't think Smooth Rock is the way to go.

    Do Nothing: ,,,,pls no

    Banning Sand Rush or Stream are two solid options to balancing NU without Sand. I don't really mind which one, if I had the choose I'd prefer the ban of Sand Rush because it means no Pokemon can set up Sandstorm manually with Smooth Rock, obviously takes a turn to set-up but 8 turns of Sand is a pretty big deal for Stoutland obviously. I guess to be super sure there's no more Sand offense I'd choose the ban of Sand Rush. But I'm fine with either option. Don't let me down Alan.
     
  12. Dånte

    Dånte Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    9
    I just wanted to make a short argument as to why I feel Sand Rush ban is the preferred option over Sand Stream. Banning Sand Rush essentially solves the issue while only affecting a total of 2 Pokémon while Sand Stream removes the potential special defense buff from all Rock Types. So I guess what I am saying is that Sand Rush affects the tier less as a whole while still addressing the issue at hand.
     
  13. Finchinator

    Finchinator IT’S FINK DUMBASS

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2012
    Messages:
    4,309
    Likes Received:
    2,287
    PO Trainer Name:
    Finchinator / Finch
    I've been building and playing a fair amount of NU lately, so I will give my opinion on Sand in NU.

    Before looking at which option would be the best for restricting or banning Sandstorm teams, it should be determined if any action needs to be taken at all. If a ban or restriction isn't necessary, then nothing needs to be done. If this archetype is broken, however, choosing the appropriate line of action should then be discussed.

    In my opinion, Sand teams are worthy of a ban or restriction in NU. As you all know, Sand Rush Stoutland is the main abuser of Sand, with Sand Rush Sandslash being the less potent, but still effective counterpart. With their speed doubled in Sand, both of these pokemon are free to outpace and destroy unprepared opposing teams.

    While it's true that getting Stoutland (or Sandslash) in safely with Sand up isn't always the easiest task, Sand lasts 5 turns (8 with Smooth Rock) and neither of these pokemon are too frail, barring Sandslash on the special side. If Stoutland gets in safely with sand up, there are few counters to it while most teams have to rely on "playing around it" which can be nearly impossible against non-CB variants. Physically Defensive Hippowdon, Physically Defensive Steelix (still takes a lot from Superpower), Spiritomb (if they lack Play Rough, otherwise RIP (Play Rough is common, too)), Defensive Hitmontop, Granbull, and a couple uncommon pokemon (Dusclops, Regirock, Avalugg, Musharna, etc.) can check/counter it, but not even all of these are reliable (for example, Hitmontop barely survives two hits after Intimidate, if it's defensive, and lacks recovery). The general moves that Stoutland run are Return, Superpower, Crunch, and Play Rough (some players elect to use Wild Charge, Fire Fang, Pursuit, etc. over Play Rough, but they miss out on hitting Spiritomb and the alternatives just aren't too helpful, in my opinion). In regards to Sandslash, it fills a slightly different roll. While it, too, abuses Sand Rush, Sandslash has SD and StoneQuake (and Knock Off) coverage (with STAB Quake), but it lacks the off-the-bat power that Stoutland has (10 less base attack and a much less spammable STAB). Bulky waters like defensive Vaporeon, Milotic, Seismitoad, and Quagsire, tanks like Weezing, Eelektross, and others, and various other pokemon have the ability to stomach multiple hits from Sandslash and do something in return to make it unable to set up or cripple it in return for setting up on them. While Sandslash has a fair amount of checks and counters, the same cannot be said for Stoutland and there is minimal overlap, making double rush teams even more potent. Furthermore, Sand teams (specifically their abusers) are problematic for the NU metagame and this suspect is called-for. The question now is which option we should choose for crippling this playstyle to the extent where it's no longer broken. Like others, I will go through each of the options one-by-one and discuss their merits and disadvantages.


    Banning Hippowdon would appear to be a full-stop to this playstyle's dominance as it is the inducer of Sand that can come in many times throughout the game. However, Hippowdon, with or without sand, is a great pokemon in NU and functions as a solid physical or mixed wall that can set up rocks and phase. If the tier where to lose Hippowdon to solve this problem, then it'd be without a crucial member that we may not even need to get rid of to fix this issue. This leads me to the conclusion that banning Hippowdon could be a last-resort option if every other option is deemed either not sufficient enough of a restriction or not an acceptable solution for some reason, but banning it wouldn't be ideal for the tier if there's an option that cripples the playstyle while not sacrificing a viable pokemon like Hippowdon.

    Banning Sand Stream would also be a full-stop to this playstyle as manual sandstorm is never going to see any use (pardon the theorymon, but let's be realistic here) and the playstyle would basically be dead. This leaves Hippowdon (and little Hippo) in the tier as they both have secondary abilities. Banning Sand Stream doesn't sacrifice a viable pokemon from the tier while stopping the SandRush archetype, meaning it is a more practical choice than Banning Hippowdon, but if there was another ability that could be banned that's of less relevance, then it could be another solution.

    Banning Sand Rush stops the main abusing of Sand Stream as it's just there as residual damage and for the rare Sand Force / Sand Veil user. This would also be a good solution, better than banning Hippo and comparable to Banning Sand Stream (personally, I think it's a bit better so the weather is still allowed, but not broken in any sense as Sand Rush is what's driving this suspect in the first place).

    Banning Stoutland would potentially solve the issue (I'm pretty sure it would make sand not broken at all, but at the same time I can't say that for a fact). It isn't too relevant a pokemon without Sand or Sand Rush, so banning it and not one of those is a fine option, in my opinion. With that being said, you could say the same about Banning Sand Rush and not Stoutland, but I guess that option allows you to at least use Sandslash, so maybe Banning Stoutland is the best option, but I personally think any of the last three options are fine (Stream, Rush, & Stout).

    Banning Smooth Rock could be an insufficient solution to the problem as we're unsure of if the playstyle would still be as threatening and broken as without Smooth Rock. The only way this could be used if it's a test ban to see if the limitation of Sand is sufficient enough to restrict the playstyle to where it isn't broken. With our playerbase, I'd say that we aren't large enough and active of a ladder enough to implement a successful and revealing test ban, so I'd lean away from this option.

    Already touched on doing nothing and how that's not ideal in the first part of the post.

    Ultimately, I'm fine with Banning Sand Stream, Banning Sand Rush, or Banning Stoutland. Personally, Banning Sand Rush and Banning Stoutland would be the two best options as Sand Stream has some outside value, unlike the other two, so salvaging it for the tier could be nice (not too big a deal though).
     
    Daybreak and Weavile like this.
  14. Trakyan

    Trakyan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    11
    I'm still of the opinion that sand isn't broken, neither is hippowdon, but that hippowdon creates an imballance with the spinners.

    However, if the playerbase really wants a solution to sand, here are my thoughts.

    Ban Hippowdon
    -my favourite option mostly because of how it makes setting SR in the tier a hell of a lot easier than spinning

    Ban Sand Stream
    -probably the most practical, letting the pokemon stay in the tier and getting rid of what the community as a whole sees as the problem

    Ban Sand Rush
    -if you ban sand rush, you might as well ban sand. Sand isn't as useful defensively anymore due to the duration nerf and when a team as built around sand (as opposed to hippowdon just being added for a wall or w/e) it was always around sand rush. Banning sand instead of sand rush also keeps the (somewhat pointless) option open for people to run sandstorm users as they would rain dance/sunny day users if they wanted to use sand rush.

    Ban Stoutland
    -I don't see sand as broken, this part of it included. Stoutland has other uses in the tier as a scrappy user and doesnt deserve to be kicked out just because of sand

    Ban Smooth Rock
    -yeah... nah... this wont help seeing as hippowdon tends to have no issue switching in numerous times throughout the match to reset sand (as opposed to the other setters which are far less durable due to hazard weakness and no recovery). Not to mention stoutland is argueably most effective as a hit and run or cleaner so the 5 turns as opposed to 8 doesn't hurt him much, you rarely stay in for the full duration anyway.

    Do Nothing
    I'm cool with this one, too. As i've stated I dont find sand broken, hippowdon maybe slightly so because of what he does with SR/spinning in the tier, but otherwise both are ok in the tier for me.

    but yeah, if something had to be banned I'd say sand stream/hippo

    Also, as for counters to sand, i'd say ghost types tend to be fairly effective, stoutland has crunch to hit them but most of the time it will find itself want to use it's other attacks instead, and most ghost types can take a crunch even if they predict wrong then go to a teammate which doesnt mind crunch. Ghost types aside, armaldo is a nice one, so are some other rock types.
     
    [OG] Swanna Lady and DAZZY VANCE like this.
  15. Halsey

    Halsey Wildstar

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Messages:
    3,204
    Likes Received:
    698
    PO Trainer Name:
    Kat
    Ban Stoutland

    It's the only reason why Sand is considered broken. Hippo itself is perfectly beatable and Sand damage + SDef Boost for rock mons isn't an issue, so I don't see why ban either Hippo or Sand Stream.

    The only two real SS abusers are Stoutland and Sandslash. The latter is slower than pretty much all scarfers and it doesn't hit particularly hard even if it gets a +2 boost, which it needs to be a threat. CB Stoutland is weaker than +2 Sandslash (obviously), but it outspeeds anything slower than Scarf Virizion with an Adamant nature and doesn't require any setup to hit pretty damn hard, 2HKOing most physical walls not called Hippo (Assuming 252 HP / 252 def) and OHKOing 95% of the offensive mons. There are only a handful Pokemon capable of switching into Return without risk and Stoutlant threatens all of them with its coverage moves (Play Rough for Tomb, Crunch for Ghosts / Bronzong and Superpower for Rock / Steel). Predicting is a problem, but unless your opp is running Pursuit Spiritomb, you probably won't risk much by just using Return since it hits mons that resist it decently hard [252+ Atk Choice Band Stoutland Return vs. 252 HP / 0 Def Bronzong: 107-126 (31.6 - 37.2%) -- 87.9% chance to 3HKO].
     
    Ortheore likes this.
  16. [OG] Swanna Lady

    [OG] Swanna Lady Y.......Yo......You.....YOU'RE FAT!

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    46
    PO Trainer Name:
    [OG] Swanna lady
    The problem I have with banning stoutland is that there are a lot more viable sets it can run including the CB scrappy (btw Scrappy is the name of my dog...odd) set. This takes away a whole pokemon which in the first place isn't broken without sand. Ideally there could be a complex ban of Stoutland and Sand Rush (As Sandlash isn't broken even with sand) or a complex ban of Sand Stream and Sand Rush. This would get rid of the broken Stoutland set while letting the other sets still be used.
     
  17. Isa

    Isa Well-Known Tauros

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    PO Trainer Name:
    Isa
    Blaziken isn't broken without Speed Boost, but we're not having a complex ban of Blaziken+Speed Boost just because of that.

    The only reason to ban Sand Rush, as I see it, is if there were a plethora of strong abusers, with at least one being a very significant threat to the point of making it almost impossible to prepare for defensively. As it stands, that's not the case - there's only one very strong abuser, Stoutland, and only one other abuser. If Stoutland was banned, Sand Rush Sandslash could still exist without any issues in the tier (nobody is arguing that Sandslash is broken with sand support, right??)

    With Sandslash currently at 2.71% usage and the same almost to the decimal in September, I don't see any reason to make a blanket ban on Sand Rush or Sand Stream. To keep consistency, either ban Stoutland or Hippowdon or nothing at all. Banning an ability wouldn't be consistent with a previously set policy in my mind - it'd be an artificial way to keep one specific Pokémon in the tier. We don't ban Speed Boost or Multiscale in OU to get Blaziken or Lugia in the tier (Lugia would still be broken but you get the point), we ban the broken Pokémon.

    This is me speaking from a pure policy standpoint, I have absolutely zero experience in NU.
     
    Ortheore and Purpleseamonkey like this.
  18. Finchinator

    Finchinator IT’S FINK DUMBASS

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2012
    Messages:
    4,309
    Likes Received:
    2,287
    PO Trainer Name:
    Finchinator / Finch
    First off, your suggestion that Stoutland has other viable sets is arguably incorrect. Nobody is using CB Scrappy Stoutland or any non-Rush Stoutland and nobody will; it's mostly obsoleted on the offensive end by pokemon like Zangoose and Cinccino (that's just listing other normal pokemon, too, as other CB pokemon are plain better like Sawk) while the defensive presence Stoutland brings isn't anything extraordinary despite it being bulkier than Zangoose and Cinccino. It's true that there is a limited niche that CB Scrappy Stoutland has, but I could never see it being worthwhile to run over the alternatives.
    (edit: Despite A_17's RMT and some peoples' opinions, I just think non Rush stout is shit. feel free to disagree tho)

    Regardless of all of this, your proposal of a combo ban is adding unnecessary complexities to the situation, in my opinion. Banning Stoutland + Sand Rush creates a precedent that we can ban a pokemon+ability combination instead of the pokemon (or ability) as a whole (see: Isa's Blaziken argument). Banning Sand Stream + Sand Rush would be a similar approach to the one that was taken in early BW OU with Rain + Swift Swim being banned (highly controversial). Something like this isn't necessary when there is only one potent abuser, in Stoutland, while an environment like BW OU had a plethora of Swift Swim abusers and a permanent Drizzle. So yea, no reason for a complex ban or straying from the options listed in the OP.

    As I previously stated, I would be content with a Stoutland ban or Banning Sand Rush. The former especially stands out to me as an appropriate line of action now as Sandslash is nowhere near broken, Stoutland's presence in the tier won't be missed, and this is a full solution to the problem that current Sand+Rush teams present NU. I'm still supportive of both of these, though.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2014
  19. Afro Smash

    Afro Smash Mfw I'm living the Australian dream

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    854
    PO Trainer Name:
    Afro Smash
    Whilst yes in other tiers you wouldn't see the banning of an ability to allow a pokemon to stay, the difference with NU is that with being the lowest tier, what we ban has no effect on other tiers. The only other thing it effects will be Sandslash, which obviously is nowhere near as potent and definitely not worth building around, and in my opinion is a lot less useful than Intimidate/Scrappy Stoutland.

    I'm not really concerned with consistency as much as keeping the most I can in the tier, though I can see why higher ups might be.
     
    [OG] Swanna Lady likes this.
  20. Trakyan

    Trakyan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    11
    Finch I have to disagree with you when you say scrappy stoutland sucks. It's perfectly viable in its own right.
    Scrappy retaliate with CB is good, i must say, and with some decent investent stoutland outspeeds the same pokemon as zangoose and cincino (as far as i can see most NU pokemon lie at 70 or below base speed, and i guess 100 and above base speed) so zangoose's advanage in speed is neglible as far as i'm concerned, while stouland has better offenses than cincino and better bulk than both. (honestly i'd say he has better coverage than cincino, too)

    In any case i'm not going to argue it more than that. My point is banning stoutland just for sand rush is pointless and unecessary.
    I'd still support a hippowdon ban, though not for sand's brokenness. In terms of which ban seems most logical to handicap sand it would be ban hippowdon or ban sand stream+sand rush.

    Though, honestly, I say do nothing.
     
    [OG] Swanna Lady likes this.
  21. East's Mascot

    East's Mascot The Tyrant

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    375
    There is very little to no reason to use Scrappy Stoutland when you can use Scrappy Kangaskhan. Early xy, people used Scrappy Stoutland only because Kanga hadn't dropped yet.

    My thoughts:
    Hippo: Not the problem
    Sand: I'm fine with banning sand stream as that also gets rid of gimmicky sand veil users, cough EMV33 cough. Sand is what makes Stoutland broken, otherwise it's just a wall breaker that's generally outclassed.
    Stoutland: Without sand support, it's not really that big a threat. If you want to avoid banning abilities, sure I guess. But, as Afro said, that's not a problem in Nu since we won't be disrupting other tiers.
    Sand Rush: No one is really complaining about Sand Rush Sandslash, and manual sand teams wouldn't be problem either. It would certainly stop Stoutland being broken as well but I think banning sand is the better option.

    I really don't see a reason to keep Sand Stream as that is what I believe the culprit is. It won't affect anything else so I say ban Sand Stream.
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014
    Proof and [OG] Swanna Lady like this.
  22. Cirno

    Cirno Romantic

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    356
    PO Trainer Name:
    Alice
    Time to sound dumb. This is all about the banning Sand Rush v Stoutland fiasco.

    Since a lot of people realise that the most broken component of sand is Stoutland, why not ban Stoutland? Removing Sand Rush to weaken two Pokémon, and weakening Sand Offense more than it needs to be, for the sake of keeping one Pokémon in the tier, when banning Stoutland just removes one Pokémon, seems to be stretching it. Removing Stoutland, a whole Pokémon, from the tier won't lead to the demise of, or taking so much away from, the tier as has been claimed, either.

    So, let's talk about the NU metagame, since most people have only talked about the tier. The one thing keeping Sandslash prominent in the meta, is Sand Rush. By removing Sand Rush, you're essentially removing pretty much most of its viability, with other Pokémon outclassing it. Sandslash is, indirectly, removed from the metagame, and Stoutland is weakened to "not broken" status by losing a set. By removing Stoutland, you've removed a broken Pokémon and everything else is kept as viable as possible.

    So, tell me how banning Sand Rush does the least damage. Or why keeping Stoutland in the tier is so important. If anything, a complex ban of Stoutland with the ability Sand Rush would be the "best" and do the least damage, but I know we don't do those.

    As for the "there are no tiers below NU" argument. No suspect has ever concerned the effect it has on lower tiers, as if there were no lower tiers. So the fact that there are no tiers below NU doesn't matter in the slightest, and the argument holds no ground.

    Ban Stoutland
     
    Virizion, Weavile, Ortheore and 2 others like this.
  23. [OG] Swanna Lady

    [OG] Swanna Lady Y.......Yo......You.....YOU'RE FAT!

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    46
    PO Trainer Name:
    [OG] Swanna lady
    By banning Sand Rush you take away 1 set but if you ban Stoutland you take away a whole pokemon which can run other sets. It would be unfair to ban Stoutland because of just one set. CB Scrappy Stoutland works incredibly well on most teams and is never outclassed as Zangoose and Cinccino have worse coverage overall and have much less bulk.

    Now to what Cirno has said. Why is this weakening sand offense more than it needs to? It makes perfect sense as the extra speed + CB is what is making sand broken in the first place. Does sand offense really need to be a thing though? It isn't necessary and some pokemon in the tier still have sand force, therefore it isn't weakening Sand Offense too much. I know it makes Sandslash less prominent in the tier but Sandslash has never really been strong in the tier anyway. Taking away Sand Rush takes away 2 sets (Stoutland and Sandslash) but there are more sets both can run. If you take away Stoutland you are effectively banning a plethora of fine viable sets.
     
  24. Afro Smash

    Afro Smash Mfw I'm living the Australian dream

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    854
    PO Trainer Name:
    Afro Smash
    I'm not claiming removing Stoutland as a whole will be removing a lot from the tier, but it will be taking more away from the tier than banning Sand Rush will.

    Removing Sand Rush will barely affect Sandslash. First of all by far the most common sets for Sandslash are Defensive Spinner variants, which will obviously be unaffected by the ban of Sand Rush. The better Sand Offense teams are built around clearing holes for Stoutland, and rarely have room for Sandslash anyway, since it offers 0 defensive synergy with Hippowdon already being a staple. So far from becoming unviable, Sandslash will lose 1 rare, mediocre set, and continue fulfil its role as a bulky spinner.

    Sand offense will cease to exist whether we ban Stoutland or Sand Rush, The only argument left is to what people percieve to be of more worth. (And the consistency thing, but as I said I won't concern myself with this unless forced upon me by higher ups).
     
    Proof likes this.
  25. Halsey

    Halsey Wildstar

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Messages:
    3,204
    Likes Received:
    698
    PO Trainer Name:
    Kat
    Sand Rush-less Stoutland is less than mediocre, 99% of the times you are better off running Kanga (Unless you dislike better speed, priority, doing more damage and Low Kick instead of Superpower). That's talking about Scrappy, the Intimidate set provides absolutely nothing defensively.

    Also I have used Sand Rush Sandslash in both NU and LU and in my opinion calling it mediocre is wrong. Sure it isn't as good as Stoutland, but it still is a base 100 attack mon capable of reaching 458 speed while running Adamant, additionally it has SD an a great offensive movepool ( EQ, Rock Slide / Stone Edge, Knock Off, X-Scissor and Aerial Ace [assuming you really want to OHKO Virizion). Lastly, it hands down is the best spinner you can run in Sand. The fact it doesn't has good synergy with Hippowdon means is hardly important, if that was such a big factor Kabutops would be the shittiest Rain Abuser.

    I fail to see how the tier loses more by banning the only blatantly broken Pokemon in Sand. Comparatively, Stoutland without Sand Rush is significantly shittier than Sand Rush Sandslash, this is not even arguable.

    PS: I really don't understand how nerfing two Pokemon is better than banning one Pokemon.
     
  26. Afro Smash

    Afro Smash Mfw I'm living the Australian dream

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    854
    PO Trainer Name:
    Afro Smash
    There's a fair few things that set Stoutland aside from Kangaskhan. First off 110 Atk vs 95 Atk, although Kanga can do more dmg with Double Edge its minimally more and it has to sacrifice HP to do so, and then all of Stoutlands non STABs are stronger. Intimidate isn't intended to turn it in to a defensive behemoth or anything, just allow it to come in on more of the tier and more safely revenge kill things, which it does. Pursuit allows Stout to trap, Superpower > Low Kick outside of Ubers (Although Kanga runs EQ anyway) though I would say Superpower is more useful as combined with the better Atk it can deal significantly more dmg to thing like Steelix/Zong etc. and finally Crunch and Play Rough mean its free to not run Scrappy and still fully able to handle Ghosts. More than enough to carve itself a niche I'd argue.

    As for Sand Rush Slash, maybe calling it mediocre was unfair but, the amount of resources you have to invest to make it worthwhile far outweighs what it can achieve imo. I've already stated it but, sharing typing with Hippowdon means it offers no Defensive synergy, then you have to run Smooth Rock on Hippo to ensure Slash can ever actually use the turns, since when ur opp switches out to their Ground type counter on Hippo youre gonna have waste a bunch pivoting to bring Slash in safely; and using Smooth Rock means sacrificing Leftovers. Then whilst it is decently strong it requires the turn to SD to break through Physical Walls, which the opponent can use to switch to a Counter, something Stoutland doesn't have to worry about since it has the power to break without set up. Offensive teams are more threatened but then they usually run a Scarfer which can outspeed Slash even in Sand, and if it goes Jolly then its not as powerful, obviously. Garb Sp Def can limit set up and switch in opportunities too.

    Offensive Sand Rush is far less common right now than Defensive Spinner sets, when Stoutland is still around and Sand Teams are worth building, after Sand is nerfed there'll be even less reason to build Sand teams and its use will dwindle further (might be a short influx immediately after if ppl try to find a replacement, but I very much doubt that will last long). Whereas for Stoutland Scrappy is actually the currently most used ability, not trying to apply too much Dr Doom logic here but people are obviously finding enough success with it to justify continued use of it.

    I fail to see how the tier loses more by banning a broken set and a set that will never be used. Sandslash with Sand Rush is still significantly shittier than Stoutland without it, this is not even arguable.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2014
    Daybreak, [OG] Swanna Lady and Proof like this.
  27. Trakyan

    Trakyan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    11
    There is plenty of reasons to run stoutland over kanga as a scrapper user, the main one would be the difference in attack stats however stoutland has moves such as super power, iron head etc which let it bypass steel and rock types far more easily

    Kanga does not hit harder, saddly. Kanga has base 95 attack, stoutland has 110 which is a hefty 15 base point advantage. Also, drain punch not low kick is the more common move on kanga, and super power is more consistent than low kick. The speed difference is 10 base points, and there is nothing than 90 base speed outspeeds that 80 doesn't, except speed tying with other base 90s. (i guess there is rotom, but those are either defensive and dont run max speed, or scarfed so both cant outspeed)

    Also, stoutland is a CB user. Kanga using CB is stupid, since it has a plethora of wonderful moves like suckerpunch, fake out etc which don't work with CB.


    The fact you consider sandslash to be only capable or best off running sand rush doesn't change the fact that most sandslash sets being run are the bulky spinner ones, outside of sand for that matter. I can't for the life of me remember the last time i saw offensive sand rush sandslash, while i recall seeing several spinner versions. I'm sure the usage stats will back this up. As such, banning sand rush wont hurt sandslash so much, hell, consider it will nerf sand to some degree, it make even buff its usage (as there is one less reason to run hippowdon, so sandslash's perks with spinning/knock off become more appealing). Also, kabutops synergizes considerably better with politoed, for starters it has a second typing and attacks from the opposite end of the spectrum. Hippodown and sandslash stack types and sand already has issues with water/ice weaknesses.

    Stoutland without sand rush is viable in its own right even when compared to sand rush sandslash. It hits much harder off the bat with CB or w/e, has better coverage and better speed should sand happen to run out (since sandslash uses SD, it has notably fewer turns at its disposal). So the fact you call it 'not even arguable' does not mean its absolute.

    And as for your last comment, many people have already stated that sandslash is not really nerfed as badly as you say by losing sand rush, and i doubt it will see any noticable rise in usage if stoutland is banned. While stoutland when banned will remove any possibility of using its other viable set (CB scrappy). Banning sand rush lets stoutland stay, but brings it down to what people see as a more acceptable threat level.

    What does losing sand rush mean for sandslash? Almost nothing. Considering the majority of sets don't even run it as an ability, absolutely nothing. The most common sand rush sandslash (that invests more than 4EVs in attack) only makes up 7.02% of all sandslash sets run. I'd like to point out that from looking at the usage stats most sand slash running sand rush aren't actually specialized for sand teams, they are just using it in case they face a sand team, in which case they might as well take sand rush. How can I tell?

    A few things. Either they dont invest in attack AND speed(even with sand rush, without invesment sandslash is still easily outsped), or they're running things such as stealth rock (why run stealth rock when you're running hippo?), or the set itself is purely support such as spin, toxic, knock off etc.

    I tallied all of the 'offensive' sand rush sandslash in the usage stats for this month and that accounted to 51.32%, that is including sets like scarfed sandslash, scope lense sandslash and all of those ridiculous sets. This includes some sandslash running little/no speed which are more than likely just running attack to hit hard in general, not as sand rush abusers. In any case, if you take a look at the top used sandslash sets, you'll find they either dont run sand rush to begin with or are obviously support sets based on their EVs/Moves.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2014
    [OG] Swanna Lady and Cameltoed like this.
  28. OUAzumarill

    OUAzumarill Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    45
    PO Trainer Name:
    Mr Snake
    I think it's clear that by far the most popular options are to ban rush, stream, or Stoutland, so should we have a vote on those?
     
  29. Trakyan

    Trakyan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ik this is sorta double posting but this suspect is dead as hell...
     
  30. Weavile

    Weavile Phoenix

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,703
    Likes Received:
    890
    It's finally ogre.

    We've come to the decision that sand is, in fact, a problem for the metagame. The reasons for this are well explained in various posts across the thread and potential suspects threads.
    The action we've decided to take is a ban on the ability Sand Rush.
    While Sand would be effectively neutralised by a ban on either Stoutland or Sand Stream we feel that the least is taken away from the metagame by a ban on Rush. While banning stream leaves sand as a team feature completely unusable where it otherwise may provide some benefits to a team, and banning Stoutland leaves us without the option of Scrappy Stoutland, but with the option of Sand Rush Sandslash and Sand Teams in general. Banning Rush leaves us with the option of Scrappy Soutland and Sand Teams (without Rush). We believe Rush is preferable to Stoutland as mono-Sand Rush teams with only Sandslash are not only not overpowering, they are simply ineffective in the metagame.
     
    Fuzzysqurl, Daybreak and Afro Smash like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.