Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]

[Skyuchi]

Maybe I should have used a different example. I forgot how much people like to plug their ears and shut their eyes when Lando-T gets mentioned as ever being potentially problematic.

(inb4 three pages of discussion on Lando-T instead of Tera because neither side of the Lando debate is socially adjusted enough to know when to not start an argument)

You probably should have, because you said Lando would be OP with Tera, then cited things Lando has already basically done.
Again even if I were pro-ban, just not at all a strong point to make. Hell I know National Dex is an unofficial metagame, but you can get a glimpse at Home by looking there. Landorus doesn't seem to be going Ice or Flying there - or even using tera at all.

 

[Karxrida]

There are times, especially at a higher level, where games, entire matches where players struggled and fought turn by turn, where it comes down to a literal guess.

That is the definition of uncompetitive.

I am so fucking tired of this argument because people parrot this phrase as if they know what it actually means. There are so many better and legitimate anti-Tera arguments to be made (tempo swing, lets Pokémon bypass their checks and counters) instead of spewing bullshit because nobody knows how to read a dictionary. Plus there are so many competitive games other than Pokémon where matches literally end on guesses because you can never truly eliminate that uncertainty, and even then it's probably a hedged bet.

Also, have you played Yu-Gi-Oh? It has these things called Hand Traps that you opponent can just drop whenever they want to stop your plays and you have little to no way of knowing if they have one. So you have to guess if they have one and that makes the game, unplayable, right? Wrong, because you can bait the Hand Trap to get the play you actually want off. Always assume they have their Hand Trap at any given time (unless their hand is empty). Bait the negate.

Denial of information isn't fucking uncompetitive.

 

[Smashburn]

Despite the general, frankly, BS arguments that have been surrounding ban sentiments, I still side with the ban sentiments myself. Although, I'd like to think it's a little more reserved since we definitely deserve a sterile evironment to test Terastalization in before we outright ban it. It does admittedly have some merits and I respect Terastalization enough to the point that I would like to see it preserved until we reach a relatively balanced point to make a decision. But, I will say that I'm also not against just outright banning it now despite how asinine that feels to some degree, just as keeping it until the end of the generation does. I'd also like to wring around the fact again that our only two realistic choices for Terastalization come down to whether Terastalization should be banned, or if it should not be banned. I cannot stress enough the fact that cartridge limitations define how we can negotiate generational gimmicks like Terastalization, and most if not all of the options we have for restricting it don't follow those guidelines. Going against that principle fundamentally tears away at decades of tiering experience and general reasonability we've accrued. I at the very least find it extremely unwise to think we can restrict Terastalization in a meaningful way in the tier's most mainstream tiers and get away with it without seriously ruining the way we do tiering. There is no spectrum of answers to choose from in reality, regardless of what tiering administration says-- it is an illusion of choice.

Aside from that, I just wanted to highlight the fact that the main bits of the argument for the pro-ban sentiment (at least for myself) are the fact that type matchups become uncertain, checks become more limited due to the power of x2 STAB, and the fact that several threats require type-and-coverage overlap to deal with them. The ladder of the three is sort of unprecedented, since never before did we have the option to directly change the types of our pokemon. However varied that is, I think those factors contribute to a lot of provable concerns that need addressed before we can go on much further.

 

[zantaRay]

I hate seeing this word all over pro-ban posts, along with 50/50. For a refresher on what Uncompetitive means, check out my previous posts along with Adviata’s post.
Now, here’s the issue with the “every turn is a 50/50” argument. On paper, this argument is very strong and comparative to Sucker Punch, but in practice, it’s only gonna come up once or twice per game. Why? Once a mon has used Tera, it can’t un-Tera. If a mon doesn't Tera in front of a mon that threatens it, it’s more of a risk for the Tera user than the attacker. For the attacker, any damage is good damage. For the Tera user, it’s a huge risk. 50/50 is also just wrong in the fact that it’s one Tera per game, no Tera-backs. If you want to play the 50/50 when you have the potential to just win, you do you, but no self-respecting player is going to do that. Classic Roaring Moon vs Breloom example: if the Roaring Moon is Tera Flying, you Tera it. If it’s Tera Steel, why would you even. Breloom wants to use Bullet Seed or Spore no matter what here. Mach Punch only if you are in a position where you lose immediately to Tera Flying Moon, you hedge your bets and click Mach Punch.



Tera also has a HUGE opportunity cost that most pro-ban advocates just gloss over since it doesn’t support their argument: you change your type. Now for all the people who are screaming at their computer or phone or whatever saying O CTEAMER YOU CAN CHANGE COUNTERS ON DEMAND ITS SO BROKEN I do ask, when do you want to use it? Tera Water Annihilape still takes damage from Moonblast on Iron Valiant and is now melted by Breloom, but it can more easily take attacks?

The other issue is the fact that when Tera is used, the guesswork stops, so realistically the guessing will happen maybe once or twice per game.

50/50 and uncompetitive are two different things. If they were the same thing, we would have a lot more things changed, like Choice items would be banned or Team Sheets would be required.

Tera isn’t an instant win button and requires thought in both the builder and in the battle to use, and how alien the mechanic is can dissuade some people. I personally so far have only played 1 game total where I feel as if I lost because solely of Tera, and it wasn’t even my opponents Tera. I turned my Iron Valiant into a Dark type to beat Gholdengo, but didn’t account for the opposing Breloom now being a huge threat into my team. Is that Tera, or was that my decision? The post-HOME era isn’t here yet, and shouldn’t be used as a basis for a ban, nor do I think that it will come with more than 1 pokemon broken by Tera specifically.

Finally, could we please stop the personal attacks? It’s getting really annoying and isn’t contributing to the discussion at all. You know who you are.

All in all this isn’t my favorite post, but I hope it addresses the problems at hand. I will likely do a follow-up post adressing HOME in more detail despite the fact that it doesn’t matter at the current moment.

Why does it matter if it only happens once, if that one instance decides the game? Which it usually does.

 

[Dusk Mage Necrozma]

Why does it matter if it only happens once, if that one instance decides the game? Which it usually does.

Unless it’s an already terrifying Pokemon like Roaring Moon or Annihilape, not really. Most of the time you just lose 1 Pokemon to a surprise Tera. Which is fine and healthy.

 

[jdcomix]

I'm not in favor of banning the mechanic but I'm willing to listen to what pro-ban users have to say to back up their side. But all I've seen over the last few pages are weak arguments about 50/50s and uncompetitiveness, theorymonning, and borderline personal attacks towards people against a ban. I usually just lurk through these threads because I don't have the energy to argue but it's really frustrating for people on the fence trying to make up their mind when people in this thread (you know who you are) refuse to acknowledge the other side's valid reasons as to why tera should stay in some capacity. It just leaves a bad impression on anyone trying to come to a decision on whether to vote yes or no when it gets suspected

 

[zantaRay]

I mean idk how I'm supposed to have a meaningful discussion with people who's main arguments are "I like it"/"It's fun", both subjective statements. And who's response to people trying to illustrate why it's problematic is either git gud or I don't think it's a problem. Fundamentally there's no recourse there. I'm definitely going to stop bothering posting because there's no point. It's not that people who want a ban aren't listening to anti ban arguments. It's that there's no actual argument for keeping it other than subjective opinion. And that's fine. If you like it that's valid, and the onus of proving it should be banned is on the people who do want it banned, but it feels like everyone who does actually post in here already has their mind made up. You act like only pro ban people are being rude and or ignoring what their opponents are saying, but both sides are doing it.

 

[jdcomix]

I mean idk how I'm supposed to have a meaningful discussion with people who's main arguments are "I like it"/"It's fun", both subjective statements. And who's response to people trying to illustrate why it's problematic is either git gud or I don't think it's a problem. Fundamentally there's no recourse there. I'm definitely going to stop bothering posting because there's no point. It's not that people who want a ban aren't listening to anti ban arguments. It's that there's no actual argument for keeping it other than subjective opinion. And that's fine. If you like it that's valid, and the onus of proving it should be banned is on the people who do want it banned, but it feels like everyone who does actually post in here already has their mind made up. You act like only pro ban people are being rude and or ignoring what their opponents are saying, but both sides are doing it.

Sorry if it came off that way because I've seen similar things from anti ban people but I'm just going off of what I've seen recently

 

[tr8orsrequiem]

The debate on having two separate ladders is something I'd like to bring up. Generally, I find the best argument for having a separate ladder is to see the differences between the metagame with and without whatever is being suspected. Unfortunately, as most people have brought up, one of these ladders ends up being dead while the other doesn't, leading to data that isn't particularly useful, because you're just splitting the community. However, I think there is use and potential in seeing the differences between a metagame with Tera and without Tera.

There's a simple solution- the council sets a duration of time in which Tera is banned on the normal ladder to see if the meta is healthier or remains relatively unchanged. As an example, the council could decide, "alright, on January 1st, we're test banning Tera for one month. After that, we'll have the suspect test."

Perhaps this is a bad idea, or it's already been mentioned- sorry if that's the case. I noticed I hadn't seen anyone mentioning this kind of solution to the multi-ladder issue, but maybe people have and I've just missed it. Figured I'd mention it just in case.

 

[charlieX7]

And who's response to people trying to illustrate why it's problematic is either git gud I don't think it's a problem. Fundamentally there's no recourse there. It's that there's no actual argument for keeping it other than subjective opinion.

the argument is about whether it's broken or not. i don't think a single person here has said "I don't think it's a problem" without reasoning; only one person has said (verbatim) git gud, and that wasn't even close to the whole argument. reductivism helps no one here.

 

[Wolf-X]

The debate on having two separate ladders is something I'd like to bring up. Generally, I find the best argument for having a separate ladder is to see the differences between the metagame with and without whatever is being suspected. Unfortunately, as most people have brought up, one of these ladders ends up being dead while the other doesn't, leading to data that isn't particularly useful, because you're just splitting the community. However, I think there is use and potential in seeing the differences between a metagame with Tera and without Tera.

There's a simple solution- the council sets a duration of time in which Tera is banned on the normal ladder to see if the meta is healthier or remains relatively unchanged. As an example, the council could decide, "alright, on January 1st, we're test banning Tera for one month. After that, we'll have the suspect test."

Perhaps this is a bad idea, or it's already been mentioned- sorry if that's the case. I noticed I hadn't seen anyone mentioning this kind of solution to the multi-ladder issue, but maybe people have and I've just missed it. Figured I'd mention it just in case.

Its very useful if a ladder dies when faced with a similar one then we have a winner

What people don’t get when we say that is that the Pokemon will be Band, Specs throughout the whole game but they can Tera and flip the switch at anytime. It takes up a moveslot/item slot whereas Terastilizing doesn’t (unless you count Tera Blast). The opportunity cost of equipping a Choice Scarf is not the same as changing your type.

Changing types also has costs, having new weaknesses more often than not can be detrimental to many mons. Normal Dragonite, Steel Scizor, Fire ChiYu, Flying Moon... all lose many resistances for a bit more dmg... Against some enemies Terastilizing will actually do more harm than good, Tusks can barely touch Dragonite until he terastilizes into normal for example.

Tera isnt some god send autowin button.

 

[Lioninjawarloc]

I am so fucking tired of this argument because people parrot this phrase as if they know what it actually means. There are so many better and legitimate anti-Tera arguments to be made (tempo swing, lets Pokémon bypass their checks and counters) instead of spewing bullshit because nobody knows how to read a dictionary. Plus there are so many competitive games other than Pokémon where matches literally end on guesses because you can never truly eliminate that uncertainty, and even then it's probably a hedged bet.

Also, have you played Yu-Gi-Oh? It has these things called Hand Traps that you opponent can just drop whenever they want to stop your plays and you have little to no way of knowing if they have one. So you have to guess if they have one and that makes the game, unplayable, right? Wrong, because you can bait the Hand Trap to get the play you actually want off. Always assume they have their Hand Trap at any given time (unless their hand is empty). Bait the negate.

Denial of information isn't fucking uncompetitive.

also because in yugioh, like in pokemon, the meta will settle and there are going to be certain options that are the best for what the meta is. Mons terratypes will be for the most part dedicated to the meta and therefore predictable. Sure someone will do something random and might lose you the game, but thats bo1 youll lose stuff to random shit youll win stuff to random shit

 

[CTNC]

IIRC, testing ladders were a thing that used to happen but it split the player base too much, so I don't expect there to be a test ladder and there probably shouldn't be for the sake of avoiding the problems having two ladders has caused before. That said, I'm not 100% against a test ladder. I'm going to admit this a a weak argument for two ladders, but if Terastal is banned, but I can see "Terastal OU" Meta existing in the Other Metagames and already having a test ladder to turn into a side thing would save the time of having to make it a side thing.

I haven't played any Gen 9 yet, so I'm not going to say anything on if Terastal should be banned or not. I just wanted to share thoughts about why there (probably) won't be a test ladder and what could happen if Terastal gets banned.

 

[Icalasari]

Also, have you played Yu-Gi-Oh? It has these things called Hand Traps that you opponent can just drop whenever they want to stop your plays and you have little to no way of knowing if they have one. So you have to guess if they have one and that makes the game, unplayable, right? Wrong, because you can bait the Hand Trap to get the play you actually want off. Always assume they have their Hand Trap at any given time (unless their hand is empty). Bait the negate.

Denial of information isn't fucking uncompetitive.

Overall, I find Smogon to be one of the few competitive places that seems to have an issue with stuff that involves mind games and baiting the opponent into using their tools at a bad time. Maybe I've not seen enough competitive communities, but...

I saw Annihilape earlier as an example. "It can change to water to deal with Skeledirge". Alright, so what I'd do is anticipate this and use Skeledirge as a pivot. I'd use it to try to bait out the tera. Sometimes I may guess wrong, so I'd choose a switch that could handle the possibilities by being neutral to most of its options

I haven't commented for ages and was brought to finally make a comment because this honestly seems like mostly fear mongering against Tera. "But Choice is active for the full fight!" except like Tera, you still choose when to bring out the Pokemon, what move to use at the time, etc. You can make a bad call against choice items and lose just like with Tera, it's still a mind game

A test ban for a month to get sterile results seems like the best solution because at least you have results you can't argue with

Back to hibernation now

EDIT: Quick Note, I don't know if anybody mentioned terastallizing megas/z crystal/gigantamax, but could just... Make it not be allowed to stack. Pokemon has a Mega Stone or Z Crystal? Can't Tera. Pokemon is Tera'd? Can't Giganta. Pokemon is Giganta'd? Can't Tera

 

[kosecant]

EDIT: Quick Note, I don't know if anybody mentioned terastallizing megas/z crystal/gigantamax, but could just... Make it not be allowed to stack. Pokemon has a Mega Stone or Z Crystal? Can't Tera. Pokemon is Tera'd? Can't Giganta. Pokemon is Giganta'd? Can't Tera

IIRC that’s how it worked in natdex before dynamax got banned

 

[Moyashi]

Also, have you played Yu-Gi-Oh? It has these things called Hand Traps that you opponent can just drop whenever they want to stop your plays and you have little to no way of knowing if they have one. So you have to guess if they have one and that makes the game, unplayable, right? Wrong, because you can bait the Hand Trap to get the play you actually want off. Always assume they have their Hand Trap at any given time (unless their hand is empty). Bait the negate.

Yugioh is reaaally not the best game to reference here given how much of a shitshow that game can be.

Mons terratypes will be for the most part dedicated to the meta and therefore predictable.

Why are pro tera people so confident this will be the case? Legitimate question here.

Overall, I find Smogon to be one of the few competitive places that seems to have an issue with stuff that involves mind games and baiting the opponent into using their tools at a bad time. Maybe I've not seen enough competitive communities, but...

No one has issues with mind games. Let's not strawman yes?

 

[roboscout]

Continuing

I am so fucking tired of this argument because people parrot this phrase as if they know what it actually means. There are so many better and legitimate anti-Tera arguments to be made (tempo swing, lets Pokémon bypass their checks and counters) instead of spewing bullshit because nobody knows how to read a dictionary. Plus there are so many competitive games other than Pokémon where matches literally end on guesses because you can never truly eliminate that uncertainty, and even then it's probably a hedged bet.

Also, have you played Yu-Gi-Oh? It has these things called Hand Traps that you opponent can just drop whenever they want to stop your plays and you have little to no way of knowing if they have one. So you have to guess if they have one and that makes the game, unplayable, right? Wrong, because you can bait the Hand Trap to get the play you actually want off. Always assume they have their Hand Trap at any given time (unless their hand is empty). Bait the negate.

Denial of information isn't fucking uncompetitive.

For another example of a game mechanic from another competitive game that is somewhat analogous to tera. See burst from many modern fighting games. It's a universal mechanic that you get once per round that can be activated while you are being hit, and if your opponent is hit by it, will definitely break their combo and can even put them in a very bad spot depending on the current situation. However burst can be baited and predicted by opponents, and some people design their combos around being burst safe. The mindgames and 1/round "get out of jail free card" are overall a well loved mechanic of these games, and something that people really enjoy. While obviously burst is not a 1 to 1 analogy of tera (they are different games after all), I do think it does touch on a lot of similar aspects that people call "uncompetitive" with tera that are some of the reasons people love it in games like guilty gear.

 

[KamenOH]

Why are pro tera people so confident this will be the case? Legitimate question here.

Not them, or anyone else but myself, but I personally believe that will be the case because its about what metas do: gravitate towards what's best. It isn't the strongest of pulls, since anti-meta and general shifts and quirks do happen, but its unreasonable to think that, generally, people won't do what will make them win more often. Yes, lower ladder will be plagued by off-meta shit, but that's practically a given, tera or otherwise. Higher ladder, where more serious play occurs (as you probably know ngl just sayin for those that don't), will more likely than not use the shit that works, over the shit that doesnt.

For something less general and more topical, Tera Flying Roaring Moon is all the rage, and for good reason. It, in the Booster Energy set, allows it to not only exploit Acrobatics, but also handle the ever present Fighting type moves. Yes, its now weak to electric and rock, but those types arent, afaik, too prominent. Alternatively, as many pokemon run many sets (LANDORUS YOU BITCH) RMoon could also run Tera Fairy, which, while also handling fighting, also lets it be weak to only Poison and Steel, while having rather good coverage in Fairy Tera Blast. Yes, a few will run other tera sets, but they are far and few between. As an offensive pokemon, RMoon is mostly settled, as was the aforementioned Landorus, until someone decided to invest what, 52 EVs elsewhere? Point it, the meta is, while not super firm, already well known, and not just on RMoon. Steel, Fairy, and Water are all good defensive options to tera into, and Skeledirge, among others, uses them well.

At first we didn't know what sets would be popular in almost every generation, but with time shit settles and we get into the more familiar zone we aren't currently in.

Now, should we give it time, is a question I'll let you answer, if you wish to do so.

 

[Qril]

Just hopping in here to voice my opinion that Tera is an excellent and fun mechanic. I hold no strong opinions about Tera Blast, but would be absolutely and positively gutted if the mechanic itself was modified to be different than on cartridge, restricted in some silly way, or banned. The only non-cartridge change I would be *maybe* alright with would be showing Tera types before the battle, but even that I feel is silly.

I really enjoy the mechanic as it exists right now, and will be incredibly disappointed if ultimately it gets changed in such a sense that it ruins how it exists at the moment. I'd probably just quit this generation right away and not play further, and just stick to cartridge VGC instead.

 

[alephgalactus]

I'd probably just quit this generation right away and not play further, and just stick to cartridge VGC instead.

Well, that’s what Tera is balanced (term used loosely) around, so it makes sense to play VGC if you’re a Tera enjoyer.

 

[BobKingOfSeagulls]

IMO I feel there's a lot of back and forth here where people have two differing opinions on the exact same facts - but assume that the only reason they disagree if because someone just doesn't understand the facts n numbers. Some people will look at the same set of values and go "I'm okay with this" and some will not. It's ultimately just frustrating everyone involved and turning the thing into attacks about someone's ability to understand something.

To a certain extent, there really isn't much use in deciding if tera is uncompetitive right now since we simply lack any decent data to back things up. With dynamax things seemed much clearer, but here there just has to be time to see how things turn up numbers wise before anything closer to an objective judgement can be made.

EDIT: Yeah to be clear im all for no action at least for now. We have years to decide to ban it, even if its only a few months at least we have more time for data.

 

[TSTSaurus]

Agreed entirely that these discussions sorely need data more than anything else. Having stats like the most common Tera types on top Mons would help immensely in allowing a meta to form and informing whether Tera is unpredictable, decides too many games, or otherwise pushes over the edge.

In the interim, though, my vote is solidly for No Action. We have years to play this game before next Gen comes out, let's not rush into kneecapping it and making "Gen 8 but with 10% more Mons".

 

[bygbyrd]

No Action

The tier has a broken mons problem, not a Tera problem. It’s a core mechanic to the generation that is more balanced that Dynamax. It adds another layer to team building and gameplay that is rewarding.

 

[faithviolet]

I can't see why people are voting in this thread, isn't this just for discussion? Anyway, here's what I wrote in the feedback survey.

* Pokemon as a game is unavoidably and inherently full of decisions made where a bad prediction will hurt you. Whether to attempt a double-switch, whether to set up, which move to choice-lock into, etc. These can feel like coinflips if the decision is insufficiently complex, and in the endgame can be provably 50/50. Terastallization probably features in many of these endgame decisions that feel like coinflips, but so do the mechanics mentioned above.
* Indeed, the fact that Tera types are invisible to opponents until used and that they are usable only once but by any member of the team are factors which *greatly reduce* the fraction of cases which are so simple that they qualify to be a true coinflip. In most of the cases where Tera plays a part in, optimal play (from one player, for simplicity's sake) would involve deep consideration of the entire game history and examination of the opponent's team to determine the likelihood that the opponent would build and play as they did given each possibly dangerous tera-type, and this is obviously not uncompetitive.
* Therefore, it's hard for me to take seriously any of the arguments which disclaim Tera on account of highly legible endgame pseudo-RPS situations: the mechanic not only is fair, but directly promotes skillful play.
* The stronger argument against Tera, in my view, is from the other direction. In the course of low-level play on ladder, I simply can't think every turn about each of the possible Tera plays that my opponent can make. Pokemon, especially singles, has a very limited number of options players can take each turn, and as a result the number of possible choices of your opponents that you need to think about. Tera expands these options a great deal, and at some point this becomes uncompetitive.

For example, if the metagame is one where
1. Terastallization is the most important factor in the outcome of a plurality of games
2. despite this, there are too many possibilities for your opponent's Tera choice to be worth considering
this metagame would be uncompetitive, and in this case I would be in favor of a full ban of the mechanic.

However, I don't believe this is the case, and even to the extent it approaches it, I believe it'll reduce over time as the metagame adapts to less offensive play, tera types adapt to become more optimal, and players themselves adapt to the necessity of considering tera types while they play. I also don't think Tera is broken in other ways. For example, it doesn't increase the rate of matchups between good teams being decided from the beginning (often the case for broken pokemon), nor has play become overly focused on the timing of Tera to the detriment of other facets of the game (one of Dynamax's many problems).

 

[zantaRay]

I can't wait for the people saying we need more data saying that we can't change it now because it's too integral once we do have data. Happens literally every time.