I think we have to allow them if the stats support it. After ST4 is the logical time to make the change IMO.
But once it is allowed in tournaments we need to look at what effect they have in that situation. I think there are differences between the style of play in tournaments than on the ladder, and if something is imballancing in either situation it needs to be fixed.
[edit] - having read some stuff misty was saying, I am gonna clear things up.
Ok, we really have 3 options.
1st, we could say "its all too much effort, what we have is fine" and leave it at that. Since this forum exists I assume we can disregard that option.
2nd, we could theorymon it all out, and decide on the best metagame for all concerned. The one thing we all seem to agree on is the fact that we will never agree on a tierlist, so I dont see how that could possibly work.
Or 3rd, we can test.
The problem with testing is I dont think we are gonna be able to come to objective conclusions based on statistics. Like, in ladderbot matches an extremely conservative style is preferable for high level players, because the overwhelming majority of people you are going to play are going to be considerably worse than you at pokemon. I think this sort of thing is what leads to most of my disagreements with Jumpman and obi about tiers and stuff, I always thought of them as people who tried very hard to minimise their chances of losing to poor players. Jump with his use of HP Rock TTar in advance, because against poor players he isnt often in the situation of relying on a flinch to win. Whereas I have always tried my best to do everything I can to maximise my odds of beating other top level players. I like inaccurate moves because often the surprise factor can give me an edge in a tight match.
I think my style of play is more geared toward tournaments, and isnt as effective on something like ladderbot.
So you need to look at both these styles and what effect it has in both cases. This is where a lot of the subjectivity seems to come from in my view.
I think the rankings on Shoddy need tweaking. I think the conservative estimate should be less conservative, and the k value should be lower. I dont know what the K value is set at now, but it definitely needs to be way way lower than it would be in chess. I mean, these are just my impressions, I dont know what the settings are exactly at the moment, but it is important we get this sort of thing right.
I think I have gotten sidetracked here. The point is, if we agree we want testing, then we have to go through with it properly.
To be honest, I have changed my mind. Here is what I think ought to happen. We need to come up with a testing strategy. I mean we are talking about allowing Lati@s and banning Garchomp. We simply cant do that much testing, it is ridiculous. So here is my new improved philosophy. We argue our way to what we feel are our best options, and test them all, and decide which is the best. and by options, I am talking about complete rulesets. We say we will test for this year, with 2 months per ruleset or something. We should try and come up with our best 5 rulesets, other than the one we have been testing for the last 8 months or so..
Have a nice day.