With the greatest of respect to you too, i posted in here to give my thoughts on the matter, sure i do not have the understanding of Smogon that you have, but are my points less valid just because i do not understand fully?
I've come up with ways to counter scald in different tiers of which surely would count towards not banning scald, since if people where so annoyed with it for being "OP" or "down to luck" then surely some of the options i've mentioned are viable alternatives to just trying to ban it because they cannot beat it?
Now i'm by no means saying i'm right in my argument, but the thread title is "Should Scald be banned for only smogon tier users", to which i've laid down my theories and opinions to defend why scald shouldn't be banned, it matters not if i actually play smogon or not (i'm just starting out). The fact is, i'm giving my opinion on counter measures to help those who perhaps missed such techniques, or overlooked them.
I fully respect that you probably think i shouldn't be in this debate due to the lack of understanding and by all means i accept that, but the best way to decide and debate is by having all other options and opinions explored right? If it was just down to "only smogon" players then surely the opinions might not be as varied?
If i've come about my posts like "why you ban it, you're all whining about it because you can't beat it" then i apologies as that is not my intention, i'm just here to give my thoughts on a matter i was quite intrigued to join in.
I hope i have not offended you in anyway nor angered you, i'm only here to give my own take. I supose what people do with my opinion is up to them but i at least hope that i might of made people think a little.
Again with respect, that was not what i said, you have taken my words out of context and mocked me. I merely suggested a few ways to perhaps remove the threat of Scald and OHKO's.
Well, since you do in fact seem open-minded, I'll explain here, though if you have questions about this reply I do request that you PM or VM them to me and I can answer you there, so as to not derail the thread.
Most metagames are cnetralized around top threats, which you can find a rough outline of
here (in OU's case). These threats rise up organically: people use what works best--and those who don't tend to, well, lose. Regardless of how you'd rank the top threats from best to worst, they're all strong and you have to prepare for them so they don't sweep you or wall your whole team. Crucially, there are A LOT of them, so being efficient with your 6 team slots and 24 move slots is critical to have success, especially since you also need to have your own strategy within that framework.
This is why, with all due respect, it actually does matter that you haven't played. It doesn't automatically invalidate your opinion (
that would be an obvious fallacy), but
generally, better and more experienced players make better arguments because the game is full of nuances and has a somewhat steep learning curve, at least competitively.
This is where Lapras, Marvel Scale, Facade, etc. come into play. Experienced players would never mention these things because they are not viable (and some lose to common Scald users). Lapras gets obliterated by most common Scald users (CM Mega Slowbro and any Keldeo are particularly brutal), Milotic is terrible and actually hates being burned, Facade has terrible coverage and requires being statused to be effective, Jellicent is a very niche Pokemon, there are very few even decent Guts abusers in OU (and those in UU don't prevent it from being a major problem), and so on. I appreciate the creativity--really, I do--but these are strategies that will help against Scald...and weaken you against
everything else. That's a huge problem.
Also, competitive tiering has grown more complex as the game has introduced more threats and more mechanics, but we still have the same 6 Pokemon and 24 moves to deal with them. Bans are not just about banning broken strategies, but can also encompass "uncompetitive" Pokemon, moves, abilities, etc. Usually, people use this term to attempt to argue that something luck-based should be removed. This is where Scald and OHKO moves come in. In these arguments, naming counter-plays (like Spite, for OHKO moves) might convince someone that something is not broken, but the bottom line is that OHKO moves were banned because they reduce games to 70/30 coin-flips. Understanding these elements of tiering is crucial to positively contributing to a discussion thread like this.
I don't mean to sound condescending, but since many of these threads go off the rails because people who don't know what they're talking about--and are often very willfully and proudly ignorant because of unbearably self-righteous and ill-informed hatred of our metagame and tiering--we do try to at least hold the standard at "do you play and care about this metagame?" Sorry if anything I said was off-putting, but I would probably refrain from commenting until you have some experience. If you want, I can link you to some high-level replays of "Scald in action" that would demonstrate how Scald functions at the highest levels of our metagame. We're not trying to be exclusive: we just want to have a good discussion.
I hope this covers everything. We also have a ton of resources to help you learn the game and become better informed; feel free to PM me if you want more information. :)
OHKO moves force you to run something with Sturdy, and uhhhh that's the only way to beat it? Skarmory for example (this is theorymon btw) would lose to MindReader + Sheer Cold Articuno, since Ice Beam will likely 2HKO if the ice bird runs 252 SpA EVs. And in Ubers it would absolutely lose to Kyogre lol. Donphan and other obscure pokemon with Sturdy (many of which are Ground-types) lose to Articuno as well. Swagger... if we have to run Numel to beat it (and even then it loses to mega gengar or any pokemon with offensive presence)... yeah, that speaks volumes about its toxic presence in the meta.
I like how I spent a good portion of my last post talking about how comparing Scald to OHKO/Swagger is a fool's errand so that it could be ignored.
I easily counter this with "true, but Scald has advantages that these moves don't like superior abusers, greater consistency, etc." but I just spent my last post doing that, and that point was conveniently ignored.
Scald's 80BP can be a bit dissappointing at times, even compared to Surf, because depending on the prior damage your opponent has taken, you can't always try to depend on its 30% chance to burn. For example Hippo at ~75% would be able to survive one +1 Scald, but not +1 Surf, and then retaliate with Whirlwind. (of course you need better checks to crocune such as mega manectric or phazers which aren't that susceptible to scald).
This isn't relevant to the discussion at all. Presenting an opportunity cost proves nothing.
It's also an invalid point, at least in the form you've presented it in. Scald's burn chance is way more valuable than Surf's extra power for every Water-type except Manaphy, depending on the team/set. I could also present an anecdote, only one where the extra power means nothing and Scald's burn chance matters a ton, but
it would be an exercise in illogic.
When you compare Scald to Hydro Pump, you can observe Scald's 51% chance to score a burn over two turns, compared to Hydro Pump's 64% chance of hitting twice in a row. While you should be using Scald if you want to play safe, sometimes (especially with Choice Keldeo) you really need to 2HKO something quick, before it can cause big trouble to your team. And when you run some calcs, you realize Hydro Pump can 2HKO said Pokemon while with Scald you need to hope for a burn. And if that burn happens on the 2nd turn, the opponent gets one more chance to smack your Keldeo for some good damage or even OHKO it before it goes. Idk about you but I'd take HPump's 64% chance to 2HKO said Pokemon here.
Shoot me.
No, really.
I don't really want to explain why these fallacies apply, but I can if you want........
Yes, I do agree Scald is a GREAT tool on long battles, especially v stall with your opponent's cleric gone, or on CM wars, since you will eventually burn your opponent and it will take 6% per turn factoring in lefties. However, such wars can be decided very well by a move with a 10% secondary effect, such as Flamethrower, while against non-Mega Sableye stall Toxic is arguably better due to its increasing damage output and its reliability, provided steels have been at least weakened before. Toxic absolutely ruins CM Slowbro, Mandibuzz, Cresselia, Porygon2, Latias, etc etc. I will concede that Scald is probably better against M-Sableye.
I like how, every time I make a point like "the variety in Scald users makes blanket checking them extremely difficult," it immediately gets railroaded into irrelevancy by "counter-points" like "CM Mega Slowbro has trouble with Toxic."
Please stay on-topic instead of talking about all of the stuff that
isn't interesting and often
doesn't matter: the minutiae of examples I use to demonstrate a point, even if the details you choose to nitpick don't actually apply to the context in which the point was made.
Please.