Finally, I just want to log the numbers (on the 1-5 scale) of the specific tiering target questions (i.e: when we list Pokemon we are focusing on) and provide some context as well!
- 3.79 / 5 from the general playerbase as a part of the September 20th survey
- 4.02 / 5 from the qualified playerbase as a part of the September 20th survey
Ogerpon-Hearthflame was quickbanned via 7-2 council vote on September 22nd as a result of this survey. You can see this
here
We have probable cause to believe this contributed to the first improvement in metagame competitiveness scores.
- 2.5 / 5 from the general playerbase as a part of the September 20th survey
- 2.79 / 5 from the qualified playerbase as as part of the September 20th survey
This was not enough support to quickban it despite there being enough council support, but we figured the community would catch-up to the metagame, which was evolving rapidly, within a matter of time. After the survey on September 22nd and the Ogerpon-Hearthflame ban on September 22nd, we did a tiering radar of everything discussion worthy on September 26th
here, which had Ursaluna-Bloodmoon at the forefront of discussion as it began to surge in popularity and people began to use the better sets on it. Finally, it was suspected on September 27th
here after support continued.
We could not justify quickbanning it with such low survey scores -- this would be even worse than something like the Volcarona situation, and we saw how that went. However, we felt strongly, so we pushed hard for the radar and eventual suspect. In addition, we got creative with a new, abbreviated suspect to save it from being in tours for an additional week and on the ladder for an additional 4-5 days. The rest is history with one of the biggest suspect ban margins ever
here.
I was pleased with how we handled this as there was clearly not enough support to quickban, but we thought we were ahead of the curve and used the system in our favor to act quickly so we were ready when the general playerbase caught on. It did involve a very busy schedule for me though as we had survey on Septembet 16, Baxcalibur ban on Septembet 17, survey results on September 19, survey #2 on September 20, Ogerpon-Hearthflame ban on September 22, radar on September 26, and Ogerpon-Bloodmoon suspect on September 27. That is 7 major tiering events that require hours of time across 11 days, which was a lot of fun, but also a ton of work.
- 3.28 / 5 in general and 3.3 / 5 qualified as a part of the September 20th survey
- 3.27 / 5 in general and 3.37 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 16th survey
- 3.11 / 5 in general and 3.19 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 30th survey
Normally this would be around suspect range, but with how much support some others have gotten, Manaphy has remained firmly entrnehced in the "stick around on the survey/radar" territory, but short of a quickban or suspect. We have seen some creative ways of handling Manaphy pop up, but it still can be a pest and seen as limiting, so I imagine it will remain present in these discussions.
- 2.23 / 5 in general and 2.71 / 5 qualified as a part of the September 20th survey
- 3.37 / 5 in general and 3.22 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 16th survey
- 3.09 / 5 in general and 3.18 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 30th survey
Similar to Manaphy, but it got off to a slower start as it may have been in the shadow of Ogerpon-Hearthflame at first (even if it arguably should not have been given how good it was). Ogerpon-Wellspring is a possible future suspect, but still not seen as a priority relative to a few more prominently supported options.
- 4.0 / 5 in general and 3.28 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 16th survey
- 3.93 / 5 in general and 3.62 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 30th survey
Kingambit has been an oddball as it has received a ton more general support than qualified.
This is partially because we have a problem with the general responses where people spam and abuse the system in ways we cannot always detect via Google Forms, so it is likely we shift to directly forum based surveys in the future in response to this bad faith behavior (good job guys, way to ruin something super convenient for everyone). A lot of these identical responses listed Kingambit as a 5 while the other Pokemon tended to be closer to their average. I was able to filter out a certain repeat spammer each time, but others did it with a bit more intelligence and it would have taken many hours of data sorting, so I cannot guarantee a perfect sample there. With this in mind, we almost exclusively focus on the qualified demographic and have been very transparent about this, so those numbers are really what we are focusing on here (and with other Pokemon).
Regardless, Kingambit is high and should be one of the primary suspect candidates moving forward. There are still multiple Pokemon coming that are higher now (and Roaring Moon was higher last time around, which we will get to), but a 3.6 is nothing to take lightly and we expect to be monitoring this very closely.
- 3.11 / 5 in general and 3.68 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 16th survey
Despite only being included for the first time, it was very clear that Roaring Moon demanded tiering action. We were not comfortable quickbanning it when it was this far below a 4, but there was internal support to do that probably. We settled for another quick suspect
here on October 17th and it was banned with a 70% majority
here.
- 3.33 / 5 in general and 3.11 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 16th survey
- 3.59 / 5 in general and 3.72 / 5 qualified as a part of the October 30th survey
Gholdengo has been one of the most discussed Pokemon, and this is for a very good reason. It is one of the most strong and practical options in our tiering with a presence many deem undesirable. I personally support us suspecting Gholdengo in the near future and I view that as a likely option if these results continue. It is not something we can ignore at this point. However, one Pokemon had even more support than this.
- 1.59 / 5 in general and 2.21 / 5 qualified as part of the September 20th survey
- 2.99 / 5 in general and 3.39 / 5 qualified as part of the October 16th survey
- 3.53 / 5 in general and 3.99 / 5 qualified as part of the October 30th survey
Gliscor has reached a point where we have to deliberate on it. Even if you are in the camp that prefers we prioritize Gholdengo, you cannot simply ignore these numbers -- it would be doing a disservice to the playerbase and making surveys pointless to ignore it when it is standing out to this extent. Both of these Pokemon should be addressed even if they are linked -- they are enormously impactful entities individually and not always paired at all.
As such, the SV OU tiering council voted today as to if we intended to quickban, suspect, or not act on Gliscor. Stay tuned elsewhere for results, but that gets us up to date with surveys besides the quickban question, which registered between 6 and 6.5 for both general and qualified responses.