UU Snake Draft IV - Format Discussion

Lily

cover me in sugar dust
is a Tutoris a Site Content Manageris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Community Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a member of the Battle Simulator Staffis a Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Senior Staff Member Alumnus
UU Leader
No huge intros, I just wanna talk about this. So ideally, this is the format I wanna go with:

4 SV UU / 1 SS UU / 1 SM UU / 1 ORAS UU / 1 BW UU / 1 DPP UU / 1 ADV UU (ft. Lapras) / 1 GSC UU (ft. Aerodactyl) / 1 RBY.

But I know there's a desire to test some extra stuff in ADV/GSC and I'm not sure if we have the signups to support 16 players per team. I would like to know what you guys think!
 

Volk

Demonstrably alive.
is a Community Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
Hello, it's your resident RBY player. I'm not going to talk about the format too much right now because I don't feel like it and I probably won't join this tournament. However, I am posting here to mention that the RBY UU Council/Community is currently considering relegalizing sleep. Sleep has been confirmed to be legal in this year's upcoming edition of RBYPL for the purpose of testing it. If RBY UU is fortunate enough to make it to UUSD IV, you may want to consider legalizing sleep as well. This would be a great help for getting more data on this meta so we could make a policy decision and corresponding VR sooner.

Thanks.
 

Estarossa

moo?
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Social Media Contributoris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Battle Simulator Moderator
C&C Leader
It's been a popular topic in UU discord for a while but there's definitely a fair bit of desire to test Muk alongside Aerodactyl in this for GSC, and that they should both be being considered if aero is in general for tiering changes. As an option its had a fair amount of play testing atm to already start proving itself a valid option to test here and its by far the best thing we could consider adding to the tier in its current state, even if you dont do anything with aerodactyl.

Muk helps alleviate a fair bit of the problems people have had with linear building and passive play with the extra boom and offense it provides, its not objectively broken after a fair bit of testing has taken place on it lately and has potential to actually fit into the meta pretty nicely, there's some nice counterplay around between all of like omastar, (aero if we test it), magneton, haunter etc and while it has moves to get around answers its not necesarily able to do this all at onec and we have ways to punish the boom.

The main concern with Muk on the face of it that I initially had was that it has the potential to break mime and electabuzz, since teams just would not necessarily be qualified to handle these after a muk + haunter combinatio could force too many trades. While i do share the same opinion this is a potent offensive structure, there is a lot of skill expression going on both from the player playing such a structure and the players who have room to play around all of this etc, its not brainless in the slightest like BP used to be and actually would make the tier more interesting to watch.

Muk has another benefit worth noting when we drop it into the tier, its raw bulk + ability to force trades gives players more variety in options to handle stuff like scyther which is fantastic,again this diversifies muk a bit too and forces it to not necessarily want to boom earlier because the thing actually thrives better in mid-late game when its got more opportunities to start doing curse stuff and to do these valuable trades.

Two questions sorta lie here then,

-> Why is this a worthwhile addition alongside Aerodactyl?
-> Why is Aerodactyl worth testing if we drop Muk?

To answer the first one, Aerodactyl certainly has concerns alongside the drawing the tier more in the passive direction that people have been complaining about. It actually makes harder progress for a lot of the tiers neater offensive options like Dodrio, Victreebel, and Electabuzz in practice that games have shown, and forces more undesirable awkward granbull sets and the like too. While you could view it as helpful for worsening scyther and limiting other cool offensive options, the reality is its limiting the ability to make progress as well. Muk is perfect to actually balance this a bit, you get the defensive benefits that aero brings to the tier but you gain another great option to punish it and actually synergise with the offensive breakers so that the tier isnt so stifled offensively.

For the second one, Aero actually helps limit some of the concerns muk might have through the addition of another normal resist thats not quad ground weak or physically frail like magneton / haunter, it has more likelihood of forcing booms too. While all of this is true the thing isnt some perfet answer still, +1 explosion will just take it out of existence and thunder can still do things, but its putting more limiters on muk while being a more unconditional answer to things like scyther etc while muk acts more as the offensive back up option that will always trade with it if kept reasonably healthy, so we get the benefits of aero without its negatives on teambuilding and game slowing with some help on making muk seem more reasonable for those who kinda doubt at first. Important to note here that people may still potentially consider things like scyther a bit too much with muk alone (i honestly dont think so personally) so aero actually still has that value when you are doing this.

----------------

The overall gist here of why muk should absolutely be considered here is that it diversifies offensive options and adds a neat new breaker and enabler that helps check offensive threats, helping push the tier away from boring psychic/water 1v1s that people hate watching and adding more skill expression and more ways to punish shit like stall. Its also helping to ease the valid concerns good players have had with aero on its own and both drops make each other more palateable to consider.
 
Hello, it's your resident RBY player. I'm not going to talk about the format too much right now because I don't feel like it and I probably won't join this tournament. However, I am posting here to mention that the RBY UU Council/Community is currently considering relegalizing sleep. Sleep has been confirmed to be legal in this year's upcoming edition of RBYPL for the purpose of testing it. If RBY UU is fortunate enough to make it to UUSD IV, you may want to consider legalizing sleep as well. This would be a great help for getting more data on this meta so we could make a policy decision and corresponding VR sooner.

Thanks.
Just want to say that I support this and think we should also test Sleep in RBY UU. UUSD typically gets some great RBY UU players to sign up, and we will be for sure getting high quality RBY UU games to test out Sleep to see if it can improve the tier.

Also, RBY UU will for sure get tons of "stand alone" sign ups, meaning people signing up only to play RBY UU, so there's no reason to cut it when there's a lot of good quality players willing to play it that aren't really going to slot anywhere else. Would be senseless cutting. So I don't think we should even consider cutting RBY (or any tiers actually) and the format of 4 SV/1 RBY-SS is perfect. Plus, UU should really see how a 12-slot tournament does in an official setting. It worked well with UUFPL so it's a good idea to see how it does in UUSD too. There will be absolutely no shortage of players I promise you.
 
not opposed to either of gsc muk or rby sleep - would love for more members of their respective communities to weigh in tho! even if it's just "yes i agree with this" and nothing more, easier to gauge than likes on a post. ty!
After talking to Estarossa I think the most prudent thing to do here would be:

UUSD: Test Aero + Muk
GSC PL: Test ONLY Aero OR Muk
ALT PL: Test ONLY Aero OR Muk (whatever GSC PL didn't test)

Do a rank choice vote afterwards of:
Free both
Free none
Free Aero
Free Muk

This is the absolute best way to do it if we are going to really exhaust all of our options and analyze all metas appropriately before making life-changing decisions for the GSC metagame.
 
I was asked to give my thoughts on the GSC UU format for UUSD, so here we go:

I think both Aerodactyl and Muk are totally fine in the tier and should be added. I have played a bunch of test games with and against both Pokemon on a variety of teams and against a variety of opponents, including dawn, esta, and pp, and neither Pokemon was overbearing. Aero is held back by its lack of offensive output and Muk's damage output and switch-in opportunities are severely restrained by the dominance of Piloswine and Nidoqueen and necessity of Normal resists/immunities on every team. I've been convinced so strongly of this by the test games I've played that I think both Pokemon should be shoo-ins to the tier. The only concern I have is the possibility of Aero making a stall team that ends up being too effective, but this has yet to be discovered (if it could exist at all), and a hypothetical concern like this is not reason enough to keep Aero out of the tier given all the benefits it provides.

I'm therefore totally fine with both Aero and Muk being tested (and added, for that matter). I'm indifferent as to whether Aero, Muk, or Aero + Muk are tested in UUSD. For me it really just comes down to what other people would feel is the best method of testing these two. If you're looking for the purest evidence of what impact Aero has on the tier, then go ahead and test only Aero. If you are like me and you're already pretty confident both Pokemon would be fine in the tier, then test both. If you wanna test just Muk that's cool too!

(This next part is moreso about why I feel we should test Aero and Muk and the state of GSC UU in general, so if you're only interested in how I feel about testing one or both of Aero and Muk, you can stop here).

What it really comes down to for me is that in its current state, GSC UU's interactions aren't how I would like them to be, and teambuilding is incredibly constrained. The overall bulk of the tier and the available pool of Pokemon GSC UU has to check its most central threats (Scyther, Granbull, Psychic-types, and Ground-types) leads to games where the influence of RNG (crits, freezes, paras, full paras, and misses) often is a much bigger factor on the progress made in games then is desirable, i.e., RNG is more influential on progress made than player choices. Additionally, the pool of Pokemon available leads to a very small number of structures that aren't heavily flawed in some way (in particular, a huge number of teams are some variation of the Mime + Gyara archetype). What we should therefore aim to do in unbanning Pokemon from BL and introducing them into GSC UU is to 1) change the core interactions of the tier in such a way that player skill becomes a larger influence on the outcome of games, and 2) allow for a wider variety of viable team structures. Of these two goals, #1 is the more important, and so even if we cannot create a much larger number of viable team structures, we should aim to create a metagame where player skill has a larger influence on outcome. Aerodactyl and Muk should provide some of this. Aerodactyl provides GSC UU with a very sturdy Scyther check unaffected by HP Ground and an additional Granbull check, removing some of the burden of other Normal resists and immunities to dance around Ground-type attacks and hopefully opening up more team structures that are less impacted by RNG. Muk provides a one-time check to almost anything with Explosion and opens up avenues of offense via Explosion that do not depend on RNG but instead force skillful use of Muk's coverage, powerful STAB Sludge Bomb, and Explosion trades.

Ultimately, I don't believe Aerodactyl and Muk alone will be enough to get GSC UU to the point where it needs to be, but I do believe unbanning them will be a step in the right direction for the tier in creating more enjoyable interactions. I am interested in further unbans down the line once Aero and Muk have been tested and possibly integrated into the tier, particularly Typhlosion, but that's a topic for the future. For now, let's make some positive change in GSC UU.
 

phoopes

I did it again
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
not opposed to either of gsc muk or rby sleep - would love for more members of their respective communities to weigh in tho! even if it's just "yes i agree with this" and nothing more, easier to gauge than likes on a post. ty!

Hello, it's your resident RBY player. I'm not going to talk about the format too much right now because I don't feel like it and I probably won't join this tournament. However, I am posting here to mention that the RBY UU Council/Community is currently considering relegalizing sleep. Sleep has been confirmed to be legal in this year's upcoming edition of RBYPL for the purpose of testing it. If RBY UU is fortunate enough to make it to UUSD IV, you may want to consider legalizing sleep as well. This would be a great help for getting more data on this meta so we could make a policy decision and corresponding VR sooner.

Thanks.
yes I agree with this

EDIT: except I will be signing up lol
 
(def agree that if rby uu is included here it should be with sleep legal same as rbypl. unlike with eg gsc uu, theres no existing tier that anyone wants to preserve, in the event rby uu doesnt end up ultimately legalizing sleep then there will be other suspects to follow "instead". two tourns suspect testing sleep yields a better process than one, & i dont think it really would make sense to have two more or less simultaneous rby uu tournaments that are suspect testing different things, which is really the only other option to consider from my pov given that the number of ppl wanting to keep the tier as it is currently is afaik 0. especially since some ppl may be playing rby uu in both tournaments, makes most sense to have the same test for both which is legalizing sleep.
 
After talking to Estarossa I think the most prudent thing to do here would be:

UUSD: Test Aero + Muk
GSC PL: Test ONLY Aero OR Muk
ALT PL: Test ONLY Aero OR Muk (whatever GSC PL didn't test)

Do a rank choice vote afterwards of:
Free both
Free none
Free Aero
Free Muk

This is the absolute best way to do it if we are going to really exhaust all of our options and analyze all metas appropriately before making life-changing decisions for the GSC metagame.
Right now I don't have much of an opinion on Aero+Muk in gsc uu because I haven't played much of it. I'm hoping that it will make it better though I do feel a little bit uneasy around the changes it could implement. I'm just curious about the order of this testing.
Since UUSD is first, what good could come from testing both at the same time AND THEN test them each out individually in the other two tours?

Shouldn't it be the inversed? Would this not potentially bring us to a swifter conclusion by the time we finally reach UUPL next year?
I do understand that we've seen a lot of the changes that Aero brings, but we certainly have not ALL OF the conclusive evidence to ultimately decide if it's healthy or unhealthy. If we tested them both at once, who's to say we might be missing one of the central issues around Aero (or conversely, Muk) because we get too wrapped up in how good or bad they both are without seeing the two individual pokémon for what they are?
We already tested Aero once in GSC Slam, so perhaps it would be a good idea to test it again or test Muk in UUSD? By the time GSC PL is around we might have a clearer picture on whether any problem lies in one or the other Pokémon and can decide whether to test them both or test only the other. And by ALTPL II if it is still necessary we may then test both of the mons together.
 
Right now I don't have much of an opinion on Aero+Muk in gsc uu because I haven't played much of it. I'm hoping that it will make it better though I do feel a little bit uneasy around the changes it could implement. I'm just curious about the order of this testing.
Since UUSD is first, what good could come from testing both at the same time AND THEN test them each out individually in the other two tours?

Shouldn't it be the inversed? Would this not potentially bring us to a swifter conclusion by the time we finally reach UUPL next year?
I do understand that we've seen a lot of the changes that Aero brings, but we certainly have not ALL OF the conclusive evidence to ultimately decide if it's healthy or unhealthy. If we tested them both at once, who's to say we might be missing one of the central issues around Aero (or conversely, Muk) because we get too wrapped up in how good or bad they both are without seeing the two individual pokémon for what they are?
We already tested Aero once in GSC Slam, so perhaps it would be a good idea to test it again or test Muk in UUSD? By the time GSC PL is around we might have a clearer picture on whether any problem lies in one or the other Pokémon and can decide whether to test them both or test only the other. And by ALTPL II if it is still necessary we may then test both of the mons together.
I am perfectly fine with a stand-alone Aero test for UUSD, I just thought maybe more people preferred to test Muk too. However, if we were intent on testing both eventually, I do feel UUSD is the better tour to test both at the same time, simply due to the fact that it's more centralized on "UU" than the other tours, and the prep that goes into teams for UUSD is generally more in depth (from my experience) than GSC PL or ALT PL. Mostly this is because UUSD attracts (usually) the best of the best for GSC UU and the entire team is involved in its prep on a week to week basis.

But if we did not want to rush it then yes, it's better to just do a stand-alone Aero here and then if Aero is freed we can examine Muk later. I am perfectly fine with that (it was the original plan anyways).
 
not opposed to either of gsc muk or rby sleep - would love for more members of their respective communities to weigh in tho! even if it's just "yes i agree with this" and nothing more, easier to gauge than likes on a post. ty!
I won't be participating in this year's UUSD so take this with a grain of salt, but as someone heavily involved in GSC UU, I fully support the testing of both aero and muk in this tour. I've been involved in testing both in friendlies, and in aero's case GSC slam as well, and so far I haven't noticed any glaring issues with their presence. I think it's important for the good of GSC UU that we continue to advance our understanding of how these mons fit into the meta so that when it comes time to vote on them we have a concrete idea as to what they contribute and where potential problems lie. So far, much of the pushback against both has been theorymonned, and while this is a good enough foundation, I personally don't think theorymon is enough to make an informed choice on either of these mons. That's why I think these mons should be tested in tours like UUSD; they give high level players a chance to work with and understand these mons not only in the builder, but also in the game. I think one of GSC UU's primary issues is a lack a new, enthusiastic players, and I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the source of people's trepidation in regard to the tier is the relative lack of tiering action both regarding complained about aspects of the tier (scyther, and to a lesser extent shuckle stall and sleep talkers), and the bloated bl list that has for too long kept reasonable (and potentially healthy) inclusions locked away in tiering purgatory. Yes, we had the agilipass ban which was a good start and a needed change, but I think if we want this tier to grow, it's important to experiment with not only the options we've had for a decade, but also with some new blood from bl.

Hope that was coherent enough. tl;dr test both aero and muk. GSC UU has a bad reputation of being stale, and testing reasonable additions from bl will not only help address long standing complaints from the playerbase, but also potentially spark interest in people who have dismissed the tier as permanently frozen in a suboptimal state. I love BigFatMantis's idea of testing aero and muk individually in upcoming team tours to fully solidify how we feel about the impact these mons have on the tier both on their own and as a pair
 
Last edited:

MrSoup

my gf broke up with me again
is a Tiering Contributor
RBTT Champion
as a player of both rby uu and gsc uu ill chime in

rby uu should test sleep

as for gsc, i dont see the point in testing muk without aero. we have already held a tour with aero and i dont hear any disagreements with its presence. And it looks like were gonna test aero here again; id be surprised if players came to a different result. I'm all for more testing, but i dont see a reason in trying a meta without aero and with muk. i think something along the lines of this makes more sense:

UUSD: Test only Aero OR Test Aero + Muk
GSC PL: Test Aero + Muk
ALT PL: Test Aero + Muk OR no tests (bc they're both already in the tier)

I think we can use uusd as a way to confirm aero's presence, whether through a solo or duo test. GSCPL can then either be used to introduce muk or try muk again. ALTPL can then be used to confirm muk or we can vote before it bc 1. we could test muk 2x and aero 3x before it and 2. altpl is likely not to give as robust of results as the two former.

tldr i dont see a world where we allow muk and not aero in the tier so idk why we would test it in isolation. either expedite the process by finishing before altpl or do 2 solo aero test (uusd + gsc slam) and 2 muk + aero tests (gscpl +altpl).
 

Estarossa

moo?
is a Site Content Manageris an official Team Rateris a Social Media Contributoris a Member of Senior Staffis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Dedicated Tournament Hostis a Battle Simulator Moderator
C&C Leader
i do believe uusd should be the one where we test muk too if we're taking that route above still ^^^. uusd is gonna be the highest prestige tour of these bunch with the best of signups as mantis says and is therefore ideal for properly assessing both muk and aero, these players when they do sign up for stuff like gscpl/altpl (which they don't all do anyway) often stretch into other gsc tiers anyway, and we want to ensure muk gets vision in the highest quality environment we can ensure. UUSD also gets more focus put into it in general by players and taken the most seriously of the bunch as Mantis mentions which also folds back into its prestige and value for this.

If as you say you view aero as a done deal at this point then imo it doesn't need this tour to confirm that with choosing a different tour for muk anyway. Definitely agree with the route instead of like below to just ensure complete assessment of all 3 possible (non-nothing) voting options anyway,

UUSD - Muk + Aero
GSCPL/ALTPL - Solo Muk / Solo Aero

I disagree with the notion that Aero is a done deal with no discontent expressed against it though, (Even if there does seem to be a majority in favour of it), there is still anti aero sentiments and people who would be ok with it alongside Muk but not on its own in this tier, and people have absolutely expressed disagreements with its presence so far in discussions. But we should still cover all bases of potential voting endpoints with this anyway with this coverage.
 
Last edited:

MrSoup

my gf broke up with me again
is a Tiering Contributor
RBTT Champion
I disagree with the notion that Aero is a done deal with no discontent expressed against it though, (Even if there does seem to be a majority in favour of it), there is still anti aero sentiments and people who would be ok with it alongside Muk but not on its own in this tier, and people have absolutely expressed disagreements with its presence so far in discussions. But we should still cover all bases of potential voting endpoints with this anyway with this coverage.
i never said aero was a done deal. what i was getting at is that there is likely not a situation where muk drops and aero doesnt (its either both or neither or just aero). thats why im saying removing aero from any of the tests and solo testing muk is weird. if we want to test muk twice, three times or ten times, do it in tandem with aero always. thats what were most likely gonna be voting on so the more tours we get to see it the better. this way we'll get a better idea of what the metas gonna be like when we vote on muk, as it will almost certaintly have aero in it.

apologies bc i knew when i wrote my original post it was gonna be confusing but i dont know how else to word it.

clarification: im very much for testing both in uusd
 
Last edited:
i never said aero was a done deal. what i was getting at is that there is likely not a situation where muk drops and aero doesnt (its either both or neither or just aero). thats why im saying removing aero from any of the tests and solo testing muk is weird. if we want to test muk twice, three times or ten times, do it in tandem with aero always. thats what were most likely gonna be voting on so the more tours we get to see it the better. this way we'll get a better idea of what the metas gonna be like when we vote on muk, as it will almost certaintly have aero in it.

apologies bc i knew when i wrote my original post it was gonna be confusing but i dont know how else to word it.

clarification: im very much for testing both in uusd
(i dont know that this is accurate @ player views, if anything from what i can tell there is not rly any opposition to muk or at least not yet ofc that can change with more testing esp when its only been tested in friendlies, whereas aero has a bit more disagreement. and i dont see any other reason to think that when the time comes someone voting no on dropping aerodactyl would somehow be contradictory with them voting yes on dropping muk, as they are completely different mons in like every way.

regardless, testing both muk + aero in this tourn seems like something everyone is on board with)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top