GSC OU Shiny tiering

[Disaster Area]

1) Do they visually appear different?
Yes - Move onto next question.
No - Do not tier them separately.

1 - Pointless criterion. If they're a forme then they have a visual difference.

2) Do you have the ability to change forme in battle?
Yes - If a forme requires another forme of Pokémon in order to be brought into battle, and that other forme is not legal in the tier, then do not tier them seperately. Otherwise, move onto next question.
No - Move onto next question.

1) Do you have the ability to change forme in battle?
Yes - Any forme which requires another forme of Pokémon in order to be brought into battle (e.g. think megas) then that forme can only be brought in a tier where the base forme is legal. Base forme here defines the forme which is brought into battle initially.
No - move onto next question.

This is superior, since the tiering separation is independent of how the Pokémon end up. I think it makes it clearer w.r.t. megas, as well as stuff like Darm-Z, Castform formes, etc. as you mention.

3?) Does the forme force a specific move on sets?
Yes - Do not tier them separately.
No - Move onto next question.

4) Does the forme originate from an ability?
Yes - Do not tier them separately.
No - Move onto next question.

3 & 4 - not nessecary. If something would be Do not tier separately, you can just not ask the question, and for those Pokémon, they will reach the final question, and it will say to not tier them separately. The simpler this is, the better - 3 steps is easier to understand than 8 steps.

5) Is there a change in typing between the formes?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Move onto next question.

(note to other readers, this is the same as my #2 question)

6?) Do they have different abilities?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Do not tier them separately

I like this addition.

7) Do they have different (base?) stats?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Do not tier them separately (unless differing movepools is accepted as criterion)

(note to readers - this is the same as my 3rd criterion)

8?) Do they have different movepools?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Do not tier them separately.

8 - No.

Basically keep mine and add your #6 into my list as like #3 (making my current #3 to #4)

Edit @ Lutra:

No we keep species clause! The complexity in viability is a part of the result. I think changing Species Clause to Forme Clause would destabilise ORAS 1U.. also in GSC you would be allowed 2 Snorlaxen (with a Shiny and non-Shiny one) if that went through.

 

[Enigami]

#1 Alright, that's covered by our definition of Forme, so we don't need that.

#3 & #4 Your #1 doesn't prevent separate tiering, it only prevents changed formes from being tiered below base formes. So Darumaka-Zen could technically end up a tier above base Darumaka. Still, I guess it does work well enough, so #3 and #4 probably aren't needed. Even if #8 is voted through and there's sentiment against Keldeo being separated, I think #8 could be worded to prevent separation of formes based on move requirements.

#8 The optional things would not apply unless they were voted on. If you meant for how we currently tier things, then yeah that's not a thing.

Edit: So this is our current criterion for formes then right?:

Spoiler: Current criterion list for tiering formes

Forme definition: Formes are Pokemon of the same species that have a visual and competitive difference.

Forme tiering:
1) Does the forme require changing from another forme in order to be brought into battle?
Yes - If the forme requires the other forme in a tier where that other forme is not legal, then do not tier them separately. Otherwise, move onto next question.
No - Move onto next question.

2) Is there a change in typing between the formes?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Move onto next question.

3) Do they have different abilities?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Move onto next question.

4) Do they have different base stats?
Yes - Then tier separately, and treat as separate Pokémon.
No - Do not tier them separately.

There should be a vote to add either 'listed' (GSC Shinies not separated) or 'effective' (GSC Shinies separated) before 'base stats' for the 4th criterion to make it clear how GSC Shinies should be handled, and whether to add a 5th criterion for different movepools, possibly worded to disallow separation of formes based on move requirements (no Keldeo separation).

Edit2: On the Showdown teambuilder I implemented the ability to separate Shinies from their base form (mostly to see if I could), and I got it working 100%. So when you select a Gen 2 format for teambuilding, you can have Zapdos in Ubers and Zapdos-Shiny in OU. All you need to do is add the tier for its GSC Shiny in the database, and the UI automatically splits the Pokemon into two select-able entries with unique tiering. If you don't want a Pokemon to have its Shiny separated, all you need to do is not give it a GSC Shiny tier and they won't be split. Internally for Showdown, Zapdos-Shiny is simply a Zapdos that has its shiny flag set and has preset Def/Spc/Spe DVs and restricted Atk DVs, so no additional work is needed to add 'shiny formes' to the database. That should make Shiny-tiering very intuitive if we decide to tier them separately.

 

[magic9mushroom]

I must admit I find the idea viscerally repulsive. I really can't see how it's not a complex ban, at least from the back-end (it's an IV limitation on specific Pokemon just like the HP Legends ban, it just happens that Pokemon with those IVs look different).

 

[Plancklength]

Personally I dislike the idea. Having tiering where you have to use pokemon with lower stats and specific hidden powers sounds sort of like tiering level 90 pokemon separately from level 100 pokemon, with an added limitation on hidden power.

Also the specific criterion of shiny seems to be a relatively weak justification to me. There's only a visual and IV difference, and if the proposal was that 0 IV pokemon be tiered differently than 15 IV pokemon (31 in later gens), that it would be regarded as just introducing another awkward complex ban that brings up weird edge cases. And tiering based on visual differences between pokemon that have no stat, ability, movepool, or typing differences would be regarded as meaningless. I do not see why combining these makes any notable difference.

 

[Enigami]

There's only a visual and IV difference

Uh... the inability to use most all Hidden Powers is an important movepool difference, in addition to the visual and stat difference.

For RBY and GSC, there is almost no reason to not maximize all stats, meaning the effective loss of 7 HP, 5 Def, 5 SpA, 5 SpD and 5 Spe base stats is pretty significant. Tiering 0 IV Pokemon differently from 15 IV Pokemon or Level 90 separately from Level 100 Pokemon isn't the same as Shinies, because there is no perceivable difference between 0 IV and 15 IV Pokemon.

There is a perceivable difference with GSC Shinies, and because of that you immediately know its limitations. If I faced a 0 IV Zapdos, I wouldn't know it if I saw it. A Shiny Zapdos on the other hand, I immediately know my Charizard outspeeds it and that my Steelix can switch into it without worrying about Water or Fire coverage.

Another major difference between Shinies and IV/Level/Movepool/Whatever restrictions is that their is only ONE way to change the Pokemon as opposed to many, many ways with the things you try to associate it with, preventing a slippery slope scenario because there is nothing beyond the Shiny to tier.

 

[magic9mushroom]

Shinies are an IV restriction. That's a fact; GSC Pokemon are Shiny iff they have that set of IVs.

They're just a particularly idiosyncratic restriction that has a visual effect.

(And in all seriousness, there are probably at least as many people on the PP servers who've read PP's tiers as there are people on the PP servers who know the intricacies of GSC Shininess.)

 

[Enigami]

Shinies are an IV restriction. That's a fact; GSC Pokemon are Shiny iff they have that set of IVs.

They're just a particularly idiosyncratic restriction that has a visual effect.

(And in all seriousness, there are probably at least as many people on the PP servers who've read PP's tiers as there are people on the PP servers who know the intricacies of GSC Shininess.)

I know that at its core it is an IV restriction, but I feel the idiosyncrasy of GSC Shinies makes them worth considering. While we could just ignore them, they do have significant properties that could be valuable even if we don't want them as full-fledged formes. At the very least, they could be used as a tool to fine-tune tiers or nerf Pokemon that are borderline broken.

My upgrade to Showdown makes the intricacies of GSC Shininess readily apparent. Right now in Showdown, each Hidden Power is displayed as a separate move, and with my changes, it'll automatically remove all Hidden Powers except Grass and Dragon as selectable options when selecting moves for a shiny Pokemon in Gen 2. In game, when you hover over the opposing Pokemon, I've changed it so it will display the proper minimum and maximum speeds of a shiny Pokemon, so even a new player will be able to see Shiny Zapdos Maximum Speed: 288, Charizard Maximum Speed: 298. With that combined with the ability to give Shinies separate tiers, the differences will be kinda hard to ignore. In Pokemon Online, the differences aren't as readily apparent but its still fairly easy to set up Shiny Pokemon and see their restrictions within the teambuilder.

One more thing that makes tiering GSC Shinies workable is that it you can apply it to cartridge or any simulator (assuming they have GSC Shinies implemented properly). Without any special simulator rules, you can battle opponents and know whether they are obeying the tier's restrictions on appearance alone, in the same way you know someone using Mewtwo in RBY is not obeying the rules of RBY OU.

 

[magic9mushroom]

My upgrade to Showdown makes the intricacies of GSC Shininess readily apparent. Right now in Showdown, each Hidden Power is displayed as a separate move, and with my changes, it'll automatically remove all Hidden Powers except Grass and Dragon as selectable options when selecting moves for a shiny Pokemon in Gen 2. In game, when you hover over the opposing Pokemon, I've changed it so it will display the proper minimum and maximum speeds of a shiny Pokemon, so even a new player will be able to see Shiny Zapdos Maximum Speed: 288, Charizard Maximum Speed: 298. With that combined with the ability to give Shinies separate tiers, the differences will be kinda hard to ignore. In Pokemon Online, the differences aren't as readily apparent but its still fairly easy to set up Shiny Pokemon and see their restrictions within the teambuilder.

Oh gee, people can detect and play under your complex ban! Clearly that makes it okay!

One more thing that makes tiering GSC Shinies workable is that it you can apply it to cartridge or any simulator (assuming they have GSC Shinies implemented properly). Without any special simulator rules, you can battle opponents and know whether they are obeying the tier's restrictions on appearance alone, in the same way you know someone using Mewtwo in RBY is not obeying the rules of RBY OU.

Ditto for move bans on specific Pokemon, though (e.g. "Hidden Power Legends"). While you could theoretically bring a Hidden Power Legend to a cartridge match banning it, you couldn't actually use Hidden Power without it being noticed and getting disqualified, so there's no point.

It's a cartridge-legal complex ban, certainly, but a complex ban nonetheless.

 

[Disaster Area]

I mean we get if you just find it abhorrent and I mean if that's the case then make it clear, this is certainly one of those things where you can just think we're obviously nuts and think that shinies shouldn't be tiered separately, and when the time comes you can make that clear with a vote (on the definitions of form).

To you, it's just a complex ban, to us we see it potentially as being a separate forme [visual difference + difference in stats] but since the word isn't properly defined, once this discussion has appeared to have come to a close, we will hold a vote. Any more questions?

 

[Enigami]

Oh gee, people can detect and play under your complex ban! Clearly that makes it okay!

That wasn't to say it was 'Okay', but that if it were decided to tier Shinies separately, we can do it in a way that is intuitive for new players atleast.

Ditto for move bans on specific Pokemon, though (e.g. "Hidden Power Legends"). While you could theoretically bring a Hidden Power Legend to a cartridge match banning it, you couldn't actually use Hidden Power without it being noticed and getting disqualified, so there's no point.

It's a cartridge-legal complex ban, certainly, but a complex ban nonetheless.

True, but that's why its not at all the same as a straight up IV ban, as an IV ban is something that can be broken without being noticed.

I see where you're coming from, though. From the perspective of Shinies being just a set of IVs, it is a complex ban, no ifs ands or buts. On the other hand, from the perspective of GSC Shinies reaching the criterion of a forme (depending on if we interpret effective Base Stats as different from listed Base Stats), it is a simple ban. Since we both seem to be pretty set on our viewpoints, at this point I feel all we can do to resolve the argument is to wait until the vote for whether the definition of 'forme' covers GSC Shinies.


I'm a bit disappointed that there hasn't been much discussion regarding the possible effects of Shiny tiering. There is something I've noticed that I'm worried about with tiering GSC Shinies separately, and that's GSC 2U. Depending on how 1U shapes up, 2U could end up simply being '1U, Shiny Edition' due to most things in OU possibly not being affected enough to warrant the usage of the other Pokemon.

There's some neat things that could come from that though, for example if 1U used the current GSC OU as a base with Snorlax sent to 1P and Shiny Snorlax remaining in 1U, 2U could essentially end up as the 'GSC OU with Snorlax banned, Electric Legends nerfed' tier that some have clamored for. Or for another example, a 1U based on GSC Ubers with the Top 8's non-shiny formes sent to 1P would effectively result in 2U being 'GSC OU with Snorlax/Zapdos/Raikou banned'. And I also think from 3U onwards there'd end up being a more decent mixing of viability among Shinies and lower tier Pokemon, so it probably wouldn't be a concern from there.

I'd like to hear some thoughts on how you all feel separating GSC Shinies would affect tiering.


Regardless of whether or not Shinies end up being formes, I'd prefer Zapdos/Raikou = Uber, Shiny Zapdos/Raikou = OU before a Hidden Power Legend ban since as it is something that can be much more clearly presented to a new player, and should be the complex ban of choice if we decide a complex ban is needed.

 

[magic9mushroom]

Well, some formes make more sense to separate, to me, than others. The BW+ Rotom formes and Deoxys formes feel much more separable than, say, Origin/Altered Giratina and Plate Arceus (since the latter, especially, is an item+Pokemon complex ban - it's just that that Pokemon and its signature move interact with that item in a unique way).

But I'm coming at this as someone who hasn't played cartridge seriously beyond RBY and at all beyond GSC, and hasn't played simulator beyond GSC, which is why I'm very hesitant to poke my nose into later gens' business and as such haven't really encountered (and don't really understand) the "forme" logic.

 

[Disaster Area]

Good post up to this point

Well, some formes make more sense to separate, to me, than others. The BW+ Rotom formes and Deoxys formes feel much more separable than, say, Origin/Altered Giratina and Plate Arceus (since the latter, especially, is an item+Pokemon complex ban - it's just that that Pokemon and its signature move interact with that item in a unique way).

As someone who has experience in every generation, a change in typing or gaining an ability that changes things significantly is enough to warrant separate tiering.

But I'm coming at this as someone who hasn't played cartridge seriously beyond RBY and at all beyond GSC, and hasn't played simulator beyond GSC, which is why I'm very hesitant to poke my nose into later gens' business and as such haven't really encountered (and don't really understand) the "forme" logic.

Don't let it put you off, we feel your opinion is as important as anyone else who takes an interest

Anyway I'm starting to take the side that we shouldn't tier the shinies differently - I feel the change is not significant enough, it could create further complexities (how about gender in GSC?!) and it is a little odd to me for every Pokémon to have a forme.

Still, from a theoretical stand-point, Shinies as separately-tierable formes in Gen 2 is not objectionable, it is merely not my preference.

 

[Enigami]

Gender doesn't have the amount of changes GSC Shinies do (reduced attack and loss of some hidden powers for 1:8 ratio Pokemon vs. reduced defense, reduced special attack, reduced special defense, reduced speed and only Hidden Power Grass/Dragon for all Shinies), and has doesn't have any visual difference like Shinies do until Gen 4 onwards (by then they no longer have any differences).

However, I'm starting to lean towards not tiering Shinies differently by default, mostly due to the possibility of '2U = Shiny 1U'. I think instead, Shinies should be treated as an acceptable semi-complex ban when it comes to banning. So for example, something such as GSC Ubers with Top 8 restricted to shinies or GSC OU with Zapdos & Raikou and/or Snorlax restricted to shinies as 1U would still be possible, and if we ended up with a situation like RBY 2U's Articuno and Moltres, we could see if the restrictions of a Shiny is enough to balance them before banning.

 

[Disaster Area]

Gender doesn't have the amount of changes GSC Shinies do (reduced attack and loss of some hidden powers for 1:8 ratio Pokemon vs. reduced defense, reduced special attack, reduced special defense, reduced speed and only Hidden Power Grass/Dragon for all Shinies), and has doesn't have any visual difference like Shinies do until Gen 3 onwards (where they no longer have any differences).

However, I'm starting to lean towards not tiering Shinies differently by default, mostly due to the possibility of '2U = Shiny 1U'. I think instead, Shinies should be treated as an acceptable semi-complex ban when it comes to banning. So for example, something such as GSC Ubers with Top 8 restricted to shinies or GSC OU with Zapdos & Raikou and/or Snorlax restricted to shinies as 1U would still be possible, and if we ended up with a situation like RBY 2U's Articuno and Moltres, we could see if the restrictions of a Shiny is enough to balance them before banning.

Gender is visible (you see the gender symbol) and the shiny difference isn't so radically different otherwise it would have been the status quo, quite possibly.

 

[magic9mushroom]

Good post up to this point
As someone who has experience in every generation, a change in typing or gaining an ability that changes things significantly is enough to warrant separate tiering.

I can understand the reason why it might be meaningful, but I don't see how banning Arceus formes isn't literally banning a certain otherwise-legal Pokemon using a certain otherwise-legal item (i.e. a complex ban).

(There is one case where I support an item + Pokemon complex ban - Wobbuffet - but that's a very special case since Leftovers Wobbuffet vs. Leftovers Wobbuffet literally makes the game unplayable prior to DPP. That's in the "no destroying the game" absolute ban stage before you get to the "unbalanced" relative bans; I'm fine with complex bans in the former but not the latter.)

Gender doesn't have the amount of changes GSC Shinies do (reduced attack and loss of some hidden powers for 1:8 ratio Pokemon vs. reduced defense, reduced special attack, reduced special defense, reduced speed and only Hidden Power Grass/Dragon for all Shinies), and has doesn't have any visual difference like Shinies do until Gen 4 onwards (by then they no longer have any differences).

Low Attack can change the base power of Hidden Power, as well.

 

[Disaster Area]

I can understand the reason why it might be meaningful, but I don't see how banning Arceus formes isn't literally banning a certain otherwise-legal Pokemon using a certain otherwise-legal item (i.e. a complex ban).

Fair enough, though I don't see any harm in it. Not totally sure of the definition of complex ban, if you can give me a definition I'm sure we can work out whether this qualifies.

I think with this sort of thing, part of it is 'how natural does it feel? Tiering Keldeo and Keldeo-R separately, or genesect formes, feels weird and unnatural because one forme sees literally all of the usage, and the change is about as minor as it can get. Shinies feel unnatural to tier separately since they only have this difference in one generation, and it'd be odd for every Pokémon to have a forme. Tiering arceus formes separately doesn't feel at all odd because multiple formes see use - a handful see a lot of use, a few are a bit more niche, and some are so awful as to be next to unusable, so it doesn't feel strange to tier them seperately to me. I mean the way it impacts their viability is comparable to BW+ Rotom or Deoxys formes [though on Smogon, Deoxys formes have always been tiered separately but ended up in the same tier each time], the difference in viability between Rotom-Wash and Rotom-Frost due to mainly their typing is just as significant between, for example, Arceus-Ghost and Arceus-Bug [for what it's worth, Arceus-Bug has never been viable in any metagame it's been legal in]. I don't feel objectively preventing these Pokémon from being tiered separately due to feeling akin to a complex ban is the right approach.

 

[magic9mushroom]

I suppose my definition of a complex ban is that it's an intersection ban (i.e. A is legal and B is legal but A+B is banned). Arceus-Ghost is the intersection of Arceus and Spooky Plate.

There is, of course, a well-known and established complex ban in GSC already (the HypnoMissy ban, in its various specificities) and I don't really know what to do with that one. We could just unban it - GSC survived for years with HypnoMissy - but it definitely evades the spirit of Sleep Clause.

 

[Lutra]

(i.e. A is legal and B is legal but A+B is banned)

So the gist of what you're saying is: A and B are exclusively legal on pokémon/teams, but A and B together on pokémon/teams are banned.

But '+' is often used to mean (exclusive) or. I'd use '&' in this instance instead.

Alternatively you could say:

Using (exclusively) A or B is legal; using A and B together is not legal.

 

[Disaster Area]

If we're gonna be serious about that Lutra xD

That being said I think what I said is wrong or at least notational abuse, maybe m9m could do it, I'm realllllly busy rn.

 

[magic9mushroom]

If we're gonna be serious about that Lutra xD

That being said I think what I said is wrong or at least notational abuse, maybe m9m could do it, I'm realllllly busy rn.

I think to be 100% anally precise you need to describe options as a set of subsets of Ω {A, B, C...}, bans as another set of subsets of Ω {α, β, γ...} and then define the legal set as (Ω \ α \ β \ γ \...). Then a complex ban is a ban κ such that none of the options A, B, C... are subsets of κ.

Or something like that.