Quoted By:
Why do people actually think "ban all legendaries" is a good idea? If Landorus-t wasn't a legendary pokemon (i.e. it could breed and be found in the grass) it would still be used just as much in OU and VGC as it is now because legendary is just a label. You could slap the title of legendary on Garchomp(remove gible and gabite, make it non-breedable and only 1 found in game) and it would not get any stronger in battle.
By the ban all legendaries logic:
"Rayquaza is too strong in OU. Rayquaza is a legendary. Regice is also a legendary. Therefore Regice should be banned because it belongs to the same arbitrary category (it's a legendary) as an overpowered pokemon."
With this logic you can make this argument:
"Blaziken is too strong in OU. Blaziken is a Hoenn starter. Sceptile is also a Hoenn starter. Therefore Sceptile should be banned because it belongs to the same arbitrary category(it's a Hoenn starter) as an overpowered pokemon."
I also don't understand why "all legendaries should be banned because some are overcentralizing" because when you ban all those highly used pokemon it makes already common, good pokemon like Talonflame, Rotom-w and Garchomp even more common and then people will complain those are overcentralizing. Competitive players using the best options available to them is not a new concept in any sort of game or sport. I don't know why people expect those VGC 2015 japs to risk not using Landorus-t if they feel like it would hurt their chances of winning just because you wanna see your bro Pachirisu win. Competitive pokemon is stale, don't get involved with it if you throw fits whenever someone uses a genie.
