>>12188079Smogon already have to keep considering complex bans as is thanks to the drizzle + SS ban, and that was a ban that didn't go against existing policy (it was merely unorthodox). Consistency is part of their policy, so prior precedents always have to at least be considered. A Pokémon + ability ban would actually require changing part of their existing policy, so it really would open the way for a lot of new bans to have to at least be considered.
The issue isn't just which bans are made, but also which ones are suggested; even if the higher ups keep rejecting them, too many suggestions for unnecessary complex bans drastically slows things down and gets in the way of discussion of more practical solutions (or whether solutions are even needed). These same problems also apply to clause reviews (while not the only reason, this did contribute towards making the review of the evasion clause a total mess).
The greater the number of complex bans that are made (especially if they alter existing policy), and hence the closer they become to the norm, the worse the problem will get. For the record, if the system for handling bans, clauses, etc hadn't changed it would be even worse (the current system gives the higher ups, who thankfully tend to be less complex-ban-happy than much of the community, the final say).
