>>18937480>There's no such thing as "objective point of view".There is. It's called Nash equilibrium.
> If the EV spreads work in VGC, even if just because the other players allow it to happen, then that obviously means that they're good in VGC.No, in this case it just means that VGC players are bad. Of course, I can completely and fully understand why Ray runs this stuff, but that doesn't make his strategies good. I'm not arguing about ray running the sets he runs, but I'm arguing against people thinking these sets are something other players should opt for as well.
The whole point is, thst of course if you're opponents are very likely to be idiots, you can build a strategy around defeating idiots efficiently. But that doesn't mean your strategy is good. It's like a guy with a machine gun can kill 100 cavemen. But that doens't mean he's actually a good fighter.
>Besides, this Amoonguss set is a great example of a set that works simply because it's different and clever:Wat? It's one of the most trivial spreads ever. The general algorithm for EV spreads is: Decide on a speed tier, then put the rest into your offense, your HP and your defense in that order, leaving out offense if you don't need it. It's among the first things newbies should learn.
Also, the spread really sucks, since it is easily creepable and depends on other people's stupidity, as it beats 0- Aegislash by exactly 1 point, which is something newbies should have learned early not to do if you have the choice.
