[95 / 9 / ?]
Quoted By: >>34683403 >>34683406 >>34683413 >>34683474 >>34683502 >>34683819 >>34683924 >>34684066 >>34684353 >>34684617 >>34684633 >>34684647 >>34684950 >>34685566 >>34687684 >>34691314
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/landorus.3625600/
>The defensive characteristic (A Pokémon is uber if, in common battle conditions, it is able to wall and stall out a significant portion of the metagame) surely is applicable to Landorus.
>There is a line in the current tiering policy where Kyogre, Groudon and Arceus are deemed broken because "they almost dictate / require usage". This is also applicable to Landorus. By every definition, Landorus is broken. Is Landorus uncompetitive though?
-------
>Surveys of smogonites have been done in the past and diversity vs centralization has never been the most important thing to people in tiering. The theory goes: the more centralized a metagame is (think RBY), the more likely a better player is to beat a worse player, since there’s less variance caused by team matchup.
>Admittedly, many people, myself included, can find these metagames boring... but the majority don’t seem to. Most people instead hate metagames where a bad team matchup means you lose at team preview. Landorus-T in theory helps that second group be comfortable with SM OU since it can glue so many teams together and avoid losses at team preview.
>As long as the second group is bigger than the first group, Lando won’t go anywhere.
>The defensive characteristic (A Pokémon is uber if, in common battle conditions, it is able to wall and stall out a significant portion of the metagame) surely is applicable to Landorus.
>There is a line in the current tiering policy where Kyogre, Groudon and Arceus are deemed broken because "they almost dictate / require usage". This is also applicable to Landorus. By every definition, Landorus is broken. Is Landorus uncompetitive though?
-------
>Surveys of smogonites have been done in the past and diversity vs centralization has never been the most important thing to people in tiering. The theory goes: the more centralized a metagame is (think RBY), the more likely a better player is to beat a worse player, since there’s less variance caused by team matchup.
>Admittedly, many people, myself included, can find these metagames boring... but the majority don’t seem to. Most people instead hate metagames where a bad team matchup means you lose at team preview. Landorus-T in theory helps that second group be comfortable with SM OU since it can glue so many teams together and avoid losses at team preview.
>As long as the second group is bigger than the first group, Lando won’t go anywhere.
