>>39184441U missed my point
You can't complain about rng when crits exist
>>39184469>even if taunt is faster, it's a 50/50You mean that Breelom may not use spore? Attack then, competitive is about predicts too
>if you ever incorrectly predict a breloom switch, one of your pokemon is put to sleepLike i just said, a mispredict can decide a match, sleep or not
>you have now gimped yourself just trying to combat a niche stratWell, seems like this niche strat is a big deal for you
Remove sleep clause and the meta will change accordingly
Making sleep more threating would make counters more handy
>if you switch in to breloom you lose your berry and get put to sleep the next turn>if you let a pokemon get put to sleep then switch into berry mon, breloom sets up a sub and same thing happenWhat are we talking about now, you're basically saying that if you're a bad player you're gonna lose
Why losing a turn to switch in someone that can't counter it? Just sacrifice your first mon and switch in a fast taunter or an effective counter
You're acting like Breelom is an unstoppable threat, maybe they should move it to AG?
>Let's say you have an insomnia mon>limited to fewer than 15 monsThat would increase in usage if sleep clause is removed
>Aren't good counters to breloom, cannot ko it behind a substituteAgain, what's your problem with breeloms? You don't need to use a mon with insomnia to counter it, the lad is slow with a 4x and five 2x weakness, just break that substitute, it has 0 priority u know?
>Lose too much by opting for insomnia over its other, superior abilitiesOk but like i said, remove sleep clause and insomnia would become handy
Cope, have sex, git gud and go back fucking faggot
