>Every tier except OU decides bans not based on Suspect Tests,

>>32915136

OU has a much larger playerbase than the other tiers and is considered the standard metagame.

File: 007SJK.png (670KB, 600x794px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 600x794px

Free yourself.

>>32915136
Source for OP pic?

>>32915155

>le Pachirisu meme
>when the guy straight up said that Pachirisu is shit and that Amoonguss is better and he only Pachirisu because everyone was prepared for Amoonguss

I think you have a childish grasp on what the usage of a mon means. Why do you think high usage by itself warrants a ban? If bans should be reserved for broken or centralizing mons, do you think lando qualifies as either? It's purpose on 70% of teams is to set rocks and check one physical attacker. Do you also think the grand multitude of mons that could fill that role similarly should also be banned following lando?

>>32915136
The lower tiers used to use the OU method for banning stuff way back when. They later adopted the new method because it was faster.
There was lots of debates over whether OU should use this new method in the beginning of this gen.
Lots of people were against it because "muh right to vote" so they ended up keeping the old method.

>>32915234
The Tiers are based on usage. Lando-T's level of usage is disproportionate to the rest of the tiers. If these Tiers really are based on usage, then Lando-T's ability to do it's job and other jobs so well has made it unfit for the Tier because it is clearly more viable than the majority of other Pokemon. You people get too caught up in thinking that as long as it's not some sweeping monster it's fine.

>>32915284
All tiers below OU are usage-based, but because there is no tier above OU it's the exception. Lando performs its role remarkably well, yes. Regardless, that role still just amounts to setting rocks and stopping one physical attacker once. The role performed, by itself, isn't broken therefore the mon can't be broken I think. Hippo or Skarm could perform the same role with only less flexibility. Chansey and Toxapex fill similar roles against another subset of attackers—though I wouldn't argue that Pex isn't broken. And of course a mon doesn't need to be a 6-0 menace to be broken. But I don't think Lando can be considered centralizing either because breaking it doesn't require cautious teambuilding. At the end of the day a mon with no recovery still just needs to be switched into hazards and worn down with a couple turns to become a non-threat. I understand what you're saying and don't disagree with it really, I'm just taking advantage of the opportunity to talk about competitive non-flippantly on this board.

>>32915136
What wpuld be Goblin Slayer's team?

>>32915284
>The Tiers are based on usage.
Yes, but not in the way you seem to think. Usage in one tier influences what is aviable in the tiers below, but has no bearing on that particular tier itself or the tiers above. For example, lets say Mantine suddenly gets used a lot in UU. After a certain usage limit it would rise to UU from RU where it currently is. However, even if Mantine were to reach even 100% usage, that still wouldn't be enough for rising to OU; it would need to be used in OU for that.

Bans are a completely separate thing and only tangentially related to usage. However, there have been more than a few cases of bans affecting mons with relatively low usage and even some against mons in a lower tier(for example, Venomoth being banned from UU despite being NU last gen).
>>32915136
What gets to be voted is still decided by a council. It's essentially the same method, except slower and with more community feedback. What's better is subjective and depends from what you value more.

>>32915234
>>32915386
50% uSaGe IsN't CeNtRaLiZiNg