idk if youll see this but it looks like you didnt link the correct blisy video in the credits? the footage you use shows them catching a whismur but the video linked only has them catching a latias
It can not be understated how valuable still being able to play old generations in a competitive environment is. Smogon is doing the Lords work by preserving those formats.
I would agree with you if the tiers and bans were frozen in place after the gen is over. They've gone back and ruined old gens I played and grinded when they were current well over a decade later
@@dudesk099 Give one example of how Smogon ruined an old format. As far as I can see, they just ban whatever is problematic, and while they might not always ban everything that should be banned, I’ve never seen them make a decision that actively makes an older format worse.
@@dudesk099 Sometimes, there can be developments in a generation's scene literal years after said gen is done. I recall hearing that Gen 1 OU singles has recently seen a major shake-up in the Big 3 due to developments within Gen 1's competitive community. Stuff like figuring out new strategies that end up shaking things up, or finding a good way to restrict something without entirely banning it.
@@LloydTheZephyrianall that is still possible if they would "retire" a format and has nothing to do with the smogon administration. I agree with the OP here, smogon and pokemon showdown are literally doing the lords work. This is what jesus would do.
Pretty sure preserving the game with all its whacky code is more important than preserving a meta from a decade or two ago, freezing it in time It's a meta, things are supposed to change anyways I love playing gen 1 on showdown, it's so different
Rotation battles are clearly superior to both of these formats only played by ruffians and hooligans. The ability to rotate your Pokémon provides a deeper level to this complex game that simple minded cavemen cannot understand.
Pretty much all battles are singles and then competitive pokemon is doubles? Either it should been singles too or we should have doubles be the default for important battles tbh
@@humbertoseghetto5218 other than the horrendous balancing issues singles has, like jimothy mentioned, which requires councils of people to manage, the real issue is time. Singles battles take wayyyy too long to be viable in real life tournaments where these days there are over 700 players playing best of 3. Heck, VGC tournaments used to be only one day and players complained that it felt like a marathon, and by top 32 they were only performing at half brain power. Shorter games also mean less opportunity for variance, but increases the impact variance has. It’s why singles players run stuff like focus blast, because there are so many turns that one of them is bound to hit. VGC players would never run it however, gamble strategies are too risky and could cost you the game when every turn decision is so impacted.
Nintendo's decision to make the competitive format completely different that the one of the actual single player game everyone played and knows is bizzare. If they want doubles to be the format for competetive, why is the *ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME* 6v6 singles
They made the gimmick, made pokemon that had no place outside the format and made moves specifically for said format, looked at it, and went “Oh God, we can’t go back”
@@ax9583 was going to comment exactly about the 2nd part of Scarlet/Violet DLC. What I think probably happened is that they never intended to have an esports scene when they introduced double battles in Ruby/Sapphire (afterall why would they think about that in 2002-2003?) and even after they instated the official tournaments with 2vs2 battles, they still thought it wasn't going to be more than a niche thing that wouldn't need a lot of attention. That's why they took so long to have another double battles focused content in the DLC so many years after xd/Colosseum.
the games are targeted at a audience of children and vgc is targeted at adults. doubles is just less accessible and more complex, which makes it more suited to an adult audience. it also has less matchup variance and shorter games. i think there should be more doubles games
I would say I am primarily a VGC player but I also love singles content creators like Jimothy, Pokeaim, Blunder, etc. I feel like the community is at its best when both sides can appreciate each other. Hopefully people can stop going at each others throats and just enjoy pokemon. Thankfully we are safe from Iron Muggulis in both game modes 🙏
One thing that’s got to be disputed is that Gen 3 was the genesis of actual strategy in Pokemon. Sets, strats, and metas all existed even back in Red/Blue. Competitive Pokemon was played by adults in the 90s and they strategized oversets and teams. In RBY you had TonyBro + Mewtwo, and in GSC you had Baton Pass teams and stall teams. There were also sims way back too. And fan made banlist. (Meetwo, Mes, Lucia used to be the only banned Pokemon. Then they banned evasion, and went from thee. I know it’s not the point of the video, but there’s been strategy for over 25 yearsz
I wish the in game story playthroughs pushed doubles more aggressively, it’s a fun format and being incentivized to engage with it would make new players more comfortable getting into competitive vgc instead of being guided to smogon. Like imagine if the gym leaders and Pokémon league all had double battles and were actually hard again, that would be sick
i hate doubles. thats a guaranteed way to get me to stop playing. Turns Pokemon into a speed game, or worse, it makes you pack mons that have no attacks. Don't know how to tell you this, but it isn't exactly easy to get a pokemon without attacks to gain experience.
@ that’s what the exp share is for, and it’s not like you can’t overlevel for the story playthrough and just pack 6 attacking mons anyways 🤷 if it’s really such a deal breaker then maybe just include it as an option for post game replayability or something with good rewards
@@josephbulkin9222 the modern Pokémon games don’t have an exp share held item that’s splits your exp in half between your mons, it’s just an innate mechanic that al exp is shared across your whole team evenly
@@christ1121Still doesnt change the fact that doubles turns the game into a speed competition. What I mean ,is that tanky mons( the ones I like) cant be used if they get targeted twice before they do anything.
I know it's only tangentially related, but competitive tf2 also has multiple different primary formats. Community competitive is split between 6v6 and 9v9. Valve does have an official 6v6 comp mode, but it has no item/class restrictions, which kind of makes it a huge mess. Still, there is a pretty large split between 6v6 and 9v9, as the formats play very differently.
Your analysis around the 10 minute mark actually reminds me about the analysis of the cultural difference between sumo and American football. Sumo is very quick and decisive, whereas football provides multiple opportunities to play for a win, and how the differences in the sports we play reflect cultural differences between japan and america
A better comparison would be American football and rugby since one pretty much originates from the other. Rugby being the long drawn out and free flowing version with many small decisions throughout a game (singles) and American football being much more calculated with fewer plays/turns being decisive in who wins the game.
I've played singles for 10+ years and switched to doubles/VGC in the middle of scarlet violet. I'm really enjoying open teamsheet format and Tera is my fave mechanic, and I think it feels better in doubles
I think the overall consensus among VGC players is that open team sheets are a good thing. It was a weird take that Jimothy thought it was bad. Knowing all your opponents options means the better players will win more often. Much more chess-like. Previous formats had a lot of information wars, trying to hide sets from your opponent, and winning by using some super random tech move.
@@Finch_The_Human Nah, a less skilled player getting the win because they pulled off some wild strategy that their opponent wasn't expecting is more fun imo. Pokemon is a lot more dynamic than chess, and wanting to make it less so is silly in my opinion. Nothing against VGC, but open teamsheets absolutely killed my interest in participating in it.
Actually many years ago it was CybertronVGC who was very important in growing the competitive scene for VGC. It was in my favorite format, Gen 6 VGC. Wolfe came to tournaments with unique teams but this was only showcased in matches commentated by Aaron Zheng or by TPCi staff.
From a competition logistics standpoint, you just can’t have 100+ turn Pokémon battles that take hours. That’s why VGC is doubles format and only bring 4 Pokémon instead of 6v6 doubles. The game lengths are short enough for the tournament operations to be manageable, but the options are complex enough that there is skill. You can shorten the singles game length down to 15-30 minutes by playing 3v3, but at that point team building is too limited. It becomes even more rock-paper-scissors and luck based.
Something that I do not see to be commented is that singles 6v6 was popularized by the anime. It was awesome to see trainers command their pokemon in creative ways. It was also a way to showcase never seen pokemon like Blaziken. I do not feel that hype in VGC or since team preview became a thing.
My thing with the “adapt” argument is that certain moves and abilities exist for a reason. Like evasiveness is disliked, but no guard, compound eyes, blizzard+hail, thunder+rain, smart strike, and aura sphere are all there for a reason, but because we remove evasiveness(except contrary Defog) these strategies are rarely used. Or banning trapping abilities, when pivoting moves and even shed shell exist to keep that in check.
Pokemon having two different competitive communities is an asset, since people can play where and how they want. Being mad that both exist together is like being angry that two restaurants are across the street from each other.
Hey I've noticed a really awesome uptick in quality of content and a bit more of a branching out in terms of topics being covered on the channel and I just wanted to let you know I see and appreciate it. You're hard work isn't going unnoticed. Awesome job!
My main thing is that VGC is way better as an actual spectator sport. I know it's rare and uncommon but games in Smogon singles can, at a moment's notice turn into an endless switchfest. That's absolute poison for viewership. I know some people love the intricate chess match at play during switchfests but I just can't stomach it personally.
I think the switchfest thing is my primary issue with Singles. I feel like at a certain point I’m wondering when the game actually gets played. I understand that intricate 5D chess moves are probably being played here but this is just ridiculous.
The irony is that, logically speaking, it's almost impossible for a game, even Singles format, to devolve into an infinite switch fest outside of smogon rules. The average damage output powercreep in pokemon is so drastic that, literally anywhere outside of smogon, it is extremely easy to run over any sort of defense-oriented setup with almost zero thought (just pick legendary with big attack number, slap on choice item or life orb, and press attacks), and usually the only way to reach enough bulk for a switch+regenerator spam to ever profit on hp gain with this situation is to have something that setup with defense increasing buffs (aka they can't really switch, as whatever is switched will take so much damage due to not being defensively boosted that it's a losing move). It's an ironic self-sabotage smogon enacted upon itself, since if someone on any other format were to attempt using smogon sets, they'd be crushed so one-sidedly that they'd assume smogon is trolling since their tiering format alters the game that drastically. I think the best example is smogon's view on Baxcalibre compared to the no-tiers console format. With most of the "KO literally everything in 1 hit" super legendaries out of the picture, Bax seems like an ultra durable mon with Snowscape defense boosts and passive Ice Body regeneration. But when those super legendaries are spammed by everyone, that tank Bax strategy is a joke of a set that no one in the console format uses because it can't tank the relevant, unfiltered powerhouse hitter mons for jack all even if fully bulk EV built. So Bax in console formats go for much more aggressive Thermal Exchange offensive sets instead. Kingambit, smogon's top dog mon, is also extremely rare in console matches because it is an absurdly strong smogon mon when all the super legendaries are filtered out, but when compared to no-tiers aggressive legendary spam it ends up being very underwhelming in the more powerful competition it faces. Because when mons like Urshifuu and Ogerpon are allowed to be spammed, everything has to become warped around the standards those kinds of mons set. In the smogon format where those can be removed, everything warps around those kinds of mons NOT existing in the format.
@@joshuakim5240 It's not just Bax. The official formats would allow monsters like Flutter Mane and Iron Bundle with the same restrictions as garbage like Brute Bonnet and Scream Tail, and the same goes for mons like Sneasler and the bikes for their own respective formats. Basically, an official competitive singles format would literally just be clicking the strongest possible move possible in constant hyperoffense mirror matches, even if legendries are banned. Just like not using Incineroar is self-griefing in VGC, not using Mane, Bundle, and Sneasler would be self-griefing in an official BSS tourney, because those are meta-warping threats. The reality is that GameFreak is awful at balancing in the modern era. This is the company that created pairs like Zacian and Zamazenta, and Glastrier and Spectrier, and gave them the same play restrictions.
Your right he should have said 1 time champion and over 10 time participant of worlds. The biggest with the best of the best. With a couple 2nd place finishes in there tok
Hey man, just wanted to say that I spent the past 7 months at home alone recovering from knee surgery and your content really helped me stay sane. It’s also been cool to see your channel growing this whole time too
I think it's silly that there's an official tournament for VGC Doubles and not the same regulation's Battle Spot Singles. I've been having fun playing RegH, and the Bring-6-Pick-3 style works great in Best of 3 sets. I would love if this was picked up at official tournaments.
Smogon vs VGC feels like the Standard vs Expanded/Legacy formats of TCGs. Legacy formats are almost always grassroots-based because the devs almost always stop supporting those formats, but those formats are still good and full of depth. I've heard tons of people in MTG, Pokemon, and Yu-Gi-Oh argue about this too, saying legacy formats are "not official" or on the contrary saying that older formats are superior in nature with their noses turned up, when it is just a different or preferred format. I am a singles main and grassroots enjoyer, and often an disillusioned by newer formats in all these games, but I still am happy the official formats are played so that we can have more people eventually to play with us and enjoy the grassroots formats, too. Great video as always, Jimothy. I have been enjoying your content consistently and am impressed by the frequency of quality uploads. Hopefully you are doing ok, too. I know matters with the Horse Council likely keep you up at night
Singles will always be my preferred format for the simple reason that there's so many ways to play. Even though I don't like gen 9 ou that much I can play UU, RU, or even a past generation of OU. In doubles if I don't like the current format I simply have to wait until the next regulation. I can't hop onto showdown and load up a game of 2014 vgc, but I can play gen 6 OU to heart's content.
I feel like that's more an issue of showdown being massively slanted towards singles than doubles, for some reason they've already killed the Reg G format despite some people preferring that format, yet they keep around doubles OU from multiple gens.
as someone who used to play a lot of random battles but never much OU or VGC, what nearly got me into OU was how much fun gen 9 was in the first few days of release, it felt fast and you could play a game out in a few minutes which felt nice, but the constant bans in the format really soured me on that and I went to VGC and found it a lot more fun. The constant need for smogon to try "balance" a format that can never be balanced feels like it harms the overall feel of singles for me, any time something feels slighty strong in OU people cry about it until it gets suspect tested or banned, and that cycle repeats endlessly. where as in doubles the format changes shake up the meta on a rather regular basis to keep things from feeling stale.
Smogon 6v6 will always be my bread and butter ❤️ I started with Pokemon Online gen 4 back in 2010 and haven’tstopped. I especially love how old gen metagames keep being played and evolve still now. The magic of discovering how good Aerodactyl can be in Gen 3 or reviving Megas in gen 7 is always a blast. Thank you, Smogon and Showdown!
As someone who played both Smogon and VGC but quit early on in Gen8 due to power creep (f*ck Dynamax) i've had several years to formulate my thoughts on the matter. I think both formats have their up and downsides. I knew of Smogon way back in Gen4, but never heard about VGC until 2015 from a content creator known as TheJustinFlynn where i learned that it was TPCI's official format. I think back then I was part of the "Smogon is fake and unofficial" crowd for about a year until i came across videos of a cardridge league playing a slightly modified version of Gen6 OU (more complex bans to free some banned pokemon, etc) and joined there, though so close to the end of the generation didnt start battling there until Gen7. During Gen7 i found myself improving at both VGC17 (to this day my favorite VGC format i played) as well as 6v6 OU on the league, topping both at locals and tournaments on the league. In 2018, i even travelled across the border to Antwerp in Belgium to participate in what was essentially the replacement for the Belgium National Championship, hosting both OU and VGC, finishing Top 4 in VGC and winning the OU tournament. While both formats are pokemon, they felt completely different from eachother. But that also caused something that irritated me a lot: so many people feel deadset on playing only VGC or only on Smogon that they completely disregard the other without ever trying it out, or playing just 1 game already going in with the mindset that they'll hate it. In person VGC tournaments are great, meeting people irl either usuals at locals or people from other countries (yes im from Europe, we have multiple countries here) at large hype events that you normally only really speak to online. Also i love how the faster gameplay allows for much more complex EV spreads, having a lot more focus on defensive calcs that are impossible in singles due to hazards messing with the calcs. Smogon however is not a format, its a forum that hosts many different formats. They host different tiers across current and all historical genearions, and even if you aren't a fan of 6v6 singles, there's things like 1v1, hackmons, and even DoublesOU, which i played quite a bit, as a sort of middleground between OU and VGC. There's something for everyone to enjoy. So yeah, i like both, and they both have a clear reason to exist. Just wish more people playing one were accepting of the other. Also i do kinda dislike the evergrowing divide between Smogon and cardridge, Showdown gameplay looks so boring when you've played cardridge and TPCI neglecting Singles with their ridiculous powercreep and dooming Gen9 sucks too, and dont forget about the removal of the VS Recorder and having several years of 20 min battle timer...
I feel like if Pokémon wanted more fan interest in doubles they should add more doubles to the actual games. Make every gen 10 gym leader a "bring 6 pick 4" doubles. Rather than there only having been 3 doubles gym leaders in 9 gens
Yeah I agree. Thankfully I think its likely cause the Gen 9 DLC Indigo Disk is pretty much exclusively double battles with actual competitive movesets (for the most part)
@@maxgustafsson7802 oh yeah, this 1v1 vs 2v2 debate has a good 20 years in it left at this rate. They'll never sell Pokemon to anyone but kids. Old people get jaded and stop spending money but there's always a new batch of kids to sell to. They've got that market on lock and will never let it go. Appealing to older people with more complicated games may make us happy, but it's basically throwing money away. A company wants to make money, not throw it away.
@@NaturesFlame I mean maybe but the double battles in the games are usually fun too. Getting to use more of your pokemon at once is fun sometimes. In Pokemon Sapphire (my first game) I loved when I found the double battles in game. I think that was the gen they started paying attention to doubles with new additions like plusle/minun and how spread moves worked, so they put quite a few double battles, even tate & liza in emerald, and battle tower + frontier having double battle options. Colosseum and Gale of Darkness were great games as a kid too, and are 100% doubles, if the gamecube was more popular I think they would've been appreciated a lot more.
I'm primarily a VGC guy nowadays, but I've played lots of Smogon Singles in previous generations and I love it, I think it's great. The main problem I have with Smogon Singles at the moment, well, you could say it's balance, but I think it is slightly more subtle than that. The fundamental issue is that for VGC, the people designing and balancing the game are the same people (or at least the same organisation) and it allows them to create some harmony between what is designed and how it is balanced (which they do not do perfectly, but overall I think they do a good job, and especially Gen IX VGC I think has been great!) The Smogon guys are subject to a hard problem, where they have zero control over the design and _some_ control over the balance (within their own rules, anyway. Theoretically they could tweak any stat or move or even add whole new Pokémon if they wanted). So it's tough, and I think it's extra tough because people really want them to _respect_ the design of the actual games while they balance the format, and in many ways various bans and restriction clauses feel like they are fundamentally not respecting the game's design and that upsets people... but Gen IX without such bans and clauses really is _not_ balanced around 6v6 Singles, so what can you do?
I think the easy solution is to tell the people whining about cartridge accuracy to go play VGC instead so that the rest of us can focus on making singles good again despite Game Freak doing everything in their power to kill it as a format in favor of doubles.
I think this is a very important point to make. Doubles are great to watch, since every turn matters so much and the games are shorter, even with the much longer animations.
@@josephbulkin9222isn't that like an upside tho, Pokemons that would otherwise be outclassed due to their middling offensive stats could still see play (and amplify the threat posed by your offensive mons). The added complexity of redirection (makes storm drain & lightning rod so much more valuable), teamwide buffs and switching shenanigans really spices the game up *a lot*
i think there is something to be said about the anime and how it affects 6v6 preference. a lot of us kids just wanted to be like ash and they didnt really do double battles in the show iirc
@@josephbulkin9222 Yeah, 6v6s in the anime were regularly several episodes long. Of course, there were a lot of doubles battles in the anime, including a ton of tag battles where it was literally 2 trainers vs 2 trainers. But singles was always the spotlight.
I prefer the single format when playing myself, but when it comes to tournaments and world championships, VGC Doubles rule feels much better to watch. There are a lot less turns, so each turn is much more impactful, and each turn, there are a lot more considerations to be made.
Open team sheets are an odd case. It was only as of Gen 9 I think that open team sheet rules became a thing, but I think there’s a lot of good that comes from it. The access of information leads to a higher skill cap and a lower skill floor, letting anyone enter and not get screwed over. It also makes high-level play more interesting, in my opinion, since it’s not necessarily about what item or move or ability an opponent brought, it’s about how they use them. I think that open team sheets, especially with terastallization, is far more fair to the majority of players than not. I think hidden moves are a great part of singles, but cheese in doubles feels very bad to play and play against.
Yeah its funny, I remember having a kneejerk reaction thinking "wow that sucks, information identification is a huge part of the game", but Moxieboosted completely changed my mind on the topic instantly in his video. Theoretically rogue strats are kneecapped a bit, but only really ones that specifically rely on unconventional movesets, and even then most high end players know Pokemon well enough to consider those weird strats. In practice, we've seen quite a bit of oddball picks show up (I mean hell, there was a damn Poliwrath recently that placed well). And yeah, like you mentioned, the existence of Tera also makes this preferable. Tera isn't the worst mechanic by a long shot, but its also not the best, as it adds a lot of volatility that isn't controllable. Team preview alone cant give you information, like it could with Megas for example, and VGC's more turn starved nature makes a surprise Tera swinging a match quite commonplace. I think it ends up being overall good for the game, and I wouldn't super hate it if it made its way on in game ladder in the future.
I believe a benefit of open team sheets is also that it doesn't give people that are more known in the scene an unfair advantage as some people tend to tell each other an item or a move option their opponent had and open team sheets equalizes that abit.
I think it should be clarified that open team sheets actually lowers the skill cap and floor for teambuilding, while raising the skill floor and ceiling for actual gameplay. Matchup fishing cheese strategies (think like that cheater using Double Kick Terrakion to beat Focus Sash Smeargle) that catch people off-guard take quite a bit of skill to think up, and banning them through open team sheets restricts teambuilding skill expression. However, cheese teams usually take less skill, because if you fished an advantageous matchup, you basically have cheats -- but if your strategies don't work, you're destined to lose. So your match outcomes are predetermined from the start (unless you're 3x better than the opponent or something). So bad players can't rely on fixed matches to cheat to victory.
Probably because singles is about 60% switching and 30% hazard clearing to facilitate switching. Doubles is just a more complex game by its nature. Both are valid and have very talented players. But if doubles players talking to singles players act like chess champions talking to checkers champions, its because its true. You play a children's game on the easiest setting.
@@booradley6832that's part of it. The other 2 major factors to why some people really like doubles is the much faster pace and greatly reduced volatility. Not only are stall strats basically unheard of in VGC, but it's also much easier to come back from a losing position.
I got into gen 3 ou around the time you started posted videos. It’s been awesome to see the content evolve. Great video, love your smooth unbiased narration.
This was a great video and a really clear and unbiased comparison between the two. If you're planning on making another video like this I would love to see one on the differences between ladder singles play and tournament singles play. I feel like some of the issues mentioned at the end are specific to tournament play, and my experience with overwatch tells me that top level ladder games and actual pro matches can test very different skills and even have completely different metas
I would like to mention that singles has a much easier time gathering information over vgc, with the overall greater average amount of turns and the free usage of a calculator. Especially with tera mechanics, which is already controversial in singles, would completely twist vgc without open teamsheets.
You've made many great points and I agree with most of them. I'm especially irked by Smogon hate, because i've been in pokemon spaces for many many years and it's almost always comming from people who have no goddamn clue about how any of Smogon rulings work and at the same time are very inept at the game itself. It's a community of people trying their best to foster an environment for you to enjoy your favorite game in - attacking them (and not the rulings you find contestable) is just such a dick move on a fundamental level. Literally why be like this. I can't agree about some points you made about doubles tho. For example an open datasheet is a new idea ment to balance out Tera types and WILD amounts of variants it brings to the game. We didnt preffer the element of surprise as a singles community, we decided to throw it away altogether because it was unfun and uncompetitive to guess that many more things every game so the comparison and reasoning behind it seems slightly flawed. I'm really not sure about the mathematical complexity of decisionmaking in respective formats. True, single games are much longer on average (lets say 40 turns while acknowledging some edge cases go way, way beyond that) than doubles (say 7 turns on average) but in singles you can only make 5 choices every turn. Click one of four attacks or switch. In doubles between having 8 attacks to click into 3 possible slots each [minus things like protect, spread and setup moves] and being able to make two switches a turn into two possible slots each turns in doubles are so much more densly packed than singles turns I think it's far from obvious as to which format offers most decisions per game. If you consider a flowchart of possible gamestates every turn i belive doubles become orders of magnitude more complex because you have a spqnning number of points to make decision from every turn. But that's neither here or there I obviously agree that pace and vibe of singles feels much different and it's great fun - I preffer playing singles myself. Thank you for making this, i do think we need more voices in the community telling people that you dont have to put down thing A to enjoy thing B. You can even enjoy both for different reasons, like me. Great point about rules and bans being in both formats too e: lol what i was on about Tera being banned in singles, i think i peered into an alternative dimension
idr the video thats from offhand so i might be wrong, but thats blisy who does a lot of stuff with rng manipulation - im pretty sure in this case they were using the whismur to check what frame they hit so theyre just using the master ball to do it quick, they wanna get to the actual thing theyre hunting for not sit there catching a random whismur
PokemonOnline was so dope. The community was small but tight, there would be regular tournaments where you'd run into the same people, and I think the minor barrier to entry helped keep the community chill
Personally I think that Pokemon should implement a mode that allows you to play the game with all battles being either Single or Double battles. It's very odd that the official competitive format of the game is doubles, but the single player mode generally only requires a couple mandatory ones, and iirc the Elite 4 and champion don't even have a single one.
My opinion is that Smogon is the way that the game makes us play. Because Pokémon is largely just singles with maybe one doubles gym, singles is what we play, what we know, what we do. VGC is the format that Pokémon wants you to play. But it doesn’t let you play it unless you’re specifically trying to play competitive Pokémon. New players aren’t used to it Especially in SV before the Blueberry DLC, the only doubles was the ghost gym that also had omi boosts when you tera and attack boosts when you KO a Pokémon making it way more aggressive than normal VGC
I think Smogon should include triple battles. I just don't like singles because if I wanna use a pokemon like furfrou. Unfortunately the only way to play it efficiently is by pissing off your opponent with evasion clause via bright powder and cotton guard, toxic, snarl, attract
VGC will always be the official competitive format because games go much quicker and when you have real life tournaments with 500+ players, staffed by volunteers, you need the games to go quick.
8:19 lolol well said. I almost forgot there was even a rivalry, but you reminded me there totally is one. We’re all Pokemon fans, why does that even exist in the first place?
i think i would be much more likely to play a 6v6 singles tourney if you only brought one team. its intimidating to me that i would have to learn multiple teams to have the best chances
I think that’s the point. There’s more to Pokémon than what you do in a battle. Your expression of skill starts the moment you open the team builder, and being able to make and effectively use more teams than your opponent means that you’re more deserving of a win than they are.
it's like melee hating ultimate and vice versa, it is so stupid. i've played both formats for about 20 years now, and they are both fun and intriguing at the same time
As someone who ditched smogon entirely recently, my decision was mostly made because the lack of consistency and the fact that so many bans and complex rules has distorted what Pokémon is to me beyond recognition. I start to ask myself if I’m even playing Pokémon sometimes when I’m playing generation nine. So right now I’m mostly just playing older gens as well as national dex since I always know what’s going to be thrown at me and bans/unbans are rather rare in both formats.
While I understand your sentiment I'm a bit confused, wouldn't that mean you *didn't* leave Smogon entirely if you're still playing other Smogon formats? Do you perhaps just mean you ditched OU?
The only reason that current generation OU is so bad is because Game Freak is pandering to doubles so hard in order to make it a playable format, and it’s ruining singles in the process. Everything they make these days is so obviously meant for doubles, and it couldn’t be any less apparent that they don’t care about singles despite it being over 99% of all Pokémon has ever been.
LEAGUE OF LEGENDS MENTIONED As someone who plays league competitively for a college team, it's kind of interesting how many references to strategies in competitive pokémon we've used. Just one example is the concept of type/strategy overload, where if you run, let's say, a rain team, it doesn't matter if they have one rain counter or specifically water type counter because if you can get past that you can theoretically blow up the rest of their team. I think friezai mentioned it in one of his videos, and You can do something similar in League. Just one example
I think Smogon serves a very important niche for pokemon. For those who do not like smogon because "it bans things", no one forces you play it. Smogon offers you the option to play Ubers, or straight up play Anything Goes. 2 formats with minimal or no restrictions. For those who say: No restriction = more creativity/variety. This is simply not true. If you look at their viability rankings, the lesser restrictive formats have fewer viable mons. Ubers and AG rank around 30 Mons ranked above C rank. OU - the metagame with established guard rails - has 85 mons which can be considered as very reasonable and viable option. Smogons philosophy with their restrictions is to maximize number of viable mons. One way to ensure that the number of viable mons stays maximized is by keeping all the 5 basic playstyles (Hyper-Offense, Offense, Balance, Defense, Stall) as viable options. If one of these options becomes to overwhelming, cutting it back in line is the one way to make sure all 5 options become viable In unrestricted formats, where only 1 or 2 of these playstyles are reasonably viable, the number of viable pokemon will automatically plummet - which is one reason why Ubers and AG have so few viable options. The option to cut back the broken option in the line does not exist. Also, "nothing is broken if everything is broken" (without rotation) does not work on a reliable basis. Sometimes it may work, but most of the times it does not. If you do not believe me, just look at competitive yugioh in the last few years: Games back then (like 2007 - 2014ish) were slower and lasted many turns, OTKs were rare, and being able to do so was a trademark feature of your deck. Back then you could have different different styles of deck: + Beatdown, which goes for supremacy in attack power and the battle phase + Aggro/Swarm, which goes for high field presence and use the monsters for various benefits + Combo which tries to assemble the various pieces as quickly as possible, and obtains a winning situation when the combo is assembled + Mid-range, which does not try to go for an early win and instead focus on establishing a resource loop to win. Like the name implies, in terms of speed/power vs durability/grind game, it lies right in the middle. + control, which focuses on slowing the game down and winning by denying the opponents resources, typically by using disruption from traps + Stun, A style of play that focuses on preventing the use of certain action by using cards that change fundamental game mechanics (like "you cannot use spell cards"). Back then, the deck was also refered to as anti-meta. + Stall/Burn - which should be self-explanatory. If you compare them to pokemon teamstyles, you can roughly equate: Beatdown/Aggro/Swarm = Hyper-Offense Combo = Offense (it sorta works, since it did not use to be a reckless gamestyle) Mid-Range = Balance Control = Defense Stall/Stun/Burn = Stall So, fast forward to 2024: In the meantime, every deck in yugioh has got some kind of searcher for their cards. Every deck has access to monsters with high attack, relatively easy to make, access to lots of internal deck consistency and so on. These monsters also usually have disruption effects to the point where you can stack so many it becomes a pseudo FTK, that you can build your board on turn 1, and if you cannot dismantle it, the other deck runs you over on turn 3. TLDR: what happened is: Combo "ate up" beatdown, aggro, swarm amped everything up by a factor of 10. The previous deck types essentially have been downgraded to become a feature of a deck and essentially became "unstoppable hyper-offense" Mid-range had to speed up in order to not be overwhelmed by combo, and they also reached the point of where they can establish a less oppressive board, which can still kill you on turn 3 if you cannot dismantle it - i.e. the distinction between combo and midrange has mostly devolved into a semantic difference. Combo is the one who goes "balls to the wall/all gas", whereas midrange is the one that also establishes a resource loop in exchange for a lower, but still relatively high ceiling. So in pokemon terms, Balance style massive skewed towards offense. That is the result of offensive powercreep. In yugioh this results in effective non-games, where Player 1 comboes for 30 minutes, and player 2 gets to activate 1 or 2 cards before he is out of plays and gets beaten down the following turn. That is what powercreep does. On the other side of the spectrum, stall/burn and stun actually merged together to effectively being the same thing. Stall/Burn strategies cannot win without being carried by a stun strategy. Control itself is in a weird spot, where the classic "pure control" cannot really exist on its own anymore and tries to not be absorbed by the other deck types. Most control decks are in danger of becoming one of two things: either become a mid-range deck that uses traps instead of monsters for disruption, or becoming "Stun Ft. a control engine", where the stun part puts the game to such a crawl where the control engine can actually have merit. So in Pokemon terms, the team Style Defense Stops existing. Ironically, Stun (in yugioh) was somewhat buffed by the powercreep, which we call reverse-powercreep: The cards, which had effects designed for back then when the game had many turns, and example only stunned for 1 or 2 turns, effectively changed into "they last the entire game", when games only lasting 3 or 4 turns becomes the norm. That in combination of the deck types natural "ignorance" to powercreep ("It does not matter how powerful your cards are, they are useless if you cannot activate them") reached to them become the dominant style in the opposite spectrum. So ye, Imagine a meta where Stun(=Stall in Pokemon terms) is the best playstyle, where no one has the chance to break through a defensive setup. The thing is: With ongoing powercreep like in gen9, and no rotation/removal of elements, it will become inevitable that a game has a high chance converge towards between those extremes. Either the force becomes too unstoppable, or the objects become too immovable. You still need more examples? Let's look at the "Lowlights" of the competitive yugioh in the last three years. To give you a few "Lowlights" from the last 3 years of yugioh, which are infamous for massively adding powercreep to the game at an even higher speed than before:
1) 2022 introduced tearlements as a deck. The deck was very popular with competitive players, because it had a good mirror, in which both players (the one going first and the one going second) had an even chance to win. it was super consistent, so it never bricked, and created no non-games because of that. Also the deck could beat the opponents endboard using their own deck thematic cards (called engine cards) and did not require powerful generic staples (so called non-engine). That so far sounds like "the greatest thing ever to bless yugioh" - so where is the catch? The deck was designed so over the top, that it was virtually unbeatable by every other deck, hence it earned the nickname "Tear 0", a pun of Tearlements and Tier 0. The best way for non-tear player to beat a Tear 0 player was to play stun, and pray you win the coinflip to go first. Sooo, the banlist surely fixed this ..... right? Well, it sorta did. They massively slaughtered the deck, and the deck is still alive and topping events. I'm not kidding, from 10 engine cards the deck used in its best iteration, 4 of them had to be banned, and the remaining ones had to be put to 1 copy per deck. And the deck STILL TOPPED competitive events, despite losing 2 legs and 1 arm. It actually won the 2024 virtual TCG world championship 2 years after its release, so the deck was hit again after this. TBF, the deck after bans was "good but not broken" levels of power, but the fact of what it took them to get it there should tell any non-yugioh player how over the top the deck was. 2) After tearlement, we had kashtira as the next - a deck which lore- and gameplay-wise was designed as a hard counter to tearlement. They had two gameplay gimmicks: Zonelocking and banishing cards from the opponents deck. Zone Locking is exactly what it sounds like: "I use my effects to make you unable to place any card on this zone, and my goal is to block all 10 zones a player has access to" - and in its hayday, Kashtira could lock out 9 out of 10 zones on their first turn with a good hand - so good luck doing anything if you go second. I mean, the lock was not "technically unbeatable". In order to beat the lock, you either had to remove their deathstar-lookalike boss monster from the field (without destroying because ofc it was immune to that, so the majority of removal options do not work lol), or by flipping their stuff into facedown defense position (its locking effect requires it to be faceup). Which led to people playing otherwise obscure cards like "Book of Eclipse" just because it could out that lock. Of course most deck required those non-engine cards, which you had to pray you hard draw them, creating a "you have to be lucky and draw the out, or you lose" gameplay. In a weird twist of irony, you could argue that this format was actually well balanced. Yugiohs deck size is 40 cards, if you go second you have 6 cards. The chance to draw a copy of an unsearchable 3-off in a 6 card hand with 40 cards is 40 %, so by extension you can say "It is good balancing, if the worst deck has a 40 % win-rate vs the best deck in a game with over 10 000 cards". 3) This year, the format was dominated by Snake-Eyes, a deck type whose type is hard to evaluate. some argue its a midrange deck with a combo ceiling, some argue its a combo deck with the recursion of midrange. you may see where this is going. Essentially, the entire deck consisted of 1 card starters. I.E. If one of their cards resolved, they ended up on full combo, and the board they established was nigh unbreakable and either required you to stop ANY effect from ever resolving, or needed multiple specific combinations of board breakers (Kashtira at least had the decency that you only needed to draw 1 of them). However, unlike Tearlements, Snake-Eyes could not beat its own board with just its own engine cards, and instead had to rely on non-engine cards to have a shot at winning the mirror going second. And well, this was the best deck, so every other deck had it even worse than that. Essentially, Snake-Eyes mirrors, i.e. high ranking competitive games, devolved into "we can coinflip to decide whos going first and compare opening hands, we already know who is winning based on that alone. If I go first and open 3 of my one card starters, and your starting hand can only block 2 of the cards - I win". 4) Tenpai: As I previously showed: going first is a massive advantage, and the meta is usually a "go first meta", sooo 2024 they finally made a good going second deck in tenpai. What does it do? They do 30k damage, when you only have 8k Lifepoints. Also, like Snake-Eyes, all of their deck cards are 1 card into full combo. ohhhh, and they have multiple cards which just say "all your cards are unaffected by your opponents effects", so just do your flowchart combo, it doesn't matter what your opponent has or does. I do not think I need to explain how frustrating it is play vs this deck. Like Kashtira, the deck ofc also has its own counters, which just like Kashtira are on the type of "only good vs tenpai, crap everywhere else" - except here the going first player is the one desperate to draw the out for once.
These 4 decks roughly summarize 30 out of the last 36 months. If we go even further back till like 2016 to 2017ish, you will lots of the similar issues: 2016/2017 was dominated 2 tier 0 decks in Zoodiac and Spyral, 2018 was the year of "Infinite Loops enabled by Firewall Dragon", which led to the meta being "FTK/Pseudo-FTK turbo" , 2019 was dominated by TOSS format - A format where the general consensus seems to be that it was a good format. 2020 was the COVID format which had no events. The format in online was also of course dominated by a combo that that put up an unbreakable board in Adamancipators. 2021 I was personally on yugioh break, so I did not follow the game that much. However, what I heard of it in this year was not as bad (even though the format had its issues). So yeah, if you look at yugioh -particular in the last 3 years with powercreep turbo, the game would constantly flip between either the Tearlement/Snake-Eyes extreme or the Kashtira/Tenpai extreme. There were occasionally phases, where the "broken balances broken" happened to work out, but the more you progress with powercreep and its speed, the smaller the area of where the concept of "nothing is broken if everything is broken" can work out happen once when multiple stars align. So, if Gen10 and Gen11's offensive powercreep will look like the one introduced in gen9, unrestricted competitive singles will look like the last 3 years of yugioh. Soooo, how do yugioh players cope with this non-sense that happened the last 3 years, especially since cards became more expensive too? Retro-Formats gained popularity, previously, only 1 significant retro format in GOAT (2005ish yugioh) existed, which was considered "the peak of OldSchool Yugioh". Nowadays, other retroformat begin to thrive, SynchroPlant/Edison Format (around 2010/2011) is popular in particular, but I also noticed more people going back to HAT (2014) and TOSS (2019) formats. So, people who hate the broken game will search a format which does not have the issues related to powercreep. Which is similar to what is happening to showdown with the rise of popularity in retro formats. People tend to love formats, which has neither a broken threat that you have to use in order to win. They do not want to play in a format where you have to bring super niche counters in order to win vs a powerful strategy. They ideally want to play in a metagame which has maximum variety. The retroformats I described all fulfill that criteria: It neither of the ugly faces of powercreep, or in the case of TOSS format where a situation where "broken balances broken" happened to work out. and all of the formats I listed have the property where a lot of decks happen to be playable, which cover all the playstyles. And to loop back to smogon formats - this is the state that smogon tries to create a situation which those retroformats happened to have gotten naturally: Each of the 4 issues I explained in detail can be seen in analogy to an issue that smogon wants to address with its policies: The "Tearlement type Issue" can be equated to "something in the meta is broken/overpowered". The "Kashtira Problem" can be equated to "Overcentralization", where you need to prepare specific counters to a strategy to not auto-lose a matchup - and those counters are only useful for this matchup The "Snake-Eyes Problem" , where Snake-Eye cannot beat its own boards without non-engine is similar to what smogon constitutes as uncompetitive - a state where the effects of RNG on the outcome of the match overwhelm the player decisions. Imagine a state where you And lastly, the "Tenpai problem", where the best strategy is "ignorant and just follows its flowchart", requires specific counters which need to be hard drawn (aka mercy of RNG) and can be argued to be broken. This sounds awfully familar to evasion, baton pass and swag-play. So essentially, Smogon serves as a Safe Haven to people who are sick of the nature of what an unregulated game can be become, and are not willing to cope with "i m sure broken will just fix broken", so their formats serve the same purpose as retro-formats. WHICH IS IRONIC, because they are the one who preserve the retroformats and keep them in a widely accessible state.
I like doubles more for competitive but singles more for casual/playthrough. Singles is less stressful because there's less going on each turn, and for playthroughs you can just switch in the super effective pokemon and click the super effective button. It's relaxing and harkens back to my childhood. But if I'm going to actually sit down and battle competitively, I prefer doubles. Singles takes too long, and sometimes feels like you spend more time switching than you spend actually doing something. It's kind of a meme, but sometimes when I watch a competitive singles match, it feels like I'm watching two people click the switch button 30 times in a row until someone finally clicks a move. That doesn't happen in doubles. I also enjoy the wider depth of strategy in doubles. Support/technical strategies are less common in singles, I could be wrong, but it seems like singles you mainly choose between an offensive playstyle focused around just clicking a lot of damaging moves, or a defensive strategy where you apply hazards/statuses and switch a million times. In doubles, you can actually have a supportive pokemon that isn't necessarily a defensive wall or an offensive powerhouse, but supports your teammates. Not to say that isn't impossible in singles, but with the amount of turns in singles and the fact that you can't switch AND use a move on the same turn like you can in doubles, means that things like tailwind, trick room, weather, fake out, etc are much more viable in doubles than in singles. And some strategies like redirection, helping hand, after you, abilities like power spot or friend guard simply don't work in singles. So if I'm going to play competitively, between the choice of having more strategic depth and games finishing in 10 turns, or less strategic depth and losing in 60, I know which one I'm going to pick. Granted, the barrier of entry for VGC is way too high, when I do get the itch to play competitive (not that often to be fair), I only use rental teams if on cartridge, or I use Pokemon Showdown's VGC ladder. I think Pokemon would benefit greatly from making a live service competitive battle simulator that would be separate from the main games and persist through the generations, just getting updates when new games are released. The only way they could mess this up is if they time gated/microtransaction gated the way you train/change EVs/IVs/Natures/moves/etc on your Pokemon. Showdown works because you can change anything on a whim. Imagine if you had to have a certain amount of proteins to change your attack evs in the simulator and you could only get more by waiting 24 hours or paying for a recharge, that would suck.
To be fair, I've heard doubles 6v6 can be quite long, too. The lack of Balance teams has been called a gen 9 thing, though I don't know if it was a growing problem.
I'm mostly a spectator, both formats definitely have their strengths and weaknesses as entertainment. VGC has high production values, live commentary, and quick games with dramatic and decisive turns. But it can be really frustrating to watch good players lose games because they got a 50/50 prediction wrong. Previous regulations also started to feel a little stale with the same high-power legendaries on every team. My hot take is that OHKOs are boring, I wish Pokemon wouldn't celebrate them so much on stream. Singles, on the other hand, does seem to be decided more often by superior preparation and strategy. But too often it feels like trench warfare, with battles lasting 50-80 turns, both players just waiting for an opportunity to secure an advantage. I've found draft tournaments to be the best way to enjoy singles as it encourages a lot of variety and creativity.
The old ShoddyBattle interface still makes me nostalgic. Also I dont think it can be overstated just how big a deal Se-Jun Park's win in 2014 was with Pachirisu in spreading awareness of and legitimizing VGC as a format. It was big news when it happened on the internet.
I'm a big fan of closed team sheets in principle, but if you're not part of a group, then it's easy to have your strategy shared with others via viewers, which keeping those without connections in the dark.
I never loved Smogon's decisions on sleep, evasion, etc, becaused I really enjoyed the in game 6v6 back in gen 6/7. However, Showdown's ease of use and accessibility makes me appreciate all they do a lot.
I like watching both singles and doubles content, the only real gripe i have is people in both formats titling their videos as "competitive pokemon" not specifying whether it's singles or doubles. This isn't a problem in terms of causing confusion, as most channels stick to one format, so as long as you're familiar with the channel you know what format you're getting. The problem i have, is that it implies that whatever format the channel in question is playing is THE way to play competitive pokemon, even if that implication isn't intended on behalf of the video creator and i think this does in some small ways help increase the divide between the two formats and their communities which i think most people can agree is not desirable. As such i strongly recommend that regardless of what format one plays or prefers that if you're going to include the words "Competitive Pokemon" in your video or stream title, please just add "Singles" or "Doubles" somewhere to help emphasize that both formats are and can be competitive.
Ive been following doubles for a long time now and watching Wolfe’s content for so long, I can’t help but agree with you. I don’t play myself, but I can’t imagine how frustrating it must be for doubles players when games can be decided so quickly. One wrong move and it could be 100% over. Like watching Wolfe’s streams and the dude’s decicion making boiling down to: Well if I do X and he knows I do X, I should do Y but if he does Z then Im fucked. Idk. I like mind games as much as the next game but there’s only so much roll of the cosmic dice I like
I played single from Gen 4 to Gen 6, and then I switched to double. I would say double ia more dynamic because there are more decisions. In single, there are 4 moves and 5 switches, so there are 4+5 = 9 ways to play the turn. In double, you have 2 mon on the field, 4 moves, two targets, and 2 switches. There are already ((4x2)+2)^2 = 100 different ways to play the turn. (For the purpose of calculations, I assume all the moves are single target attacks, and we are not targeting our own Pokemon)
Wolfe is really a hero for the VGC scene, and does it all with a very positive and family friendly channel. I am a big fan and personally grateful to the guy
I tend to prefer the faster pace of VGC because I can sometimes get mentally exhausted from the slower pace of singles. A mistake in doubles means you can usually just get a new match after you lose in short order or somehow recover, but sometimes in singles you might not even realize how screwed you are for 5 turns of intense decision making. I do like both from time to time though and I think that learning one makes you better at the other because at the end of the day it's still Pokemon.
I used to be a smogon Andy, until wolfyvgcs videos really showed me the depth of vgc. But I loved 6v6 during the X and y games. But man vgc has gotten way better nowadays with rental teams ect.
I'd love to hear you do a video on 1v1 but with a bring 6, pick 3 mechanic aka Battle Spot Singles It's a much more popular meta in Japan and wish it got more play here
Both singles and doubles can coexist. If Nintendo/Game Freak wanted to axe Smogon and Showdown, they easily could. The fact that they haven’t shows that they view it as bringing value to the game they can’t do officially. It’s an official format in all but name.
I started with singles like most people and ended up playing vgc because I hate 100+ turns battles of nothing. Game is designed around doubles, thats why pp stall is a thing in singles
One big disagreement: it's often stated that pokémon games "nowadays are competitively balanced around doubles", but I don't think that's true at all. The truth is that the games still aren't balanced around competitive at all, they'll just implement new features and the playerbase has to hope that they are actually balanced, for both singles and doubles. I feel that sentiment came up especially in gen 8 with dynamax being banned in OU, but in all honesty dynamax was even worse in vgc. A dynamaxer could sweep not just half a team but 75% of it, most max moves had their effects doubled (including the ones that dealt 16% residual damage each turn) and most importantly there were so many additional ways to abuse dynamax, like weakness policy. The teams that won the players cups were all centered around this theme, with stuff like Weakness Policy Coalossal + Surf or Regigigas + Weezing topping. In doubles Imposter also doesn't work properly, so OU's main answer to dynamax wasn't even there. This is also true for a lot of other problematic things, like Mega Kang and Mega Mence or Flutter Mane and Urshifu being just as dominant and problematic in vgc as they were in OU. It's just that the vgc community doesn't exactly have a choice. Either they play the metagame they're given or they lose out on the only competitive mode they have as well as all the potential prestige. I also think that a lot of the more controversial gen 9 bans happened because of the divisive stand on tera. Aside from the clearly messed up mons a lot of mons are just too strong because of a completely unrestricted tera, but since the community can't come up with a unified solution to the issue, mons that abuse it end up banned.
@@GravityIsFalling Doubles is inherently most likely to be balanced ❌ most vgc players stopped caring about balance altogether because they can't change anything ✅ Mons like Flutter Mane or Urshifu are extremely far from balanced, as is a format having multiple mons with about 60% usage or gen 8 vgc with only one primary playstyle.
@ Flutter mane may not be balanced in VGC ( I hate this example btw raging bolt Is way more insane), but it is way more balanced in VGC Because inherently it only occupies 25% of all mons in the field
Let me educate you on something. A game like pokemon, a single player rpg based around gradually becoming stronger by gaining levels, can never work as a competitive multiplayer game. And that's fine. I never liked the competitive scene of this series anyway.
@@GravityIsFalling Except Psyspam hitting both opponents. Raging Bolt is usually available at the same time as Miraidon, which complicates things. Flutter Mane got a format without Calyrex.
I think I got into competitive mons when Pokemon Online and Showdown had still coexisted. I used Pokemon Online because it wasn't blocked by my school's filter and I would just mess around in gen 5 OU. Showdown eventually somehow started evading my school's filter and I defaulted to that at some point. Doubles is fun as hell, but singles is a bit more straightforward to me.
the 1 single type of item in vgc is very cool, every tournament should be played like that because although restrictive it does breed creativity, something I dont like about smogon gen 2 ou is that everyone uses leftovers and not using it is a huge detrimental cause everyone else has it
jimothycool.com
Horse Council merch available until end of December.
Wolfe only won worlds once
idk if youll see this but it looks like you didnt link the correct blisy video in the credits? the footage you use shows them catching a whismur but the video linked only has them catching a latias
It can not be understated how valuable still being able to play old generations in a competitive environment is. Smogon is doing the Lords work by preserving those formats.
I would agree with you if the tiers and bans were frozen in place after the gen is over. They've gone back and ruined old gens I played and grinded when they were current well over a decade later
@@dudesk099 Give one example of how Smogon ruined an old format. As far as I can see, they just ban whatever is problematic, and while they might not always ban everything that should be banned, I’ve never seen them make a decision that actively makes an older format worse.
@@dudesk099 Sometimes, there can be developments in a generation's scene literal years after said gen is done. I recall hearing that Gen 1 OU singles has recently seen a major shake-up in the Big 3 due to developments within Gen 1's competitive community. Stuff like figuring out new strategies that end up shaking things up, or finding a good way to restrict something without entirely banning it.
@@LloydTheZephyrianall that is still possible if they would "retire" a format and has nothing to do with the smogon administration.
I agree with the OP here, smogon and pokemon showdown are literally doing the lords work. This is what jesus would do.
Pretty sure preserving the game with all its whacky code is more important than preserving a meta from a decade or two ago, freezing it in time
It's a meta, things are supposed to change anyways
I love playing gen 1 on showdown, it's so different
Rotation battles are clearly superior to both of these formats only played by ruffians and hooligans. The ability to rotate your Pokémon provides a deeper level to this complex game that simple minded cavemen cannot understand.
Yokai Watch gaming
My opinion is clearly superior... the way you do things is wrong.
😂😂😂 @chickenpig
Honestly tho I wish they’d bring back rotation/triple battles.
@wonderfulrose477 what games had triple battles in them?
@@FearMatter Gen 5 and 6
Why do Pokémon games ask if I want to teach my pokemon helping hand if 99.99% of In game battles are singles?
Dont be rude. They're trying to help
Pretty much all battles are singles and then competitive pokemon is doubles? Either it should been singles too or we should have doubles be the default for important battles tbh
This is basically the sentiment of every sane person, there's NO reason for there to be such an awkward divide@@humbertoseghetto5218
@@humbertoseghetto5218 other than the horrendous balancing issues singles has, like jimothy mentioned, which requires councils of people to manage, the real issue is time. Singles battles take wayyyy too long to be viable in real life tournaments where these days there are over 700 players playing best of 3.
Heck, VGC tournaments used to be only one day and players complained that it felt like a marathon, and by top 32 they were only performing at half brain power.
Shorter games also mean less opportunity for variance, but increases the impact variance has. It’s why singles players run stuff like focus blast, because there are so many turns that one of them is bound to hit. VGC players would never run it however, gamble strategies are too risky and could cost you the game when every turn decision is so impacted.
@@Finch_The_Humandoubles has a lot of balance issues, it just isn't actively tiered like singles. That's why you get things like fluttermane
They both have the most important part of Pokemon, absolute bullshit that makes you never wanna play again.
Unfortunate doesn't even begin...
This is how it feels to face down way too many Iron Valiants and Kingambits:
What too many maushold beat up strats do to a mf
@@bluekirby_64to describe my series…
@lordgrub12345 what 0.3 seconds of raging bolt on my screen feels like
Of course the real ones know Rotation Battles are where it's at.
Well said 11-hour man 🙏
I wish they'd be back
Perhaps they won't be as problematic on better hardware
I played a rotation battle once. I got dizzy.
More of a triples man myself
Peasant, you wouldn't last 5 minutes in Battle Royale format.
Competitive Jimothy Cool is a unique case in the world of TH-cam.
the real competitive format is for 2 people to play through an entire game as a nuzlocke then battle with the teams they have at the end
True
True and based
I’ve never seen a 2v2 furret tour so I know my answer
2v2 Draft league Furret is a nightmare though. It gets Follow me and crazy support.
Nintendo's decision to make the competitive format completely different that the one of the actual single player game everyone played and knows is bizzare. If they want doubles to be the format for competetive, why is the *ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME* 6v6 singles
They made the gimmick, made pokemon that had no place outside the format and made moves specifically for said format, looked at it, and went “Oh God, we can’t go back”
@RoughRouser maybe that's why xd/Colosseum and the blueberry academy dlc exist lol
@@ax9583 was going to comment exactly about the 2nd part of Scarlet/Violet DLC. What I think probably happened is that they never intended to have an esports scene when they introduced double battles in Ruby/Sapphire (afterall why would they think about that in 2002-2003?) and even after they instated the official tournaments with 2vs2 battles, they still thought it wasn't going to be more than a niche thing that wouldn't need a lot of attention. That's why they took so long to have another double battles focused content in the DLC so many years after xd/Colosseum.
the games are targeted at a audience of children and vgc is targeted at adults. doubles is just less accessible and more complex, which makes it more suited to an adult audience. it also has less matchup variance and shorter games.
i think there should be more doubles games
@@karanea same, im searching for some hackroms focused in doubles
Team Fortress 2 was entirely ran by the community for so long that its infrastructure was too strong for Valve to be able to even touch it.
I would say I am primarily a VGC player but I also love singles content creators like Jimothy, Pokeaim, Blunder, etc. I feel like the community is at its best when both sides can appreciate each other. Hopefully people can stop going at each others throats and just enjoy pokemon. Thankfully we are safe from Iron Muggulis in both game modes 🙏
I think the majority of competitive pokemon community is actually very chill and just some loud assholes make noise.
You have been pumping out content. What a time to be alive.
One thing that’s got to be disputed is that Gen 3 was the genesis of actual strategy in Pokemon. Sets, strats, and metas all existed even back in Red/Blue. Competitive Pokemon was played by adults in the 90s and they strategized oversets and teams. In RBY you had TonyBro + Mewtwo, and in GSC you had Baton Pass teams and stall teams. There were also sims way back too. And fan made banlist. (Meetwo, Mes, Lucia used to be the only banned Pokemon. Then they banned evasion, and went from thee. I know it’s not the point of the video, but there’s been strategy for over 25 yearsz
Both sides are wrong actually #triplesonlyvalidformat
You’re wrong too, rotation battles forever!
I wish the in game story playthroughs pushed doubles more aggressively, it’s a fun format and being incentivized to engage with it would make new players more comfortable getting into competitive vgc instead of being guided to smogon. Like imagine if the gym leaders and Pokémon league all had double battles and were actually hard again, that would be sick
i hate doubles. thats a guaranteed way to get me to stop playing. Turns Pokemon into a speed game, or worse, it makes you pack mons that have no attacks. Don't know how to tell you this, but it isn't exactly easy to get a pokemon without attacks to gain experience.
@ that’s what the exp share is for, and it’s not like you can’t overlevel for the story playthrough and just pack 6 attacking mons anyways 🤷 if it’s really such a deal breaker then maybe just include it as an option for post game replayability or something with good rewards
@@christ1121 Let me tell you, the exp share only makes it more difficult to gain experience, as everything is halved when you win a battle.
@@josephbulkin9222 the modern Pokémon games don’t have an exp share held item that’s splits your exp in half between your mons, it’s just an innate mechanic that al exp is shared across your whole team evenly
@@christ1121Still doesnt change the fact that doubles turns the game into a speed competition. What I mean ,is that tanky mons( the ones I like) cant be used if they get targeted twice before they do anything.
I would argue that this isn't competitive pokemon's greatest debate. In fact it is the stupidest debate.
I know it's only tangentially related, but competitive tf2 also has multiple different primary formats. Community competitive is split between 6v6 and 9v9. Valve does have an official 6v6 comp mode, but it has no item/class restrictions, which kind of makes it a huge mess. Still, there is a pretty large split between 6v6 and 9v9, as the formats play very differently.
Your analysis around the 10 minute mark actually reminds me about the analysis of the cultural difference between sumo and American football. Sumo is very quick and decisive, whereas football provides multiple opportunities to play for a win, and how the differences in the sports we play reflect cultural differences between japan and america
A better comparison would be American football and rugby since one pretty much originates from the other. Rugby being the long drawn out and free flowing version with many small decisions throughout a game (singles) and American football being much more calculated with fewer plays/turns being decisive in who wins the game.
A video about triples would be pretty heat tbh
I've played singles for 10+ years and switched to doubles/VGC in the middle of scarlet violet. I'm really enjoying open teamsheet format and Tera is my fave mechanic, and I think it feels better in doubles
I should clarify thar I still enjoy 6v6 singles a lot. However in gen9 I reffer doubles/VGC
I think the overall consensus among VGC players is that open team sheets are a good thing. It was a weird take that Jimothy thought it was bad. Knowing all your opponents options means the better players will win more often. Much more chess-like.
Previous formats had a lot of information wars, trying to hide sets from your opponent, and winning by using some super random tech move.
@@Finch_The_Human Nah, a less skilled player getting the win because they pulled off some wild strategy that their opponent wasn't expecting is more fun imo. Pokemon is a lot more dynamic than chess, and wanting to make it less so is silly in my opinion. Nothing against VGC, but open teamsheets absolutely killed my interest in participating in it.
@@Finch_The_Human"winning through a random tech move" average anti innovation vgc player
Actually many years ago it was CybertronVGC who was very important in growing the competitive scene for VGC. It was in my favorite format, Gen 6 VGC. Wolfe came to tournaments with unique teams but this was only showcased in matches commentated by Aaron Zheng or by TPCi staff.
Ahhh the age old debate - Scald singles ban VS Scald doubles ban
From a competition logistics standpoint, you just can’t have 100+ turn Pokémon battles that take hours.
That’s why VGC is doubles format and only bring 4 Pokémon instead of 6v6 doubles. The game lengths are short enough for the tournament operations to be manageable, but the options are complex enough that there is skill.
You can shorten the singles game length down to 15-30 minutes by playing 3v3, but at that point team building is too limited. It becomes even more rock-paper-scissors and luck based.
i mean true could you imagine abr vs tele irl
@@tavvviaiaviaNgl I still would have watched it. Hype game.
Something that I do not see to be commented is that singles 6v6 was popularized by the anime. It was awesome to see trainers command their pokemon in creative ways. It was also a way to showcase never seen pokemon like Blaziken. I do not feel that hype in VGC or since team preview became a thing.
That would have a lot to do with it.
Anime never really dis 6v6 was 3v3 or 4v4 most of the time
My thing with the “adapt” argument is that certain moves and abilities exist for a reason.
Like evasiveness is disliked, but no guard, compound eyes, blizzard+hail, thunder+rain, smart strike, and aura sphere are all there for a reason, but because we remove evasiveness(except contrary Defog) these strategies are rarely used.
Or banning trapping abilities, when pivoting moves and even shed shell exist to keep that in check.
Someone else who calls it "evasiveness"!
Competitive pokemon is a unique case in the world of esports
Because this is a rare instance where an official competitive ruleset and a fan made grassroots competitive ruleset both exist at the same time.
Usually, it's one or the other. Smash Bros doesn't have an oficial tournament ruleset, so it's entirely run by the fans.
@@Not_An_Original_NameBut bigger esports like League of Legends are all about their official competitive ruleset
So why does Pokémon have both? It's actually a pretty interesting question.
Official competitive pokemon formats have existed for a long time; since the very first game in the series in fact.
Pokemon having two different competitive communities is an asset, since people can play where and how they want. Being mad that both exist together is like being angry that two restaurants are across the street from each other.
Hey I've noticed a really awesome uptick in quality of content and a bit more of a branching out in terms of topics being covered on the channel and I just wanted to let you know I see and appreciate it. You're hard work isn't going unnoticed. Awesome job!
My main thing is that VGC is way better as an actual spectator sport. I know it's rare and uncommon but games in Smogon singles can, at a moment's notice turn into an endless switchfest. That's absolute poison for viewership. I know some people love the intricate chess match at play during switchfests but I just can't stomach it personally.
I think the switchfest thing is my primary issue with Singles. I feel like at a certain point I’m wondering when the game actually gets played. I understand that intricate 5D chess moves are probably being played here but this is just ridiculous.
The irony is that, logically speaking, it's almost impossible for a game, even Singles format, to devolve into an infinite switch fest outside of smogon rules. The average damage output powercreep in pokemon is so drastic that, literally anywhere outside of smogon, it is extremely easy to run over any sort of defense-oriented setup with almost zero thought (just pick legendary with big attack number, slap on choice item or life orb, and press attacks), and usually the only way to reach enough bulk for a switch+regenerator spam to ever profit on hp gain with this situation is to have something that setup with defense increasing buffs (aka they can't really switch, as whatever is switched will take so much damage due to not being defensively boosted that it's a losing move). It's an ironic self-sabotage smogon enacted upon itself, since if someone on any other format were to attempt using smogon sets, they'd be crushed so one-sidedly that they'd assume smogon is trolling since their tiering format alters the game that drastically.
I think the best example is smogon's view on Baxcalibre compared to the no-tiers console format. With most of the "KO literally everything in 1 hit" super legendaries out of the picture, Bax seems like an ultra durable mon with Snowscape defense boosts and passive Ice Body regeneration. But when those super legendaries are spammed by everyone, that tank Bax strategy is a joke of a set that no one in the console format uses because it can't tank the relevant, unfiltered powerhouse hitter mons for jack all even if fully bulk EV built. So Bax in console formats go for much more aggressive Thermal Exchange offensive sets instead. Kingambit, smogon's top dog mon, is also extremely rare in console matches because it is an absurdly strong smogon mon when all the super legendaries are filtered out, but when compared to no-tiers aggressive legendary spam it ends up being very underwhelming in the more powerful competition it faces. Because when mons like Urshifuu and Ogerpon are allowed to be spammed, everything has to become warped around the standards those kinds of mons set. In the smogon format where those can be removed, everything warps around those kinds of mons NOT existing in the format.
If you can't appreciate the Switchfest you don't deserve the epik sweepz
@@joshuakim5240 It's not just Bax. The official formats would allow monsters like Flutter Mane and Iron Bundle with the same restrictions as garbage like Brute Bonnet and Scream Tail, and the same goes for mons like Sneasler and the bikes for their own respective formats.
Basically, an official competitive singles format would literally just be clicking the strongest possible move possible in constant hyperoffense mirror matches, even if legendries are banned. Just like not using Incineroar is self-griefing in VGC, not using Mane, Bundle, and Sneasler would be self-griefing in an official BSS tourney, because those are meta-warping threats.
The reality is that GameFreak is awful at balancing in the modern era. This is the company that created pairs like Zacian and Zamazenta, and Glastrier and Spectrier, and gave them the same play restrictions.
adhd zoomer baby cant handle everything not oneshotting
6:50 wolfe glick has won the world championships a single time. this spread of misinformation is unacceptable.
Your right he should have said 1 time champion and over 10 time participant of worlds. The biggest with the best of the best. With a couple 2nd place finishes in there tok
@@Zo3yXjust 2nd one time.
also won nattys, ints, record number of regionals, and even a players cup (online worlds covid replacement)
True but he has won the most trophies of any player
it's not that serious relax
Hey man, just wanted to say that I spent the past 7 months at home alone recovering from knee surgery and your content really helped me stay sane. It’s also been cool to see your channel growing this whole time too
Was not expecting to see the word “mastubrating” (spelled exactly like that) in a jim cool video
Was waiting for a comment mentioning that lol
2:22 AYOOOO whats going on in that chat??
I think it's silly that there's an official tournament for VGC Doubles and not the same regulation's Battle Spot Singles. I've been having fun playing RegH, and the Bring-6-Pick-3 style works great in Best of 3 sets. I would love if this was picked up at official tournaments.
yeah also 6-3Singles are fun, but they take a long time so are not accepted as tournaments.
Smogon vs VGC feels like the Standard vs Expanded/Legacy formats of TCGs. Legacy formats are almost always grassroots-based because the devs almost always stop supporting those formats, but those formats are still good and full of depth. I've heard tons of people in MTG, Pokemon, and Yu-Gi-Oh argue about this too, saying legacy formats are "not official" or on the contrary saying that older formats are superior in nature with their noses turned up, when it is just a different or preferred format.
I am a singles main and grassroots enjoyer, and often an disillusioned by newer formats in all these games, but I still am happy the official formats are played so that we can have more people eventually to play with us and enjoy the grassroots formats, too.
Great video as always, Jimothy. I have been enjoying your content consistently and am impressed by the frequency of quality uploads. Hopefully you are doing ok, too. I know matters with the Horse Council likely keep you up at night
Singles will always be my preferred format for the simple reason that there's so many ways to play. Even though I don't like gen 9 ou that much I can play UU, RU, or even a past generation of OU. In doubles if I don't like the current format I simply have to wait until the next regulation. I can't hop onto showdown and load up a game of 2014 vgc, but I can play gen 6 OU to heart's content.
I feel like that's more an issue of showdown being massively slanted towards singles than doubles, for some reason they've already killed the Reg G format despite some people preferring that format, yet they keep around doubles OU from multiple gens.
1v1 has always felt like the more natural format because the vast majority of the battles in the actual games are 1v1.
I would like to see more Doubles in the main games. Blueberry Academy was a nice start.
@@erwark yeah I do prefer 1v1 over all but the dlc battles were fun.
A couple gyms focusing on it could be a good choice
God I wish they would just commit to doubles and quit with the antiquated 1v1 format for the rpgs. 2v2 is just more fun and interesting.
@@evilded2I hate doubles.
@@evilded2Someone is complaining that Now you need two starters" or something
As if that's a bad thing
As long as it's not Pikachu
Truly thought-provoking debate
as someone who used to play a lot of random battles but never much OU or VGC, what nearly got me into OU was how much fun gen 9 was in the first few days of release, it felt fast and you could play a game out in a few minutes which felt nice, but the constant bans in the format really soured me on that and I went to VGC and found it a lot more fun. The constant need for smogon to try "balance" a format that can never be balanced feels like it harms the overall feel of singles for me, any time something feels slighty strong in OU people cry about it until it gets suspect tested or banned, and that cycle repeats endlessly. where as in doubles the format changes shake up the meta on a rather regular basis to keep things from feeling stale.
Smogon 6v6 will always be my bread and butter ❤️ I started with Pokemon Online gen 4 back in 2010 and haven’tstopped. I especially love how old gen metagames keep being played and evolve still now. The magic of discovering how good Aerodactyl can be in Gen 3 or reviving Megas in gen 7 is always a blast. Thank you, Smogon and Showdown!
As someone who played both Smogon and VGC but quit early on in Gen8 due to power creep (f*ck Dynamax) i've had several years to formulate my thoughts on the matter. I think both formats have their up and downsides. I knew of Smogon way back in Gen4, but never heard about VGC until 2015 from a content creator known as TheJustinFlynn where i learned that it was TPCI's official format. I think back then I was part of the "Smogon is fake and unofficial" crowd for about a year until i came across videos of a cardridge league playing a slightly modified version of Gen6 OU (more complex bans to free some banned pokemon, etc) and joined there, though so close to the end of the generation didnt start battling there until Gen7. During Gen7 i found myself improving at both VGC17 (to this day my favorite VGC format i played) as well as 6v6 OU on the league, topping both at locals and tournaments on the league. In 2018, i even travelled across the border to Antwerp in Belgium to participate in what was essentially the replacement for the Belgium National Championship, hosting both OU and VGC, finishing Top 4 in VGC and winning the OU tournament.
While both formats are pokemon, they felt completely different from eachother. But that also caused something that irritated me a lot: so many people feel deadset on playing only VGC or only on Smogon that they completely disregard the other without ever trying it out, or playing just 1 game already going in with the mindset that they'll hate it. In person VGC tournaments are great, meeting people irl either usuals at locals or people from other countries (yes im from Europe, we have multiple countries here) at large hype events that you normally only really speak to online. Also i love how the faster gameplay allows for much more complex EV spreads, having a lot more focus on defensive calcs that are impossible in singles due to hazards messing with the calcs. Smogon however is not a format, its a forum that hosts many different formats. They host different tiers across current and all historical genearions, and even if you aren't a fan of 6v6 singles, there's things like 1v1, hackmons, and even DoublesOU, which i played quite a bit, as a sort of middleground between OU and VGC. There's something for everyone to enjoy.
So yeah, i like both, and they both have a clear reason to exist. Just wish more people playing one were accepting of the other. Also i do kinda dislike the evergrowing divide between Smogon and cardridge, Showdown gameplay looks so boring when you've played cardridge and TPCI neglecting Singles with their ridiculous powercreep and dooming Gen9 sucks too, and dont forget about the removal of the VS Recorder and having several years of 20 min battle timer...
I feel like if Pokémon wanted more fan interest in doubles they should add more doubles to the actual games.
Make every gen 10 gym leader a "bring 6 pick 4" doubles. Rather than there only having been 3 doubles gym leaders in 9 gens
Yeah I agree. Thankfully I think its likely cause the Gen 9 DLC Indigo Disk is pretty much exclusively double battles with actual competitive movesets (for the most part)
Games are for kids, not for sweats training for a tournament.
Games will always be 1v1 because it's easier for kids to figure out
@@NaturesFlame then they'll keep having the issue of people wanting to compete in the game they've actually played
@@maxgustafsson7802 oh yeah, this 1v1 vs 2v2 debate has a good 20 years in it left at this rate.
They'll never sell Pokemon to anyone but kids. Old people get jaded and stop spending money but there's always a new batch of kids to sell to. They've got that market on lock and will never let it go.
Appealing to older people with more complicated games may make us happy, but it's basically throwing money away. A company wants to make money, not throw it away.
@@NaturesFlame I mean maybe but the double battles in the games are usually fun too. Getting to use more of your pokemon at once is fun sometimes. In Pokemon Sapphire (my first game) I loved when I found the double battles in game. I think that was the gen they started paying attention to doubles with new additions like plusle/minun and how spread moves worked, so they put quite a few double battles, even tate & liza in emerald, and battle tower + frontier having double battle options. Colosseum and Gale of Darkness were great games as a kid too, and are 100% doubles, if the gamecube was more popular I think they would've been appreciated a lot more.
I'm primarily a VGC guy nowadays, but I've played lots of Smogon Singles in previous generations and I love it, I think it's great.
The main problem I have with Smogon Singles at the moment, well, you could say it's balance, but I think it is slightly more subtle than that.
The fundamental issue is that for VGC, the people designing and balancing the game are the same people (or at least the same organisation) and it allows them to create some harmony between what is designed and how it is balanced (which they do not do perfectly, but overall I think they do a good job, and especially Gen IX VGC I think has been great!)
The Smogon guys are subject to a hard problem, where they have zero control over the design and _some_ control over the balance (within their own rules, anyway. Theoretically they could tweak any stat or move or even add whole new Pokémon if they wanted). So it's tough, and I think it's extra tough because people really want them to _respect_ the design of the actual games while they balance the format, and in many ways various bans and restriction clauses feel like they are fundamentally not respecting the game's design and that upsets people... but Gen IX without such bans and clauses really is _not_ balanced around 6v6 Singles, so what can you do?
I think the easy solution is to tell the people whining about cartridge accuracy to go play VGC instead so that the rest of us can focus on making singles good again despite Game Freak doing everything in their power to kill it as a format in favor of doubles.
I prefer to play singles but I like watching doubles way more for it's complexity
I think this is a very important point to make. Doubles are great to watch, since every turn matters so much and the games are shorter, even with the much longer animations.
Can't stand doubles. makes speed almost a requirement to win, as well as packing on mons that DONT EVEN ATTACK.
@@josephbulkin9222isn't that like an upside tho, Pokemons that would otherwise be outclassed due to their middling offensive stats could still see play (and amplify the threat posed by your offensive mons). The added complexity of redirection (makes storm drain & lightning rod so much more valuable), teamwide buffs and switching shenanigans really spices the game up *a lot*
@@m32c50 I prefer using slow tanky pokemon, so no, not an upside.
i think there is something to be said about the anime and how it affects 6v6 preference. a lot of us kids just wanted to be like ash and they didnt really do double battles in the show iirc
Definitely has something to do with it. A 6vs6 battle is SUPPOSED to be a long battle, an endurance .
@@josephbulkin9222 Yeah, 6v6s in the anime were regularly several episodes long.
Of course, there were a lot of doubles battles in the anime, including a ton of tag battles where it was literally 2 trainers vs 2 trainers. But singles was always the spotlight.
I prefer the single format when playing myself, but when it comes to tournaments and world championships, VGC Doubles rule feels much better to watch. There are a lot less turns, so each turn is much more impactful, and each turn, there are a lot more considerations to be made.
Open team sheets are an odd case. It was only as of Gen 9 I think that open team sheet rules became a thing, but I think there’s a lot of good that comes from it. The access of information leads to a higher skill cap and a lower skill floor, letting anyone enter and not get screwed over. It also makes high-level play more interesting, in my opinion, since it’s not necessarily about what item or move or ability an opponent brought, it’s about how they use them. I think that open team sheets, especially with terastallization, is far more fair to the majority of players than not. I think hidden moves are a great part of singles, but cheese in doubles feels very bad to play and play against.
Yeah its funny, I remember having a kneejerk reaction thinking "wow that sucks, information identification is a huge part of the game", but Moxieboosted completely changed my mind on the topic instantly in his video. Theoretically rogue strats are kneecapped a bit, but only really ones that specifically rely on unconventional movesets, and even then most high end players know Pokemon well enough to consider those weird strats. In practice, we've seen quite a bit of oddball picks show up (I mean hell, there was a damn Poliwrath recently that placed well).
And yeah, like you mentioned, the existence of Tera also makes this preferable. Tera isn't the worst mechanic by a long shot, but its also not the best, as it adds a lot of volatility that isn't controllable. Team preview alone cant give you information, like it could with Megas for example, and VGC's more turn starved nature makes a surprise Tera swinging a match quite commonplace. I think it ends up being overall good for the game, and I wouldn't super hate it if it made its way on in game ladder in the future.
I believe a benefit of open team sheets is also that it doesn't give people that are more known in the scene an unfair advantage as some people tend to tell each other an item or a move option their opponent had and open team sheets equalizes that abit.
I think it should be clarified that open team sheets actually lowers the skill cap and floor for teambuilding, while raising the skill floor and ceiling for actual gameplay.
Matchup fishing cheese strategies (think like that cheater using Double Kick Terrakion to beat Focus Sash Smeargle) that catch people off-guard take quite a bit of skill to think up, and banning them through open team sheets restricts teambuilding skill expression.
However, cheese teams usually take less skill, because if you fished an advantageous matchup, you basically have cheats -- but if your strategies don't work, you're destined to lose. So your match outcomes are predetermined from the start (unless you're 3x better than the opponent or something). So bad players can't rely on fixed matches to cheat to victory.
Smogon single players and VGC double players should come together and point and laugh at the Smogon doubles players, the fence sitters of Pokemon
The thing that annoys me most about Doubles is the players that act superior and think that only doubles counts as competitive because its “official”.
Probably because singles is about 60% switching and 30% hazard clearing to facilitate switching.
Doubles is just a more complex game by its nature. Both are valid and have very talented players. But if doubles players talking to singles players act like chess champions talking to checkers champions, its because its true. You play a children's game on the easiest setting.
@@booradley6832that's part of it. The other 2 major factors to why some people really like doubles is the much faster pace and greatly reduced volatility. Not only are stall strats basically unheard of in VGC, but it's also much easier to come back from a losing position.
Seems everyone is wrong. I only partake in the finest 5v5 Furret Triple and Rotation battles, depending on the season
I got into gen 3 ou around the time you started posted videos. It’s been awesome to see the content evolve. Great video, love your smooth unbiased narration.
This was a great video and a really clear and unbiased comparison between the two. If you're planning on making another video like this I would love to see one on the differences between ladder singles play and tournament singles play. I feel like some of the issues mentioned at the end are specific to tournament play, and my experience with overwatch tells me that top level ladder games and actual pro matches can test very different skills and even have completely different metas
Nintendo's evil treatment of the smash bros scene actually makes me more disdainful of 'official' formats as a concept.
Considering all the disgusting weirdos that have been revealed in the Smash scene, it's no wonder why nintendo wants nothing to do with it.
@@nuraby_9228grow up. Morality is irrelevant when it comes to entertainment. Completely irrelevant.
I would like to mention that singles has a much easier time gathering information over vgc, with the overall greater average amount of turns and the free usage of a calculator. Especially with tera mechanics, which is already controversial in singles, would completely twist vgc without open teamsheets.
Competitive Pokémon is a unique case in the world of esports.
Because this is a rare instance where an official competitive ruleset and a fan made grassroots competitive ruleset both exist at the same time.
@@lalter_Usually, it's one or the other. Smash bros doesn't have an official tournament ruleset, so it's entirely run by the fans.
You've made many great points and I agree with most of them. I'm especially irked by Smogon hate, because i've been in pokemon spaces for many many years and it's almost always comming from people who have no goddamn clue about how any of Smogon rulings work and at the same time are very inept at the game itself. It's a community of people trying their best to foster an environment for you to enjoy your favorite game in - attacking them (and not the rulings you find contestable) is just such a dick move on a fundamental level. Literally why be like this.
I can't agree about some points you made about doubles tho. For example an open datasheet is a new idea ment to balance out Tera types and WILD amounts of variants it brings to the game. We didnt preffer the element of surprise as a singles community, we decided to throw it away altogether because it was unfun and uncompetitive to guess that many more things every game so the comparison and reasoning behind it seems slightly flawed.
I'm really not sure about the mathematical complexity of decisionmaking in respective formats. True, single games are much longer on average (lets say 40 turns while acknowledging some edge cases go way, way beyond that) than doubles (say 7 turns on average) but in singles you can only make 5 choices every turn. Click one of four attacks or switch. In doubles between having 8 attacks to click into 3 possible slots each [minus things like protect, spread and setup moves] and being able to make two switches a turn into two possible slots each turns in doubles are so much more densly packed than singles turns I think it's far from obvious as to which format offers most decisions per game. If you consider a flowchart of possible gamestates every turn i belive doubles become orders of magnitude more complex because you have a spqnning number of points to make decision from every turn. But that's neither here or there I obviously agree that pace and vibe of singles feels much different and it's great fun - I preffer playing singles myself.
Thank you for making this, i do think we need more voices in the community telling people that you dont have to put down thing A to enjoy thing B. You can even enjoy both for different reasons, like me.
Great point about rules and bans being in both formats too
e: lol what i was on about Tera being banned in singles, i think i peered into an alternative dimension
1:42 Is nobody gonna talk about how the guy uses a master ball on a whismur?
You must be careful around whismur as they may shatter your eardrums
idr the video thats from offhand so i might be wrong, but thats blisy who does a lot of stuff with rng manipulation - im pretty sure in this case they were using the whismur to check what frame they hit so theyre just using the master ball to do it quick, they wanna get to the actual thing theyre hunting for not sit there catching a random whismur
PokemonOnline was so dope. The community was small but tight, there would be regular tournaments where you'd run into the same people, and I think the minor barrier to entry helped keep the community chill
I played for years. Great memories. Even helped run a server for a while with always around 30-40 players.
Personally I think that Pokemon should implement a mode that allows you to play the game with all battles being either Single or Double battles. It's very odd that the official competitive format of the game is doubles, but the single player mode generally only requires a couple mandatory ones, and iirc the Elite 4 and champion don't even have a single one.
@@yummines you have to make a full games with entirely new teams to compensate for said double battles.
My opinion is that Smogon is the way that the game makes us play. Because Pokémon is largely just singles with maybe one doubles gym, singles is what we play, what we know, what we do.
VGC is the format that Pokémon wants you to play. But it doesn’t let you play it unless you’re specifically trying to play competitive Pokémon. New players aren’t used to it
Especially in SV before the Blueberry DLC, the only doubles was the ghost gym that also had omi boosts when you tera and attack boosts when you KO a Pokémon making it way more aggressive than normal VGC
I think Smogon should include triple battles. I just don't like singles because if I wanna use a pokemon like furfrou. Unfortunately the only way to play it efficiently is by pissing off your opponent with evasion clause via bright powder and cotton guard, toxic, snarl, attract
triple battles are on showdown, its in the challengable OM category
Does Holk Hogan still prefer singles?
VGC will always be the official competitive format because games go much quicker and when you have real life tournaments with 500+ players, staffed by volunteers, you need the games to go quick.
0:12 Aklo's Link vs Zain was so hype last weekend.
They are both inferior to the clear best format: rotation battles
8:19 lolol well said. I almost forgot there was even a rivalry, but you reminded me there totally is one. We’re all Pokemon fans, why does that even exist in the first place?
i think i would be much more likely to play a 6v6 singles tourney if you only brought one team. its intimidating to me that i would have to learn multiple teams to have the best chances
I think that’s the point. There’s more to Pokémon than what you do in a battle. Your expression of skill starts the moment you open the team builder, and being able to make and effectively use more teams than your opponent means that you’re more deserving of a win than they are.
You've quickly become one of my favorite YTers. Thanks for getting me into Gen 3 OU!
it's like melee hating ultimate and vice versa, it is so stupid.
i've played both formats for about 20 years now, and they are both fun and intriguing at the same time
ayo speedrun mention
as a pokemon speedrun enjoyer it tugs at my heart to see that
As someone who ditched smogon entirely recently, my decision was mostly made because the lack of consistency and the fact that so many bans and complex rules has distorted what Pokémon is to me beyond recognition. I start to ask myself if I’m even playing Pokémon sometimes when I’m playing generation nine. So right now I’m mostly just playing older gens as well as national dex since I always know what’s going to be thrown at me and bans/unbans are rather rare in both formats.
While I understand your sentiment I'm a bit confused, wouldn't that mean you *didn't* leave Smogon entirely if you're still playing other Smogon formats? Do you perhaps just mean you ditched OU?
The only reason that current generation OU is so bad is because Game Freak is pandering to doubles so hard in order to make it a playable format, and it’s ruining singles in the process. Everything they make these days is so obviously meant for doubles, and it couldn’t be any less apparent that they don’t care about singles despite it being over 99% of all Pokémon has ever been.
@@Steflora I imagine if it gets too bad, it'll cripple the story.
LEAGUE OF LEGENDS MENTIONED
As someone who plays league competitively for a college team, it's kind of interesting how many references to strategies in competitive pokémon we've used.
Just one example is the concept of type/strategy overload, where if you run, let's say, a rain team, it doesn't matter if they have one rain counter or specifically water type counter because if you can get past that you can theoretically blow up the rest of their team. I think friezai mentioned it in one of his videos, and You can do something similar in League. Just one example
I love doubles since gen 4, I love VGC since Rizzo era and I’m a player since 2015.
You know my answer.
I think Smogon serves a very important niche for pokemon. For those who do not like smogon because "it bans things", no one forces you play it. Smogon offers you the option to play Ubers, or straight up play Anything Goes. 2 formats with minimal or no restrictions.
For those who say: No restriction = more creativity/variety. This is simply not true. If you look at their viability rankings, the lesser restrictive formats have fewer viable mons. Ubers and AG rank around 30 Mons ranked above C rank. OU - the metagame with established guard rails - has 85 mons which can be considered as very reasonable and viable option.
Smogons philosophy with their restrictions is to maximize number of viable mons. One way to ensure that the number of viable mons stays maximized is by keeping all the 5 basic playstyles (Hyper-Offense, Offense, Balance, Defense, Stall) as viable options. If one of these options becomes to overwhelming, cutting it back in line is the one way to make sure all 5 options become viable
In unrestricted formats, where only 1 or 2 of these playstyles are reasonably viable, the number of viable pokemon will automatically plummet - which is one reason why Ubers and AG have so few viable options. The option to cut back the broken option in the line does not exist.
Also, "nothing is broken if everything is broken" (without rotation) does not work on a reliable basis. Sometimes it may work, but most of the times it does not. If you do not believe me, just look at competitive yugioh in the last few years:
Games back then (like 2007 - 2014ish) were slower and lasted many turns, OTKs were rare, and being able to do so was a trademark feature of your deck. Back then you could have different different styles of deck:
+ Beatdown, which goes for supremacy in attack power and the battle phase
+ Aggro/Swarm, which goes for high field presence and use the monsters for various benefits
+ Combo which tries to assemble the various pieces as quickly as possible, and obtains a winning situation when the combo is assembled
+ Mid-range, which does not try to go for an early win and instead focus on establishing a resource loop to win. Like the name implies, in terms of speed/power vs durability/grind game, it lies right in the middle.
+ control, which focuses on slowing the game down and winning by denying the opponents resources, typically by using disruption from traps
+ Stun, A style of play that focuses on preventing the use of certain action by using cards that change fundamental game mechanics (like "you cannot use spell cards"). Back then, the deck was also refered to as anti-meta.
+ Stall/Burn - which should be self-explanatory.
If you compare them to pokemon teamstyles, you can roughly equate:
Beatdown/Aggro/Swarm = Hyper-Offense
Combo = Offense (it sorta works, since it did not use to be a reckless gamestyle)
Mid-Range = Balance
Control = Defense
Stall/Stun/Burn = Stall
So, fast forward to 2024:
In the meantime, every deck in yugioh has got some kind of searcher for their cards.
Every deck has access to monsters with high attack, relatively easy to make, access to lots of internal deck consistency and so on. These monsters also usually have disruption effects to the point where you can stack so many it becomes a pseudo FTK, that you can build your board on turn 1, and if you cannot dismantle it, the other deck runs you over on turn 3. TLDR: what happened is: Combo "ate up" beatdown, aggro, swarm amped everything up by a factor of 10. The previous deck types essentially have been downgraded to become a feature of a deck and essentially became "unstoppable hyper-offense"
Mid-range had to speed up in order to not be overwhelmed by combo, and they also reached the point of where they can establish a less oppressive board, which can still kill you on turn 3 if you cannot dismantle it - i.e. the distinction between combo and midrange has mostly devolved into a semantic difference. Combo is the one who goes "balls to the wall/all gas", whereas midrange is the one that also establishes a resource loop in exchange for a lower, but still relatively high ceiling. So in pokemon terms, Balance style massive skewed towards offense. That is the result of offensive powercreep. In yugioh this results in effective non-games, where Player 1 comboes for 30 minutes, and player 2 gets to activate 1 or 2 cards before he is out of plays and gets beaten down the following turn.
That is what powercreep does. On the other side of the spectrum, stall/burn and stun actually merged together to effectively being the same thing. Stall/Burn strategies cannot win without being carried by a stun strategy. Control itself is in a weird spot, where the classic "pure control" cannot really exist on its own anymore and tries to not be absorbed by the other deck types. Most control decks are in danger of becoming one of two things: either become a mid-range deck that uses traps instead of monsters for disruption, or becoming "Stun Ft. a control engine", where the stun part puts the game to such a crawl where the control engine can actually have merit. So in Pokemon terms, the team Style Defense Stops existing. Ironically, Stun (in yugioh) was somewhat buffed by the powercreep, which we call reverse-powercreep: The cards, which had effects designed for back then when the game had many turns, and example only stunned for 1 or 2 turns, effectively changed into "they last the entire game", when games only lasting 3 or 4 turns becomes the norm. That in combination of the deck types natural "ignorance" to powercreep ("It does not matter how powerful your cards are, they are useless if you cannot activate them") reached to them become the dominant style in the opposite spectrum. So ye, Imagine a meta where Stun(=Stall in Pokemon terms) is the best playstyle, where no one has the chance to break through a defensive setup.
The thing is: With ongoing powercreep like in gen9, and no rotation/removal of elements, it will become inevitable that a game has a high chance converge towards between those extremes. Either the force becomes too unstoppable, or the objects become too immovable.
You still need more examples? Let's look at the "Lowlights" of the competitive yugioh in the last three years.
To give you a few "Lowlights" from the last 3 years of yugioh, which are infamous for massively adding powercreep to the game at an even higher speed than before:
1) 2022 introduced tearlements as a deck. The deck was very popular with competitive players, because it had a good mirror, in which both players (the one going first and the one going second) had an even chance to win. it was super consistent, so it never bricked, and created no non-games because of that. Also the deck could beat the opponents endboard using their own deck thematic cards (called engine cards) and did not require powerful generic staples (so called non-engine). That so far sounds like "the greatest thing ever to bless yugioh" - so where is the catch? The deck was designed so over the top, that it was virtually unbeatable by every other deck, hence it earned the nickname "Tear 0", a pun of Tearlements and Tier 0. The best way for non-tear player to beat a Tear 0 player was to play stun, and pray you win the coinflip to go first.
Sooo, the banlist surely fixed this ..... right? Well, it sorta did. They massively slaughtered the deck, and the deck is still alive and topping events. I'm not kidding, from 10 engine cards the deck used in its best iteration, 4 of them had to be banned, and the remaining ones had to be put to 1 copy per deck. And the deck STILL TOPPED competitive events, despite losing 2 legs and 1 arm. It actually won the 2024 virtual TCG world championship 2 years after its release, so the deck was hit again after this. TBF, the deck after bans was "good but not broken" levels of power, but the fact of what it took them to get it there should tell any non-yugioh player how over the top the deck was.
2) After tearlement, we had kashtira as the next - a deck which lore- and gameplay-wise was designed as a hard counter to tearlement. They had two gameplay gimmicks: Zonelocking and banishing cards from the opponents deck. Zone Locking is exactly what it sounds like: "I use my effects to make you unable to place any card on this zone, and my goal is to block all 10 zones a player has access to" - and in its hayday, Kashtira could lock out 9 out of 10 zones on their first turn with a good hand - so good luck doing anything if you go second.
I mean, the lock was not "technically unbeatable". In order to beat the lock, you either had to remove their deathstar-lookalike boss monster from the field (without destroying because ofc it was immune to that, so the majority of removal options do not work lol), or by flipping their stuff into facedown defense position (its locking effect requires it to be faceup). Which led to people playing otherwise obscure cards like "Book of Eclipse" just because it could out that lock. Of course most deck required those non-engine cards, which you had to pray you hard draw them, creating a "you have to be lucky and draw the out, or you lose" gameplay.
In a weird twist of irony, you could argue that this format was actually well balanced. Yugiohs deck size is 40 cards, if you go second you have 6 cards. The chance to draw a copy of an unsearchable 3-off in a 6 card hand with 40 cards is 40 %, so by extension you can say "It is good balancing, if the worst deck has a 40 % win-rate vs the best deck in a game with over 10 000 cards".
3) This year, the format was dominated by Snake-Eyes, a deck type whose type is hard to evaluate. some argue its a midrange deck with a combo ceiling, some argue its a combo deck with the recursion of midrange. you may see where this is going. Essentially, the entire deck consisted of 1 card starters. I.E. If one of their cards resolved, they ended up on full combo, and the board they established was nigh unbreakable and either required you to stop ANY effect from ever resolving, or needed multiple specific combinations of board breakers (Kashtira at least had the decency that you only needed to draw 1 of them). However, unlike Tearlements, Snake-Eyes could not beat its own board with just its own engine cards, and instead had to rely on non-engine cards to have a shot at winning the mirror going second. And well, this was the best deck, so every other deck had it even worse than that. Essentially, Snake-Eyes mirrors, i.e. high ranking competitive games, devolved into "we can coinflip to decide whos going first and compare opening hands, we already know who is winning based on that alone. If I go first and open 3 of my one card starters, and your starting hand can only block 2 of the cards - I win".
4) Tenpai: As I previously showed: going first is a massive advantage, and the meta is usually a "go first meta", sooo 2024 they finally made a good going second deck in tenpai. What does it do? They do 30k damage, when you only have 8k Lifepoints. Also, like Snake-Eyes, all of their deck cards are 1 card into full combo. ohhhh, and they have multiple cards which just say "all your cards are unaffected by your opponents effects", so just do your flowchart combo, it doesn't matter what your opponent has or does. I do not think I need to explain how frustrating it is play vs this deck. Like Kashtira, the deck ofc also has its own counters, which just like Kashtira are on the type of "only good vs tenpai, crap everywhere else" - except here the going first player is the one desperate to draw the out for once.
These 4 decks roughly summarize 30 out of the last 36 months. If we go even further back till like 2016 to 2017ish, you will lots of the similar issues: 2016/2017 was dominated 2 tier 0 decks in Zoodiac and Spyral, 2018 was the year of "Infinite Loops enabled by Firewall Dragon", which led to the meta being "FTK/Pseudo-FTK turbo" , 2019 was dominated by TOSS format - A format where the general consensus seems to be that it was a good format.
2020 was the COVID format which had no events. The format in online was also of course dominated by a combo that that put up an unbreakable board in Adamancipators. 2021 I was personally on yugioh break, so I did not follow the game that much. However, what I heard of it in this year was not as bad (even though the format had its issues).
So yeah, if you look at yugioh -particular in the last 3 years with powercreep turbo, the game would constantly flip between either the Tearlement/Snake-Eyes extreme or the Kashtira/Tenpai extreme. There were occasionally phases, where the "broken balances broken" happened to work out, but the more you progress with powercreep and its speed, the smaller the area of where the concept of "nothing is broken if everything is broken" can work out happen once when multiple stars align. So, if Gen10 and Gen11's offensive powercreep will look like the one introduced in gen9, unrestricted competitive singles will look like the last 3 years of yugioh.
Soooo, how do yugioh players cope with this non-sense that happened the last 3 years, especially since cards became more expensive too? Retro-Formats gained popularity, previously, only 1 significant retro format in GOAT (2005ish yugioh) existed, which was considered "the peak of OldSchool Yugioh". Nowadays, other retroformat begin to thrive, SynchroPlant/Edison Format (around 2010/2011) is popular in particular, but I also noticed more people going back to HAT (2014) and TOSS (2019) formats. So, people who hate the broken game will search a format which does not have the issues related to powercreep. Which is similar to what is happening to showdown with the rise of popularity in retro formats.
People tend to love formats, which has neither a broken threat that you have to use in order to win. They do not want to play in a format where you have to bring super niche counters in order to win vs a powerful strategy. They ideally want to play in a metagame which has maximum variety. The retroformats I described all fulfill that criteria: It neither of the ugly faces of powercreep, or in the case of TOSS format where a situation where "broken balances broken" happened to work out. and all of the formats I listed have the property where a lot of decks happen to be playable, which cover all the playstyles.
And to loop back to smogon formats - this is the state that smogon tries to create a situation which those retroformats happened to have gotten naturally: Each of the 4 issues I explained in detail can be seen in analogy to an issue that smogon wants to address with its policies:
The "Tearlement type Issue" can be equated to "something in the meta is broken/overpowered".
The "Kashtira Problem" can be equated to "Overcentralization", where you need to prepare specific counters to a strategy to not auto-lose a matchup - and those counters are only useful for this matchup
The "Snake-Eyes Problem" , where Snake-Eye cannot beat its own boards without non-engine is similar to what smogon constitutes as uncompetitive - a state where the effects of RNG on the outcome of the match overwhelm the player decisions. Imagine a state where you And lastly, the "Tenpai problem", where the best strategy is "ignorant and just follows its flowchart", requires specific counters which need to be hard drawn (aka mercy of RNG) and can be argued to be broken. This sounds awfully familar to evasion, baton pass and swag-play.
So essentially, Smogon serves as a Safe Haven to people who are sick of the nature of what an unregulated game can be become, and are not willing to cope with "i m sure broken will just fix broken", so their formats serve the same purpose as retro-formats. WHICH IS IRONIC, because they are the one who preserve the retroformats and keep them in a widely accessible state.
Every night, I pray to Arceus that I wake up as cool as Jimothy.
I like doubles more for competitive but singles more for casual/playthrough. Singles is less stressful because there's less going on each turn, and for playthroughs you can just switch in the super effective pokemon and click the super effective button. It's relaxing and harkens back to my childhood. But if I'm going to actually sit down and battle competitively, I prefer doubles. Singles takes too long, and sometimes feels like you spend more time switching than you spend actually doing something. It's kind of a meme, but sometimes when I watch a competitive singles match, it feels like I'm watching two people click the switch button 30 times in a row until someone finally clicks a move. That doesn't happen in doubles. I also enjoy the wider depth of strategy in doubles. Support/technical strategies are less common in singles, I could be wrong, but it seems like singles you mainly choose between an offensive playstyle focused around just clicking a lot of damaging moves, or a defensive strategy where you apply hazards/statuses and switch a million times. In doubles, you can actually have a supportive pokemon that isn't necessarily a defensive wall or an offensive powerhouse, but supports your teammates. Not to say that isn't impossible in singles, but with the amount of turns in singles and the fact that you can't switch AND use a move on the same turn like you can in doubles, means that things like tailwind, trick room, weather, fake out, etc are much more viable in doubles than in singles. And some strategies like redirection, helping hand, after you, abilities like power spot or friend guard simply don't work in singles. So if I'm going to play competitively, between the choice of having more strategic depth and games finishing in 10 turns, or less strategic depth and losing in 60, I know which one I'm going to pick. Granted, the barrier of entry for VGC is way too high, when I do get the itch to play competitive (not that often to be fair), I only use rental teams if on cartridge, or I use Pokemon Showdown's VGC ladder. I think Pokemon would benefit greatly from making a live service competitive battle simulator that would be separate from the main games and persist through the generations, just getting updates when new games are released. The only way they could mess this up is if they time gated/microtransaction gated the way you train/change EVs/IVs/Natures/moves/etc on your Pokemon. Showdown works because you can change anything on a whim. Imagine if you had to have a certain amount of proteins to change your attack evs in the simulator and you could only get more by waiting 24 hours or paying for a recharge, that would suck.
To be fair, I've heard doubles 6v6 can be quite long, too.
The lack of Balance teams has been called a gen 9 thing, though I don't know if it was a growing problem.
I'm mostly a spectator, both formats definitely have their strengths and weaknesses as entertainment. VGC has high production values, live commentary, and quick games with dramatic and decisive turns. But it can be really frustrating to watch good players lose games because they got a 50/50 prediction wrong. Previous regulations also started to feel a little stale with the same high-power legendaries on every team. My hot take is that OHKOs are boring, I wish Pokemon wouldn't celebrate them so much on stream.
Singles, on the other hand, does seem to be decided more often by superior preparation and strategy. But too often it feels like trench warfare, with battles lasting 50-80 turns, both players just waiting for an opportunity to secure an advantage. I've found draft tournaments to be the best way to enjoy singles as it encourages a lot of variety and creativity.
The old ShoddyBattle interface still makes me nostalgic.
Also I dont think it can be overstated just how big a deal Se-Jun Park's win in 2014 was with Pachirisu in spreading awareness of and legitimizing VGC as a format. It was big news when it happened on the internet.
The only thing thst makes me tilt my head at this video is being AGAINST open team sheets.
I'm a big fan of closed team sheets in principle, but if you're not part of a group, then it's easy to have your strategy shared with others via viewers, which keeping those without connections in the dark.
triples>
real
what about rotation battles?
@@AGMadeItBratlord rotation is triples but with ally switch on everyone: rather terrible
@@runeheal Triples already has that.
I never loved Smogon's decisions on sleep, evasion, etc, becaused I really enjoyed the in game 6v6 back in gen 6/7. However, Showdown's ease of use and accessibility makes me appreciate all they do a lot.
I like watching both singles and doubles content, the only real gripe i have is people in both formats titling their videos as "competitive pokemon" not specifying whether it's singles or doubles.
This isn't a problem in terms of causing confusion, as most channels stick to one format, so as long as you're familiar with the channel you know what format you're getting.
The problem i have, is that it implies that whatever format the channel in question is playing is THE way to play competitive pokemon, even if that implication isn't intended on behalf of the video creator and i think this does in some small ways help increase the divide between the two formats and their communities which i think most people can agree is not desirable. As such i strongly recommend that regardless of what format one plays or prefers that if you're going to include the words "Competitive Pokemon" in your video or stream title, please just add "Singles" or "Doubles" somewhere to help emphasize that both formats are and can be competitive.
Ive been following doubles for a long time now and watching Wolfe’s content for so long, I can’t help but agree with you. I don’t play myself, but I can’t imagine how frustrating it must be for doubles players when games can be decided so quickly. One wrong move and it could be 100% over. Like watching Wolfe’s streams and the dude’s decicion making boiling down to: Well if I do X and he knows I do X, I should do Y but if he does Z then Im fucked.
Idk. I like mind games as much as the next game but there’s only so much roll of the cosmic dice I like
Competitve pokemon is a unique case in the world of esports
Because this is a rare instance where an official competitive ruleset and a fan made grassroots competitive ruleset both exist at the same time.
is this an inside joke
I played single from Gen 4 to Gen 6, and then I switched to double.
I would say double ia more dynamic because there are more decisions.
In single, there are 4 moves and 5 switches, so there are 4+5 = 9 ways to play the turn.
In double, you have 2 mon on the field, 4 moves, two targets, and 2 switches. There are already ((4x2)+2)^2 = 100 different ways to play the turn.
(For the purpose of calculations, I assume all the moves are single target attacks, and we are not targeting our own Pokemon)
So basically, singles is team deathmatch and doubles is search and destroy.
Wolfe is really a hero for the VGC scene, and does it all with a very positive and family friendly channel. I am a big fan and personally grateful to the guy
I tend to prefer the faster pace of VGC because I can sometimes get mentally exhausted from the slower pace of singles. A mistake in doubles means you can usually just get a new match after you lose in short order or somehow recover, but sometimes in singles you might not even realize how screwed you are for 5 turns of intense decision making. I do like both from time to time though and I think that learning one makes you better at the other because at the end of the day it's still Pokemon.
I want to see Item Clause be introduced into singles just to see what happens to the meta
I used to be a smogon Andy, until wolfyvgcs videos really showed me the depth of vgc. But I loved 6v6 during the X and y games. But man vgc has gotten way better nowadays with rental teams ect.
I'd love to hear you do a video on 1v1 but with a bring 6, pick 3 mechanic aka Battle Spot Singles
It's a much more popular meta in Japan and wish it got more play here
Has 4v4 singles ever been tried?
Both singles and doubles can coexist. If Nintendo/Game Freak wanted to axe Smogon and Showdown, they easily could. The fact that they haven’t shows that they view it as bringing value to the game they can’t do officially. It’s an official format in all but name.
I started with singles like most people and ended up playing vgc because I hate 100+ turns battles of nothing. Game is designed around doubles, thats why pp stall is a thing in singles
Even worse is FunBro
smooth brain takes from vgc glazers
Brilliant video, you truly are a fucking deadset legend of the Pokémon TH-cam world. Such a balanced, thorough, and thoroughly enjoyable video.
One big disagreement: it's often stated that pokémon games "nowadays are competitively balanced around doubles", but I don't think that's true at all. The truth is that the games still aren't balanced around competitive at all, they'll just implement new features and the playerbase has to hope that they are actually balanced, for both singles and doubles.
I feel that sentiment came up especially in gen 8 with dynamax being banned in OU, but in all honesty dynamax was even worse in vgc. A dynamaxer could sweep not just half a team but 75% of it, most max moves had their effects doubled (including the ones that dealt 16% residual damage each turn) and most importantly there were so many additional ways to abuse dynamax, like weakness policy. The teams that won the players cups were all centered around this theme, with stuff like Weakness Policy Coalossal + Surf or Regigigas + Weezing topping. In doubles Imposter also doesn't work properly, so OU's main answer to dynamax wasn't even there.
This is also true for a lot of other problematic things, like Mega Kang and Mega Mence or Flutter Mane and Urshifu being just as dominant and problematic in vgc as they were in OU.
It's just that the vgc community doesn't exactly have a choice. Either they play the metagame they're given or they lose out on the only competitive mode they have as well as all the potential prestige.
I also think that a lot of the more controversial gen 9 bans happened because of the divisive stand on tera. Aside from the clearly messed up mons a lot of mons are just too strong because of a completely unrestricted tera, but since the community can't come up with a unified solution to the issue, mons that abuse it end up banned.
Things are balanced for doubles ❌
Doubles is inherently most likely to be balanced ✅
@@GravityIsFalling Doubles is inherently most likely to be balanced ❌
most vgc players stopped caring about balance altogether because they can't change anything ✅
Mons like Flutter Mane or Urshifu are extremely far from balanced, as is a format having multiple mons with about 60% usage or gen 8 vgc with only one primary playstyle.
@
Flutter mane may not be balanced in VGC ( I hate this example btw raging bolt
Is way more insane), but it is way more balanced in VGC
Because inherently it only occupies 25% of all mons in the field
Let me educate you on something. A game like pokemon, a single player rpg based around gradually becoming stronger by gaining levels, can never work as a competitive multiplayer game. And that's fine. I never liked the competitive scene of this series anyway.
@@GravityIsFalling Except Psyspam hitting both opponents.
Raging Bolt is usually available at the same time as Miraidon, which complicates things.
Flutter Mane got a format without Calyrex.
What i really like about the singles community is that there's a format for older gens and different tiers
I think I got into competitive mons when Pokemon Online and Showdown had still coexisted. I used Pokemon Online because it wasn't blocked by my school's filter and I would just mess around in gen 5 OU. Showdown eventually somehow started evading my school's filter and I defaulted to that at some point.
Doubles is fun as hell, but singles is a bit more straightforward to me.
the 1 single type of item in vgc is very cool, every tournament should be played like that because although restrictive it does breed creativity, something I dont like about smogon gen 2 ou is that everyone uses leftovers and not using it is a huge detrimental cause everyone else has it
*Detriment.