What is the tiering philosophy and why do we need it?
The goal of tiering is to create a range of different rulesets that allow us to use different pokemon in a competitive environment, with different rulesets creating subtly different metagames and dynamics of play. The goal of this philosophy is to establish clear standards for how we should form these competitive rulesets and what our approach should be in various scenarios that are likely to occur.
What criteria do we use in determining a pokemon's tier?
When tiering there are essentially two decisions that are made: whether to include a pokemon in a tier or drop it to the one below, and whether or not to ban something. A pokemon's inclusion in a tier is determined solely by its viability within that tier. If it is perceived as being sufficiently viable it is made a part of that tier, if not, it drops to the tier below. A ban is implemented if an element in a tier has an unhealthy effect on that metagame. This can be characterised through a variety of methods, but it is invariably determined solely by playtesting as opposed to theorymon.
Notably, a pokemon's perceived status is generally ignored if it differs from its actual role in a metagame. This is most relevant for legendary pokemon, which might otherwise face potentially unwarranted bans without testing. This means that when beginning tiering in a new generation all pokemon are initially permitted.
Complex Bans
Complex bans undermine a ruleset's integrity and simplicity and as such should not be used, with the notable exception of tweaking established old gens. This can occur because a niche strategy may rise to have an unhealthy effect on the metagame, but a simpler ban would significantly alter the metagame, which is an undesirable outcome in an established old gen.
Non-Pokemon Bans
As it is mostly pokemon that are tiered, bans on things other than pokemon (e.g. Items, Abilities) represent an inconsistency with our tiering system, make rulesets slightly more difficult to work with and can potentially impact a broad selection of pokemon, many of which might not be problematic. As such they should be avoided where possible. Nonetheless, they may prove necessary, and can be used when it is unreasonable to ban each problematic pokemon , mostly if there's a large number of them. They may also be considered where the item or ability can be argued to be broken on all pokemon that make use of it even where it might be reasonable to ban individual pokemon- for instance although Lati@s could reasonably be banned individually, it might make more sense to ban Soul Dew.
The goal of tiering is to create a range of different rulesets that allow us to use different pokemon in a competitive environment, with different rulesets creating subtly different metagames and dynamics of play. The goal of this philosophy is to establish clear standards for how we should form these competitive rulesets and what our approach should be in various scenarios that are likely to occur.
What criteria do we use in determining a pokemon's tier?
When tiering there are essentially two decisions that are made: whether to include a pokemon in a tier or drop it to the one below, and whether or not to ban something. A pokemon's inclusion in a tier is determined solely by its viability within that tier. If it is perceived as being sufficiently viable it is made a part of that tier, if not, it drops to the tier below. A ban is implemented if an element in a tier has an unhealthy effect on that metagame. This can be characterised through a variety of methods, but it is invariably determined solely by playtesting as opposed to theorymon.
Notably, a pokemon's perceived status is generally ignored if it differs from its actual role in a metagame. This is most relevant for legendary pokemon, which might otherwise face potentially unwarranted bans without testing. This means that when beginning tiering in a new generation all pokemon are initially permitted.
Complex Bans
Complex bans undermine a ruleset's integrity and simplicity and as such should not be used, with the notable exception of tweaking established old gens. This can occur because a niche strategy may rise to have an unhealthy effect on the metagame, but a simpler ban would significantly alter the metagame, which is an undesirable outcome in an established old gen.
Non-Pokemon Bans
As it is mostly pokemon that are tiered, bans on things other than pokemon (e.g. Items, Abilities) represent an inconsistency with our tiering system, make rulesets slightly more difficult to work with and can potentially impact a broad selection of pokemon, many of which might not be problematic. As such they should be avoided where possible. Nonetheless, they may prove necessary, and can be used when it is unreasonable to ban each problematic pokemon , mostly if there's a large number of them. They may also be considered where the item or ability can be argued to be broken on all pokemon that make use of it even where it might be reasonable to ban individual pokemon- for instance although Lati@s could reasonably be banned individually, it might make more sense to ban Soul Dew.
Last edited:
