09-29-2016, 11:23 AM
Sorry to say this, but to say my opinion, I just think it's pointless and dangerous at the same time to discuss which Pokemon should be banned without actually doing the battles. Of course it's free to "guess" which Pokemon would be strong in the competetive fields, but when it comes about banning, then it should be treated with extra caution.
There must be plenty of battles held before the decision. After all, even Nucleon and Inflagetah may end up in being "not so strong as it seemed". Also bunch of battling videos might help the decision, as it works as a source of real battle situations, not just theoritical ones.
I'm simply not a fan of the idea to "ban" Pokemon, but really, I'm afraid of Pokemons being banned unfairly because of people saying "Nucleon should be banned, because I think so". Everyone thought M-Salamence would dominate the wi-fi rating battles right after the release of ORAS, and then after a week only a few kept using it and other returned to using M-Kangaskhan and M-Gengar as a mega position as if no new megas were released. Top of the theoritical battles fell to nothing in real battles.
There must be plenty of battles held before the decision. After all, even Nucleon and Inflagetah may end up in being "not so strong as it seemed". Also bunch of battling videos might help the decision, as it works as a source of real battle situations, not just theoritical ones.
I'm simply not a fan of the idea to "ban" Pokemon, but really, I'm afraid of Pokemons being banned unfairly because of people saying "Nucleon should be banned, because I think so". Everyone thought M-Salamence would dominate the wi-fi rating battles right after the release of ORAS, and then after a week only a few kept using it and other returned to using M-Kangaskhan and M-Gengar as a mega position as if no new megas were released. Top of the theoritical battles fell to nothing in real battles.
Online ID:232277
I'm Japanese and not a English speaker, sorry for bad grammars, spellings etc.
