Then why havent you liked vanochristian7639's comment, which clearly says ,,I haven't watched the video but (...)" This, although on the surface seeming like a simple statement with no goal to harm, is a lie told to the Commenters to keep them engaging. We're onto you, *B*urger *K*ing *C*hili and we won't let this behavior slide.
You jest, but I got called a dirty stall user once in Gen 8 by. Some asshole who was playing basically the same stall team but with one sweeper. “My brother in Christ, we are both scum”
I tend to think of stall like that one quote about the stonecutter, where it looks like no progress is being made for hundreds of hits of the hammer, until at the very end when the payoff is the stone splitting cleanly in half on the final blow. All about little advantages being built up over time.
I had a game were I was making choices in a reasonable amount of time against a stall player and it went to over turn 100 and all of a sudden had ten seconds left to make a choice. That surprised me, threw me into a panic, and I lost because my moves got sloppy. I was pissed for losing for such a stupid reason and stopped playing for several months.
Stall plays an important role in the metagame clock. As offense teams try to one up each other, they tend to drop wallbreakers and stallbreakers, and run more short term scarfers, revenge killers, hazard setters, and swepers without any longevity. And when that goes too far, stall teams can clean house and keep that offense arms race in check. Obviously, its a bit of a oversimplified view, but it still has a similar effect.
I’ve always found stall to be the sign of a bad meta. If I can just slap the 6 bulky mons together and wall most or heck even half of the offensive meta then there’s a problem.
Stall is probably hated because you need a gameplan on how to dismantle the opponents defensive core, which isn't needed as much in balance/HO where the focus isn't as much on defensive play. I remember when i first started playing i hated stall because i hadn't even learned that game planning and win cons were a thing, i just liked to click the big damage button to kill things in front of me with epic predictions and powerful attacks (which I'm sure many can relate to) so when i played against stall, i was annoyed that my dragonite wasn't sweeping on turn 20 like other games It usually takes a lot longer to break a stall core, which takes a lot more foresight and experience and actively taking part in a battle plan, which is why stall can be enjoyable to watch at a high level for experienced players, because they understand game planning to such an extent that it seems like second nature
There is a concept I learned in magic the gathering, but it applies to many strategy games and I'm pretty sure pokemon. The concept is, if two strategies are roughly equal in power, and the players are equal in ability, the slower strategy is usually more powerful. You tend to have to trade off power and speed when building a deck or pokemon team. However, the faster strategy can win if it defeats the opponent before they can get started, or can cause the slow strategy to fail with early pressure. This causes a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. Massivly over simplifying, medium beats fast, slow beats medium, fast beats slow. In a mirror match, its often a good idea to slow down, since going faster is often harder in practice than slowing down.
I feel like part of the reason people hate stall is you usually realize when you’re gonna lose to stall and just get outlasted but then (if you don’t forfeit) it still takes a long time to actually play out and you are just going through the motions until you get worn down. It’s kinda like losing a game of monopoly where you realize there’s nothing you can do but the game still goes on for half an hour
This is the biggest thing for me. When offense has set up its win, there are a few turns left and it's over, when stall has set up its win you're like "well if I get a freeze or if I get a bunch of crits maybe I can pull this around" and that doesn't happen and you just lose really slowly and it's very frustrating.
Honeslty, I think that everyone need to play stall at least a bit because it helps being a better player. From my perspective, playing stall isn't very fun, but I feel like I learn more with this archetype.
Dude, my hate for stall is a lot more simple than you make it out to be. I come home after work, I hop on OU around the 1500s, I just want to play a fun match or two. But then im forced into a 30 minute grind where I have to condition my opponent for 20 turns to get a single double switch on the Dondozo. I dont fucking care for all that, I just want to play a casual pokemon game that doesnt last 30 minutes
Sometimes I just don't want to play a game that is 30 minutes where I'm not having fun and the skill is the match up. I played gen 7 uu. It was actually broken and quag had to be banned because stall was too good and not because it was broken. I don't like screens offense but it usually doesn't exceed 30 turns.
what a battle takes more than 30 secs to finish? this is a waste of time, completly ignoring the fact that nobody has time for x matchen only for x insert timeframe. ok you play less battles but lets be honest stall teams rely on predictions, ho not so much.
22:07 the way we refer to bulky things as fat has always cracked me up, always weird to read about people talking about good a pokemon is in the "fat mirror" etc
My biggest issues are with the later gen regen stall teams. They pack multiple regen users, an unaware clef, etc. and creates a very low skill team. In many matchups, they can afford multiple misplays with no loss to their odds of winning due to the survivability of the regen core since they can heal and switch at the same time. And then in the mirror match, you might get these long drawn out more skillful matches but more often you get matches where optimal play is a skill free infinite switch off from both players, creating hundreds of consequence free turns or no difference in outcomes from suboptimal play since the mon they switch to and from don't matter as long as they are switching regen mons. But people will defend this era because one time in tournament a guy realized he and his opponent were in a multiturn loop where he could win in x iterations of it and a simple math problem won the game and something that appeared to be an infinite turn tie to the crowd watching was actually won at team preview.
As someone who plays control in card games, which are similar to Stall in pokemon, it has a good place and shouldn't be looked down upon as "bad" or "a waste of time". On the other hand, youre holding the tournament up, we cant go to round 2 until you finish, and have been waiting for 20 minutes. Because of the luck inherit to pokemon (crits, scald burns, etc), its hard to be sure youre in in a losing position and playing is truly a waste of time. Feels bad to concede even if its inevitable ill lose, because what if...
If you realize you can’t win no matter what, just concede. If you’re not lying about your odds of winning in that scenario, then this is the most optimal play. Or you could, like, try to claw your way out, maybe even learn the matchup
@@lancesmith8298the match up is: do I have taunt and a way to kill their unaware mon so my setup sweeper can win? No? Okay guess I gotta get crazy crits
@@fulltimeslackerii8229 I mean, if you want genuine answers, the questions you need to ask yourself against stall are: 0. Am I even playing to win in the first place? No amount of competitive advice will answer this for you, and no competitive advice will teach you how to have fun as you see fit. My first thought upon Gen 9 release was “it’d be really funny to run Cyclizar Screens HO”, and that playstyle was never going to stay legal. If you’re not in it just for the prestige of winning, play your favorites, not to the meta. Or pick something that sparks joy. 1. Did I pack a wallbreaker? Choice item beefcakes are pretty much your main way past Unaware in general, especially if they have the right coverage (for example, Grassy Glide into Quag, Earthquake into Clod, [good Grass special move] for Dondozo, Iron Head for Clefable, and so on). This is precisely what they’re there for. 2. What Pokemon do I have that can go long if need be? Dragonite is a sweeper, yes, but Multiscale can take the edge off of stray hits, and Roost exists. So many random Mons get Pressure, and recovery moves have even less PP than before, so you can reasonably get something paralyzed and switch it into Roost/Heal Bell/Defog/U-turn/other status moves, wasting their resources. 3. How much of their team can I kill with one sweep? Sometimes you have threats like Manaphy that are terrifying without an Unaware mon on deck, and sometimes you just have a good type advantage to work with. 4. What’s the most threatening Pokémon on the team, and how do I kill it? Killing it isn’t the hard part so much as the double switches and mind games it might take to get their best Pokemon into a position you can threaten it in. You have so many turns to learn your opponent’s autopilot. 5. Can I accept the fact my team simply loses to some stall teams? Hey, game’s random sometimes, and even if it weren’t, ladder isn’t the tournament experience. You might as well play it out to see what to do in the future.
your videos kinda give me the vibe of sitting in a lecture but the professor is super cool and you enjoy going to that class and im saying this as a uni student on their last semester that hates school. i started truly getting into competitive pokemon in gen 4 and 5 era so hearing about the earlier meta games is pretty cool and really helps change the way i look at certain Pokemon a lot. (the draft league boom/resurgence right now is also helping that)
As a novice/mid ladder team builder, beating a meta stall team was always much more satisfying than beating a HO/Offensive team of the same relevance. This seems to be the case to me because even on stall teams damage is the name of the game, so accounting for offensive Pokemon feels like a given when building a team. Stall though, that has always felt like the deciding factor behind what is and isn't a good team. Stall teams already trying to constrict the main OU meta, so anything that is a bit off from that felt like it got PP stalled/Toxiced to death. So when I did beat stall with my own team, I knew I was mostly on the right track with how my team is structured, making the victory that much more triumphant than if I did it with a team passed to me. Even with a team that wasn't mine, beating offensive teams is always less satisfying. In a blurb, to me HO is to Stall as the Appetizer is to the Main Dish.
i mostly play gen 3 because gen 2 stalling is not stalling but lets be honest: one side think the match should en at turn 15 the other side thinks nah and i dont see the problem because the game or sites like showdown make it clear what rules exist before you can press play.
I think it’s worth acknowledging that it is in fact okay to dislike a game being 10 turns or less on the grounds it isn’t engaging. But then again, it could also be said that watching a 100 turn plus game isn’t always engaging either. There should be variety in the lengths of games. Sometimes they are faster and sometimes they are longer. At the end of the day it is preference on where you lean.
There's def a balance between HO 6-0 sweep and Clef Regenrator Balance with HDB. Anyway, for singles, I think while not every game needs to be short, games should feel snappy. Thus, I am not a fan of Regenrator, HDB, and think Hazards are necessary to keep a good pace for games in singles.
You're right The difference is the Clef HDB Regen is cool because players have to feel each other out until eventually the teams fall apart with good maneuvering.@@theimpersonator7086
@@theimpersonator7086Honestly, if I had to build competitive Pokemon from scratch, knowing what we know now (this isn’t even too much of a hypothetical, pet mods are really interesting me rn), I’d throw out hazards and hazard removal entirely, in favor of making switching always cost health. If the point of hazards is to punish switching, then doesn’t that put the problem on switching as a flawed mechanic in need of balancing, and not the hazards themselves? And if it’s not switching’s fault, is losing a quarter of a healthbar plus Toxic a fair trade for keeping switching as it is?
@@lancesmith8298 If hazards were to be removed, then yeah Pivot moves, Regenerator, some mons stats would def have to be nerfed or removed to keep games for having a good pace/flow to them.
@@lancesmith8298 Switching is not a flawed mechanic whatsoever. It's the single most important core feature of Pokemon that makes it fun to play competitively, and on it's own it's a genius way to turn rock-paper-scissors into a positional offense/defense tug of war ("do I use a move to bring the opposing team closer to fainting, or give up a turn for better positioning?"). In doubles format it's less important because what you have out on the field is already a complex position (double the mons, double the rocks papers and scissors out) and aggro control through direct protection like Protect/Detect, redirection like Rage Powder/Follow Me, and other supplementary moves like Ally Switch take the place of switching for the most part. 100% of the time, it is ALWAYS mechanics that abuse switching by removing it's inherent cost that arguably cause issues. Regenerator is switching, and using a recovery move. U-Turn is switching, and using an attack. Magic Guard is switching, and using Safeguard/getting a turn of Leftovers over Sand, etc. Hazard gameplay is one of the most effective ways to fight back against switch abuse (most switch abusers, obviously not Magic Guard). I don't understand why you would want to see hazards removed entirely. They add a layer of depth to the game beyond attacks, boosts, and status. Because the core of competitive Pokemon is positioning, and switching is how positioning is achieved, why wouldn't you want to have methods in your game of making switching more interesting? The tug of war is more even more deep with hazard gameplay, on top of clicking attacks, boosts, or status, you can choose to "give up" a turn like with switching, but instead it makes the future of the game slightly more advantageous to you (or in other words, you slightly nerf switching for the opponent). And with hazard removal, you can undo that advantage with giving up one of your turns (Defog and old Rapid Spin aren't real attacks/"boosts" on their own). I think just adding an HP nerf on switching is a wholly worse decision. You are removing depth from the game, and depending on the gen, could just ruin the flow of the game entirely (in GSC for instance maybe the game wouldn't be ruined, though it's still just a worse version of what single layer Spikes and Rapid Spin already add to the game). And also, you technically do lose HP every switch, because the opponent gets the opportunity to get a free attack in. It's just more interesting this way because free turning given off switching can be used for more than just immediate damage. In my opinion, all that would need to be done with Stealth Rocks is just to remove the type effectiveness of it and lock it to being 12.5% damage regardless of levitation or Flying typing. Pokemon is already chock full of asymmetrical type balancing... but in most cases Stealth Rock pushes it a bit far. Volcarona is one of the only examples of Stealth Rock tyoe effectiveness being healthy since it's a goddamn monster and this is a unique Achilles Heel for it. But boots kinda ruined that...
5:40 here’s a good way to phrase it: If you truly want to come out of a game saying “I won because I was better,” you don’t want games decided by one turn of dumb luck/one small mistake. This is why a lot of competitions are Bo3; even the best players have bad turns, bad games, bad luck, etc. but you can’t get unlucky for 200 turns in a row. The longer the game, the more likely that the better player won.
I haven't watched the video, but stall is a play style usable in competitive Pokemon singles where a player uses high defense Pokemon to outlast the opponent
The best way to describe the hate toward them was summarized really well by a fighting game player describing how he hated winning with a campy character. He said it felt more like he was winning through his opponents getting annoyed and slipping up 99% of the time than he was actually outplaying people with his own skill. It feels like a very dishonest and gimmicky way to play games through that perspective imo
I don't remember stall being hated back in the Netbattle days. I think you touched on the real reasons why it's hated: people wanna get battles with over with ASAP for the sake of climbing the Showdown ladder. Older sims didn't have a ladder so there was less incentive to speed up battles.
"The reason why I want it to be over as quick as possible is because on ladder, if a battle takes me an hour, even if I won it, I couldve won like 5 battles and ranked h8gher but because the opponent is running stall I spend an hour minutes on a battle that will give me little at best and decrease my ELO at worst. I wanna be able to rank in a moderate pace" I think this is the reasoning, I mean sometimes you just wanna play a quick battle while waiting for someone to pick u up and then u go against a team that takes a million years to beat and now u have to be in the car playing. Idk, too specific of a scenario, but its reasonable imo I would say that some people exagerate a little bit when they cant handle a 100 turn battle, ig thats why GSC is so underrated But hey if u ask me, 200 turns is when it starts to get a lil annoying cuz maybe I had planned to stop playing at a certain time but I couodnt cuz the battle lasted longer than usual
I understand hating Stall. Stall is exhausting to play against. Games go long, and given how good Stall teams have a myriad of ways to cripple your Pokemon, it makes the majority of the already large amount of turns stressful. Avoiding a burn on Weavile for 200 turns? Managing the hazards when your hazard control might not have a recovery move and theirs do? Good lord. Another reason why Stall is hateable, is because it forces good teambuilding. THIS IS NOT A BAD THING LOL, but generally, it is easier to forget to account for Stall matchup when teambuilding. Taunt, Trick+Scarf, cleric pokemon, they are lesser auto-includes than just throwing together a core that rips through offense or a singular wall you have in mind, or a defensive core that stands up to premier offensive threats. Putting together a truly good team means you need a deep understanding of the metagame, and... Everybody has weaker attention spans. We just do. If competitive Pokemon somehow existed a 1000, even 100 years ago, I don't think anyone would complain about long games. It's just the way things are. But... Stall is inherently good for existing in Pokemon. It's gameplay is fully legitimate, you can beat Stall with a good team (and standing up to multiple team styles is the mark of a well built team), and Stall can beat you if they play consistently over the course of a game. AKA, being rewarded for consistency. Wishing Stall to just not exist is the same as wanting the game to be less deep.
BKC lately your videos have had some garbage recordings of the battles themselves. If you want to make sure that's not the case, you can try to download the replays as a standalone html and play them from your local directory so there's no animation latency etc. Thanks for a really good video regardless.
This is probably unpopular but I enjoy stallier games because there is a very heavy emphasis on maneuvering. It's nice to see BKC say the same thing. I enjoyed playing semi stall throughout Gen 7 BH, bulky offenses and stall in gen 7 OU, and now Superman in ADV. When I queue stall, I'm not thinking about making my opponent suffer a long game, I'm exploiting their lust for fast pace and lack of longevity (but then queue against opposing stall pain). Honestly the joy of maneuvering is probably why I enjoy Fire Emblem too, and slower games of chess. Stall for me isn't about switching to walls, but about switching into a bulky Pokemon that also exerts offensive pressure on my opponent, while not being at a defensive disadvantage. Having to constantly apply pressure is a huge part of the fun, and it's part of why I dropped gen 9. I know it's my fault for not learning the generation well, but having games decided by single turns is infuriating to me. Of course, this is not to say you can't get good games in gen 9, but it is really hard to get into gen 9 because there is so much more to learn to avoid losing in a single turn. Also yes, I had to watch the entire video after being called out for wanting to write a comment straight away.
I still to this day dont know what any of the team archetypes actually are. After watching this, i still dont know. Is tss stall? What's bulky offense? Wouldn't that just be balance? Is dragmag hyper offense?
TSS is a gameplan in Gen 3, and not the actual archetype. There’s a lot of Mons that are big dumb walls that work for TTS, but they’re not required to be TTS. It’s as much of an archetype as VolTurn is. Bulky offense is different from balance based on move choices (I think, trying to position something as “balanced” is stupid hard to define regardless of game). A BO team might have a recovery move or two, and picks Mons that can tank a couple hits to swing back harder. Meanwhile, Balance teams tend to have 50/50 splits between hard hitters and defensive pivots, and also between solid damage moves and utility moves. And yes. Kind of an upsettingly good HO style of team, actually; usually those are pretty frail and die off as new meta threats get established or solved, but there’s pretty much no universe where somebody isn’t running a Steel type to fight Dragon moves
I think the main reason why stall is hated is that it's frustrating to see your progress being denied or erased, and stall is the team style that prioritizes denying progress over making progress the most. I don't like facing stall because I like clicking buttons without thinking much, but I don't hate stall players because if my playstyle is garbage into stall, it's my fault, not theirs.
I am only speaking of the gen 7 ladder experience, but I think it's valid to be annoyed by stall in OU but not in something like Ubers. Now I think competitively, stall is a completely valid option but if I want to load a fun team with a banded sleep talk last resort komala I know that if the stall player plays the matchup correctly, then I'm lost. Now that's fine a 1800 elo stall player, if they prove that they understand my options are limited, I'm happy to forfeit in under 20 turns. However, when stall at 1500 makes a bad play, like switch in a gliscor on turn 5, escaping a 30% lava plume burn chance with heatran, that's really annoying, particularly, when I find out the chansey is rocks, softboil, seismic toss, toxic. I'll never complain about stall in gen 7 ubers because that stall can at least force progress with toxic, and even sableye can force things out with fake out pressure on a toxic'd pokemon. At the same time, in gen7ou a stall will face gliscor pex sometimes, and the stall player can't really force progress except getting rid of 24 defogs. But that really isn't the ladder experience, and so I think it's fine to dislike stall in some metas like gen7ou and be fine with it in gen7ubers. But this is really just from a ladder perspective, this has nothing to do with the competitive experience. In other words, a stall player being rewarded for bad plays can happen in gen7ou, but it can't really happen to the same extent in another meta like gen7ubers. Obviously, when mega medicham ice punches you on a hurricane dodge from torn, then that's tough as well, but at least I didn't spend 50 turns positioning with the limited options I gave myself while trying to have fun. Sincerely, Medicham hater (torn is a fraud in gen7)
I haven't watched the video, but thank you Kevin for making such wonderful videos for us, and being here in general. I find that your insights on Pokemon can lead to wider implications on maybe even improving our daily lives. Thank you for the work you do, and stay hydrated my friend, from one Kevin to another.
I haven't watched the video yet but as a DPP current genner, it can't be stall unless it is Hippowdon, Blissey, Skarm, Tentacruel, Celebi, Rotom-A exactly. Thank you.
The reason why stall is hated is because a prolonged battle can get tedious and annoying, especially against someone who is used to fast-paced battles.
I feel like stall is only bad when regenerator is in play. Being able to nullify progress without a lot of consequences for misplays is pretty unhealthy and "boring" in my opinion. I like playing stall in ubers tiers because with all the heavy hitters you are only a couple misplays away from crumbling completely and all of your mons being OHKO'd.
Stall is walking to a game of connect four and finding out your playing chess. Longer, more thought provoking, and if tou havent studied toure in for a rough time
Imo as a stall player it feels the worst its been in a while. I mainly think there are few reasons for this. One because of tera any mon can become a decent wall breaker( the instant 1.5x damage). Ogerpon wellspring is insane into stall it can solo alot of stall teams. And i think gholdengo making hazard removal so difficult that alot of stall teams rely on boots spam to be able to function which makes it get incredibly punished by knock off. I think as the meta develops and maybe we have some innovation in gen9 stall teams we could see stall get better but at the moment its pretty bad
Issue with stall in gen9 is that there’s only like 1-2 viable teams everyone spams. It takes a single google search to find most stall players team paste and then there is a massive disadvantage
TBF, the title is a question and people have opinions on the subject, so naturally people are gonna respond THEN watch speaking of which, I mainly don't like stall because it feels like it stifles my creativity in the team builder and undermines the time spent building synergy and cool teams. But I also like playing against it cause it's a chance to slow down and really pick apart my decision making.
Whenever I am dipping my toes into a new meta, first thing I usually do is build (or steal) a Stall team. I find that they allow me to quickly scout the meta (see what different mons can do and gauge the meta's top threats) while also giving me some "free" wins as I rely entirely on fundamentals. In other words, I like Stall because it is generally a less risky playstyle that places less emphasis on individual turns and more emphasis on patience, fundamentals, and macro/long-term thinking. (Incidentally, my favorite meta is Gen 2 OU for that same reason, though I prefer offensive teams in that meta.) Obviously I put quotations around "free" for a reason though. I'm not trying to imply that playing Stall is easy. I think patience and stamina are important skills that Gen 1/Gen 2 players (who are very usued to 150+ turn games) usually have in spades while newer gen players can get impatient and sloppy once you get past like 80 turns.
one time in early SV my opp kept throwing attacks that did 30% to my garganacle while I kept clicking recover while it died slowly to salt cure. He raged at me for using stall... lol. Like bro just cuz you cant kill me doesnt mean im stalling
Early on in my team building I would do quote unquote stall teams, but it happened naturally without me trying because I was just trying to have an answer for everyone in The meta
In order to beat stall, you need to use stall teams. Learn how it works, what makes stall teams tick. You must become what you hate in order to defeat it and understand it.
The noob’s understanding: This isn’t fair, they’re just switching in things that won’t die to my stuff over and over again! The reality: I wish I was good at building offense so I don’t need a college degree and an extra minute on the timer to handle Iron Valiant
Many competitive games can reach states were one side has pretty much lost, but the formal end of the game will only come after an agonizing process, and giving up is technically a bad choice cause the opponent could choke or you have some resource that maybe could give you an out. Those game states are hated in pretty much every game, and vitriol against the players that use those strategies as well as against the institutions that can change the game, are an universally observable response. IMO Pokémon and stall have it wa(aaaaaaaaa)y better than games like yugioh and magic, since evenly matched players and teams will still have an interactive and competitive game even if stall is present, but sadly even in that ideal scenario the crawl of death will eventually come. In the before mentioned games, sometimes your opponent resolving a single card can make half or more of your deck unplayable. Most often i don't think it's as black and white as you liking or don't liking the game, everyone has their own tastes and expectations about the game, and in my experience even if don't dislike stall i can tell using it and playing against it is a distinctly different experience (i'm a god of vocabulary). Players have to eventually mature, recognize the misalignment between their wants and the reality of the game, and find their own ways to cope with it without lashing out to the first scapegoat they find suitable. If you're not alone in your frustrations and there is something that can be done to change the game, more power to you, get political, change the system, start your own enthusiast organization, the sky is the limit. That being said, players going mad at the first hint of a defensive move really are playing the wrong game.
As a stall apologist I think the reason stall generates a lot of its animosity is without a good understanding of the meta they can be very opaque why you lost. Anyone can see that they lost because Volcarona got a free quiver dance. It can be a lot harder to figure out why your pokemon flailed uselessly wile being worn down. All types of tactics have knowledge checks, people learn very quickly that six mons with basic attacking moves loose to sash smash Cloyster, but it is pretty clear you need more utility to stop that. How do you break tri regenerator +hazard spam? That is a lot more complex to break and it is much easier to blame the game than blame the player. That said there are two things that put me off from stall. One, the turn counts stall creates basically guarantee crits will happen and the nickle and dime nature gameplan + defensive core needs all members alive leads to frustration for me. Two, 48pp Recover is a sin that causes god to weep.
I think the reason stall gets hate from people is cuz they want to continue laddering at a fast pace and they see stall as something that impedes that fast paced progression and the only way they can avoid the time loss of playing a game against stall is to forfeit which is counter intuitive because they want to also gain elo at a fast pace.
Longer games give you more time to scout out an opponent's tactics. Bulk is nice to have in that regard, and even if you don't make Stall your main play style, playing a game with it to see how an opponent reacts could be an interesting way to open a series against them to try to read their behavior in what many perceive to be a tricky situation.
It’s not boring but it is aggravating that stall can effectively halt your progress as effectively as it does. Specifically in gen9 national dex, the standard stall team is corviknight, sableye-mega, clodsire, dondozo, chansey/blissey, and gliscor. You can’t use setup sweepers because clod and dondozo are massive unaware walls, you can’t wear them down with hazards because of corviknight and sableye, you can’t use status to wear them down because of gliscor and pink blob, so you end up just eating gliscor’s hell of spikes and toxic without even knock off making progress due to the inherent traits of this specific combo of pokemon
To be fair, Gen 9's power level demands that stall also has more insane tools (like defense boost sweepers and actually good Unaware mons), but I must admit: that team does seem hard to break without some sort of naturally hard hitter or a setup sweeper that can beat dondozo/clod (which shouldn't be that hard with z moves, right? The cope is real). At least earlier Gen stay teams had the decency of not having Unaware and magic bounce
The best comparison between games that I can make for stall is super smash brothers melee. People hated jigglypuff, who was a slower, “lamer” playstyle of taking advantages of misplays. Fox, falco and falcon were fast paced combo menaces that were “cool”. Stall can be aggressive. Jiggs can be aggressive. But losing to both is a result of making mistakes. It lowers the chance factor, the reads, the moments, and spreads it out across the game.
more moves in pokemon games deal damage than not ergo stall is not what god intended us to do!! stall is hated because it's not fun when something exists solely to interrupt your gameplan you want to realize. for the same reason control decks are disliked in card games - you have this nice pile of cards only for opponent to say "no" to whatever you do on your turn because that's their gameplan
People hate stall in Pokemon for the same reason they hate 10 minute lines in Yugioh. If they don’t draw the out in their opening hand they are forced into a situation where the options are concede or not have fun.
The thing about Stall is that it puts way more on the other player. The floor of just switching into your counter every turn is just pretty high whil the other person need to create offensive momentum. The real skilltest is when you need to weight long term vs shortterm benefits of the moves you make and Stall is designed to suck the momentum out of the game and make a whole dimension not matter one bit. not say stall isnt skillintensive when you try to get trapped in a vortex or need to play around a designed stallbreaker but thse are by definition rare.
People have an inherent dislike of "lame" gameplay styles across genres of games. There's similar hatred of control decks in tcgs (or stun if you play yugioh) and of zoners in fighting games. The biggest haters generally have never tried these styles to see that it's a lot harder than it looks.
A lot of players, I think, like to click big buttons and watch number go down and stall is the least conducive to that. It's a shame because slow methodical games are actually really fun
I'm not sure I like stall, though I definitely prefer it to screens offense. My favorite teams are those which are able to switch around for long periods of time while keeping health up, but which do still in the end win by attacking, not via passive damage. I do think that it is totally fine for people not on smogon to call these teams "stall", even though this doesn't fit with smogon's definition, because their game plan involves quite a bit of stalling to get the pokemon in position.
I really don't think "if you lose to stall then your team is bad or you're the worse player" is a valid argument; the same thing could be said for any number of the broken things you've complained about before. If you consider a strategy legitimate, you can say that teams that lose to it just aren't good (people say this for Baton Pass quite a bit, I think). If you consider the strategy low-skill or a matchup-fish or whatever, the stance is that those teams are perfectly good, they just can't afford to check this one "bad" "gimmick" strategy.
13:52 I love long games, but I also think it is totally valid to prefer punchier games, playing a bunch of faster games in a row. Not my style, but not objectively incorrect taste. I honestly don't think it has anything to do with taste.
I can recognize a stall team from team preview... if I see it, I leave. I simply dont want to deal with that 🤷🏽 Edit: I rather you just have a team full of legendaries than to deal with a hazard stall-out, toxic & protect team.
I remember this one dude who was using shell armor kingler with iron defense + amnesia + rest + iron claw. It was impossible to beat. I wasn't playing stall to be exact but I just endured with my skarm until they forfeit at turn 138. I told them it was banned to force infinite battles but idk what happened there.
I'm ok with Stall or other compositions. People hating on legitimate strategies is silly, if it's too strong it'll get bans and if not it's lega It's not on the opponent to entertain you or use your time well. That's on each individual involved to worry about themselves and anything from there's a bonus Someone getting upset at slower strategies just sound impatient
Stall is something I don’t like in certain forms….one of the worst examples I can think of is Mean Look, Charm Umbreon trapping your Snorlax in Gen2 OU….UGH!! That can be so boring and such a non-winnable matchup usually Another thing I hate (but also love doing haha) is Gen 1 Wrap….i love pulling it off with bullshit like Onix and Arbok, or even legit threats like Dragonite and Victrebell, but my goodness I hate getting caught in it lol
In other words, I prefer to loose rather quick if I know it’s gonna happen….minus Gen1 Wrap, I didn’t play with stall much….the closest thing I’ll “stall” with are Blissey + 5 Intimate Pokémon switching in and out, and those matches rarely drag past 30 turns or so
People are very quick to complain against stall Gen 7 ou one time I was using Gliscor Uxie Ambipom Mega Absol Serperior Gengar That’s 2 walls with rocks and toxic + 4 offensive mons only one of which is a setup sweeper the others were pivot heavy and the gengar wasn’t even will o wisp To be fair serp has leech seed and taunt And I was accused of stall