Dondon, Please chill out
After reading the (https://pokemongo.gamepress.gg/making-generation-2-attacker-tier-list-methods-and-observations), I could see a very angry writer trying his very best to calm down...
Well, here are my thoughts:
1. People are never 100% objective; everyone is subjective to some extent. To be specific, we trainers tend to defend what we have and diminish what we don't. Take Gyarados. He has probably become the most common high CP mon after the water event and almost everyone has some good Gyarados (DT/HP or DT/O). It is frustrating for them to see Gyarados lies only in Tier 3. Same for Rhydon.
2. We could try some new format for the Tier list. Recently, we GP community as well as GP, are facing competition from other rating agencies. They are winning more appraisal and we really need to think about how to maintain GP's reputation as the top 1 in PoGo rating. Our current Tier system simply cannot satisfy the growing need of different trainers. Their group format was a nice try, but as you said, it "doesn’t adequately differentiate between good Pokemon in a role and worse Pokemon in that role". I may propose a "Best Attacker against each Defender" format - what is the optimal option to beat a Blissey, sth like that.
And finally, keep up your good work! I must admit that your Tier lists match most of my battling experiences after Gen2.
Answers
He is probably frustrated that he even has to justify a list he makes on his own time for an ungrateful audience.
And instead of being thanked, he is told why his list is 'wrong' and then gets a million different suggestions as to how to 'fix' it.
Quite frankly, I don't blame him.
I wouldn't be surprised if he tells us all exactly what we can do with our requests for a list next time.
Just because someone thinks that their Gyarados is all that...doesn't mean it is all that.
And just because it isn't in the tier they want it to be...they can still use it and it makes ZERO difference to it's performance.
I am not sure dondon is the one that actually needs to be told to calm down. All those that feel the need to tell him how to deliver us free high quality content need to calm down.
I for one would just like to say 'Thanks dondon'...and then I will move on.
He doesn't have to justify anything, nor does he have to respond to every discussion comment, if he feels that is a waste of his time.
In all of the replies he posted to other peoples' critiques, I never once saw him say "that's a valid point," or "I never thought of it from that angle," or something similar. It was pretty much always "here's why I'm right and you're wrong," with the catch-all defense of "results may vary depending on your style, which is why I'm still right."
That said, he deserves respect and appreciation for the time and effort he dedicated to the project.
I'll concede a valid point when I see one, and there haven't been many of those.
You don't make concessions just for the hell of it. The one thing that I have sort of conceded (I say sort of because I already knew this when I created the tier list but never outright stated it) is that Gyarados is a usable generalist if you have a lackluster attacker squad. But that's why it's in tier 3+.
I've also had it pointed out to me that Blissey can't beat herself, which is true, but you pick 6 Pokemon to attack a gym for a reason.
To be clear, saying something like "No, certainly not." to start a counterargument doesn't exactly set a positive tone. Nor does alluding that anyone who considers Gyarados to be a usable generalist has a "lackluster" squad. It may seem nitpicky, but when representing a reputable website like Gamepress, it's important to be careful with how you present things.
The only valid argument people have stated is that you also suffer from a subjective view that is overshadowing objective information. Fight battles with facts/numbers and less of the argumentative statements. A "No, here's why..(insert math here)" will work as a counter argument without all the triggers.
Thanks for all the work in the lists.
The true issue with lists is that there are so many ways to play.
The issue with Gyrados is lets compare a Bite/HP one vs the Pokemon you have in Tier 2.5. The "Glass Cannons"
Let's say you play them identically. That means you Dodge on Gyrados as much as you dodge on Alkaham. And your playing them as Neutral Matchups.
Bite at .5 seconds is actually quicker than any of the moves the Glass Cannons have.
Bite/HP
Gyrados does about 80% DPS of Alka
Gyrados does about 75% DPS of Gengar
Gyrados does about 82% DPS of Espeon
Gyrados does about 77% DPS of Flareon
But Gyrados is far more survivable than any of those 4. Let's compare Gyrados to Alk. Def scores basically same. 190 stam vs 110. Thats a 72% increase.
So Gyrados played the same way as Alk. Does 80% as much damage but has 172% HPs. (and a microfraction .1 second easier move to dodge with)
My issue with Gyrados placement, is that if you play Gyrados like you do the 2.5 Glass Cannons, you do more damage to the Gym
As such Bite/Hydropump (and you could do DT/HP since Gengars/Espeons moves are DT duration)
Belong in 2.5 at least
Or to put it another way.
Gyrados is half Glass Canon half generalist.
It's high enough DPS to appeal to me like the Glass Cannon's do. Although it only does 75-80 damage
But it is close enough in damage department, that it's vastly superior bulk makes it a more valuable attacker than the Glass Cannon Tier and sets it apart from the rest of Tier3
Don't know if you are reading Dondon.
But I did these posts out of order. I posted, then read your explanation of Gyrados (The mother load)
And I agree with all your comparisons of Gyrados vs Dragonite. Or Gyrados vs Vaperon. or Gyrados against Dragonite.
My gripe is limited to the one topic you don't discuss at all. Gyrados vs Tier 2.5
Gyrados's Bulk Advantage is simply put too much larger than the Glass Cannon's DPS Advantage not to put Gyrados in that tier.
You'd have a better chance beating 2 ZH/BS Snorlax's back to back with Gyrados than you would with Flareon.
There's a fallacy with simply pushing numbers around to promote an argument. Numbers such as raw DPS and bulk exist in a vacuum and are pretty meaningless when not applied to a real battle.
Let me examine your claim that playing Gyarados like a glass cannon does more damage to a gym.
Taking DT/O Gyarados as a defender, PC/FS Alakazam wins faster AND takes less % HP damage than any flavor of Gyarados! Put simply, if played like a glass cannon, Alakazam not only grinds through more Gyarados before fainting, but also does it faster.
So what gives? If you just take DPS and bulk into account, Alakazam is "supposed to be" worse. Why do the battle results differ from your expectations? It's because in the process of being faster, Alakazam KOs Gyarados before taking a second Outrage. DPS isn't a constant thing. It spikes in short bursts when a Pokemon uses a charge move.
There's something else to take into account as well. When facing a gym, you're allowed to bring a team of 6 Pokemon. If your glass cannon KOs just 2 defenders, it's performing above average. In this case, the primary consideration is time. If you're able to grind through a gym regardless of whether you bring an Alakazam or Gyarados, then it doesn't matter how much bulkier Gyarados is, because Alakazam is saving time while Gyarados isn't saving anything.
If bringing the Gyarados allows you to defeat 10/10 defenders, and with Alakazam you only defeat 9/10 defenders, then it matters how much bulkier Gyarados is.
This idea of using Gyarados like a glass cannon is exactly what I was thinking when I questioned the relative positions of Gengar and Gyarados. And I have several of both mons, and I'd love to be able to use my Gengars more, but Gyarados is just way more reliable. It's like comparing my DB/B Kingdra to my FB/B Lapras against Dragonite; the Kingdra (which is 100 CP higher than the Lapras, due to higher IV's and higher level) is way more fun to use, but the Lapras is more forgiving of mistakes, and therefore more reliable.
It's almost never the case that Gyarados will put you over the hump of being able to defeat the 10th defender.
Gyarados as a "glass cannon" is trash. Its damage output is not nearly high enough to qualify as such. It would be like if I called Vaporeon a "glass cannon." As I have pointed out already, dodge all Gyarados does not actually end battles with substantially more % HP than dodge all Alakazam, so it's not going to help you defeat an extra Pokemon.
I think the frustration is evident in my tone of speech because I'm frankly exhausted bringing up the same data over and over again.
"I'll concede a valid point when I see one, and there haven't been many of those."
That would be a very narrow point of view, which is closely related to "I'm right and you're wrong." And that is a hard line to take when there is so much subjective discretion in a list like this. For example:
-Why are glass cannons tier 2.5? Why are they above mons that might be just a tiny bit worse as specialists than the specialists in tier 2? You might answer "because mons that are the best at something are placed higher than mons that are the 2nd best at anything." This is a valid point of view, but it uses subjective discretion, so it is not the only valid view.
-Heracross is given an exception because you need multiple fighting types to take on Blissey. Well, for gyms that have multiple Dragonites (like, say, 5 or more), you will need multiple ice types and/or dragon counters as well, and Lapras is one of the rarest mons in the game. Why doesn't Cloyster get an exception? Answer: subjective discretion.
-How much should Blissey be penalized for the time it takes for her to win battles, or for the fact that she can't beat the top defender (herself)? That is a matter of subjective discretion.
Yet, you always give a reason why you are right and they are wrong (i.e. "you pick 6 Pokemon to attack a gym for a reason").
The real answer, for me, is that the hierarchical tier list concept is just simply obsolete in its current form. But, I might be wrong.
First off, I think Gamepress and Dondon did an excellent job with their Best Attackers list. It matches my personal sentiments regarding attacking movesets and no one can really argue with their research and calculations--they're top-notch. It's unfortunate that Gamepress and Dondon are unfairly getting so much backlash for their list, but I agree that a negative, almost condensending tone is apparent in Dondon's writing and it's not the best way to approach the situation.
Like you said, people will always defend what they have and diminish what they don't. And they take rankings like this personally. So if Gamepress is going to present counterarguments, it's best to word it in a way that will make people want to listen and understand their perspective--the facts--instead of giving people more of a reason to take it personally and discrediting the site because of the negativity.
I personally found it to be a very good reference point free of charge. Like any other guide I've ever used I take what I need and have my own input. lol everyone needs to relax over the guide. I do however wish Niantic released a top attacker and defender list themselves. That would be pretty sick.
I wasn't aware this was what angry people sounded like. Maybe having to present counterarguments makes the content sound angrier, but fundamentally the content is pretty much the same as the article that accompanied the defender tier list release.
If you would like to point out which part of the article gives the impression that I'm "very angry," please do so. I normally have a very dry prosaic style that has been confused before with being angry.
"I may propose a "Best Attacker against each Defender" format - what is the optimal option to beat a Blissey, sth like that."
Actually, the tier list page states that, for example, Machamp is the most time-efficient attacker into Blissey, or that Lapras is optimal into Dragonite, etc.
As you've probably seen already, the problem with any format that presents information more complicated than what can be fit into a neat little image is that people don't take their time to read the information.
With all due respect, as a non-native English speaker, my understanding of the tone could be wrong. Still, I reached the conclusion by observing some wordings like "..so they grabbed their pitchforks and declared GamePress’s methodology trash", "this is a position of damned-if-I-do, damned-if-I-don’t", and "..and I got a ton of sh*t for this".
If someone will read your article in a month from now or even now without going through recent QAs might think that most of this community was displeased with your tier list. And this is FALSE. There were several displeased that were more vocal then pleased ones, as it happens in all aspects of life. I think there were more saying thank you in various threads :) or voting the posts doing that (but then again, those are less visible). So maybe you can add words like "several", "some" in relation with picking their pitchfork :).
Erm just read what dondon wrote, like i said before(but people disagree alot) never follow 100% GP, if u think some pokemon(gyardos top 1 debat) better than GP tier list, dont follow it... Even dondon said the same thing, Dondon:if you like using Gyarados as an attacker, then by all means, continue using Gyarados as an attacker. Even dondon said about error(dodge) ... We all do love what GP provide to us, but some people cannot follow it, example me: lapras is the best anti dragon, but how can i use lapras if i only have 1 lapras(hatching) that why i need backup, my 10 cleafable...that why like i said never follow 100%...Thankz you dondon and trainerstips!
Don Don is amazing, and anyone who doesn't appreciate the amazing analysis he puts out should probably just delete their account here.
I have only one small qualm with his tier list, and it has nothing to do with Gyarados. Furthermore, I wouldn't create flame threads to denigrate DD's research by saying he's wrong, or anything like that. As others have said, if you like a certain mon ... by all means use it. That doesn't mean that the data backs up your decision.
In general, I have to take Dondon's side on this. What Dondon did was create a mathematical model that can be used to quantify how "good" a pokemon is relative to others. The math can't be wrong, only the assumptions that define the modeling process and the interpretations of the results can be wrong. Given the complexity of trying to incorporate a pokemon's effectiveness into a single metric, Dondon's simplifying assumptions are completely reasonable (e.g., rating defenders based on their worst match-ups). It seems that the issue that people have here are in the interpretation of the results, and as Dondon stated in his response to this debacle, he opted for ease of presentation rather than a comprehensive but wildly complicated and confusing collection of tables. Again, this is a reasonable decision to make.
Is it the best decision? Maybe not, but that's where the discussion should be. When people call his methods bad because (for example) Gyarados isn't ranked higher, well, don't blast the guy who spent so much effort on making an easily consumable infographic, talk about different methods of presenting the material instead. In Dondon's reasonable metric, Gyarados is not top tier. There's no two ways about it. Under a different metric, Gyarados may rank higher, but we can't choose a metric to use specifically because it ranks Gyarados higher, we choose a metric because it is sensible, and if it says Gyarados is the best pokemon in the game, then so be it.