Unpopular opinions

Why would they nerf it. Despite what some people think, Close Combat is not a spammable move in VGC.
With the VGC meta generally being faster and much more position based than the singles one, with how much more punishing a wrong switch can become, clicking Close Combat will often turn 2-3hkos into 1-2hkos (expecially as EVing to live specific hits is a relatively common strategy and dropping your defenses carelessly can be very detrimental).

Differently from singles, the risk/reward of the defense dropping vs high BP is a important part of CC in the context where it matters. To the point certain mons like Iron Hands much rather just run Drain Punch than risk hitting a CC into a Landorus or Tornadus switch in and get 1hkod the turn after.
 
Last edited:
i might need to create a don't make me tap the sign meme and the sign says "we know vgc is the official competitive format and we know how double battles work, and that still doesn't defeat the point of balancing moves around single battles, which also have their competitive format and also are the format of the actual game" :tymp:
Yes, but GameFreak only ever nerf things for balance reasons for doubles. They'll buff things to make them better in singles but they won't nerf them.

Which I personally think is a good thing, I've never agreed with nerfing specific Pokémon or moves.
 
Yes, but GameFreak only ever nerf things for balance reasons for doubles. They'll buff things to make them better in singles but they won't nerf them.

Which I personally think is a good thing, I've never agreed with nerfing specific Pokémon or moves.
oh, i don't disagree that their focus is doubles, i just think they should balance other aspects of their product if it makes it better. if nerfing a mon, move or ability makes the game more engaging, competitive etc then i am all for it
 
I've said this before but the way X and Y handled baby Pokemon was a really good tweak to the format that shouldn't have been reverted. Because all Pokemon in the Undiscovered egg group have 3 perfect IVs when encountered*, it adds an element of strategy onto the decision to catch one vs catching an evolved form. In Reflection Cave you can catch both Mr Mime and Mime Jr: catching the former gives you a strong Pokemon right away while catching the latter means that there's more of a grind involved to raise it but it's highly likely to have much better stats in the end, making it a better long-term investment. It added an extra incentive to use babies when - outside of the instances where they have a special/desirable move you wouldn't get otherwise - it's typically not worth the effort raising one entails in a regular playthrough.


*yes I know this probably wasn't intentional, hence it being changed back in ORAS
That does solve what I've said before, which is that baby mons need an actual reason to be used for people to use them. Most Baby Mons are just bad with no redeeming qualities. Budew/Magby/Elekid make their lines available early, which is nice, but none of their evos are all that sought-after, so it doesn't make the baby concept that interesting. And the exclusive moves are fine, but due to the nature of baby mons(weak), most of the moves suck. The 3 Perfect IVs are at least something good, even if most players won't know about that.

Also if GameFreak cares so much about VGC, why are there no doubles battles in the actual games that people play?
 
Also if GameFreak cares so much about VGC, why are there no doubles battles in the actual games that people play?
My honest reply is that they probably don't know how to design them without keeping the game simple.
Ultimately the target audience for the "story" are still sub 10 year old kids, and they want to keep the plotline simple to clear without overloading with informations.

They've actually been trying last two gens to give a bit of double battles, there's been segments of the plot that were exclusively double battles or "pseudo double" (you and AI vs either two enemies or a giant enemy) as well as both games having post game doubles activity (gen 9 doesn't have it yet but iirc DLC2 was stated to be mainly doubles focused) but it does look like they struggle to come up with doubles that aren't "thematic".
 
Bringing up HJK is interesting, because everything that gets both prefers to use CC anyway; it's completely eclipsed every other physical Fighting move outside of incredibly niche combos like Contrary+Superpower.
Actually, High Jump Kick's Base Power went from 100 to 130 since Generation V, and I remember Mienshao and Medicham using HJK over Close Combat in the past.
Why is 10 more BP now less important than 100% accuracy, I am not sure. Evasion is banned on Smogon, and power creep means you sometimes want the more powerful option available (this is why plenty of Fire-type Pokémon use Fire Blast instead of Flamethrower now for example).
 
Actually, High Jump Kick's Base Power went from 100 to 130 since Generation V, and I remember Mienshao and Medicham using HJK over Close Combat in the past.
Why is 10 more BP now less important than 100% accuracy, I am not sure. Evasion is banned on Smogon, and power creep means you sometimes want the more powerful option available (this is why plenty of Fire-type Pokémon use Fire Blast instead of Flamethrower now for example).
Mienshao and Medicham didn't get Close Combat until gens 8 and 9, respectively. The Jump Kicks also had their crash damage increased in every generation until it reached its current state in gen 5, starting at "basically inconsequential" and arriving at "if this misses or you kick a Ghost or Protect you're super fucked"
 
Actually, High Jump Kick's Base Power went from 100 to 130 since Generation V, and I remember Mienshao and Medicham using HJK over Close Combat in the past.
Why is 10 more BP now less important than 100% accuracy, I am not sure. Evasion is banned on Smogon, and power creep means you sometimes want the more powerful option available (this is why plenty of Fire-type Pokémon use Fire Blast instead of Flamethrower now for example).
Besides the Crash damage, a big reason Mienshao liked High Jump Kick was because Reckless would boost the damage on it without (guaranteed) recoil, which made a notable Power difference for it as a Fast Frail Wallbreaker who probably wouldn't survive too much punishment

252 Atk Reckless Mienshao High Jump Kick vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Garchomp: 256-303 (71.7 - 84.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 Atk Mienshao Close Combat vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Garchomp: 198-234 (55.4 - 65.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

While I assume it prefers Close Combat nowadays, there is a legitimate reason to consider the move on it even with both available, though may fall under the "niche combos" flag like Contrary Superpower.

I think this is the big issue I have too. Close Combat as a 100 or even 110 BP move might be a lot more manageable given its downside, or if it simply removed it/reduced it further (like just a DEF drop) to be a 95 BP move or something as coverage, making it like a Pokemon picking between Surf/Hydro Pump or Dragon Claw/Outrage as a "reliable vs powerful" choice.
 
Actually, High Jump Kick's Base Power went from 100 to 130 since Generation V, and I remember Mienshao and Medicham using HJK over Close Combat in the past.
Why is 10 more BP now less important than 100% accuracy, I am not sure. Evasion is banned on Smogon, and power creep means you sometimes want the more powerful option available (this is why plenty of Fire-type Pokémon use Fire Blast instead of Flamethrower now for example).
I wish people would be a little more charitable. I'm well aware of HJK's power boost (it's a little patronising to assume I somehow missed it for five successive generations!), but my statement still holds true. As soon as Medicham and Mienshao got Close Combat, it definitively became the STAB move of choice.
Besides the Crash damage, a big reason Mienshao liked High Jump Kick was because Reckless would boost the damage on it without (guaranteed) recoil, which made a notable Power difference for it as a Fast Frail Wallbreaker who probably wouldn't survive too much punishment
To my knowledge, Regenerator Mienshao with Close Combat has been by far the preferred set in the generations where it's had access to both STAB options. Regenerator is just that busted an Ability, even on a mon as frail as Mienshao, that it eclipses even the Reckless power boost. Reckless HJK is fun to play with in-game, but Mienshao doesn't have the tools (e.g. other recoil moves, or, crucially, a secondary STAB) to make good use of it in competitive play imo.
 
Last edited:

Kin+ak (✧∇✧)

I COULD BE BANNED!
Besides the Crash damage, a big reason Mienshao liked High Jump Kick was because Reckless would boost the damage on it without (guaranteed) recoil, which made a notable Power difference for it as a Fast Frail Wallbreaker who probably wouldn't survive too much punishment

252 Atk Reckless Mienshao High Jump Kick vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Garchomp: 256-303 (71.7 - 84.8%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252 Atk Mienshao Close Combat vs. 0 HP / 4 Def Garchomp: 198-234 (55.4 - 65.5%) -- guaranteed 2HKO

While I assume it prefers Close Combat nowadays, there is a legitimate reason to consider the move on it even with both available, though may fall under the "niche combos" flag like Contrary Superpower.

I think this is the big issue I have too. Close Combat as a 100 or even 110 BP move might be a lot more manageable given its downside, or if it simply removed it/reduced it further (like just a DEF drop) to be a 95 BP move or something as coverage, making it like a Pokemon picking between Surf/Hydro Pump or Dragon Claw/Outrage as a "reliable vs powerful" choice.
Yeah ok so u guys Just want fighting Type on its generalty to be nerfed. I dunnow of uR fav Type is Rock or smthing but no, strategically, it wouldnt be better. I mean, imagine aggron mega in a world where u can't Even cC it. And in opposition to the strong/reliable the isn't any 80/90 BP WIDELY DISTRIBUTED fighting move. In a world where Even altaria has Dragon claw, do you want koraidon to use body press? Haye you also forgot flamethrower/fire blast. 100/110 Bp on close combat would legitimately be a drop in gamefreak's effectiveness. bruh I can't Even gET why u want it nerfed. It kills you fav mon? Well O dont want BRAVE BIRD to be nerfed(altho moonblast should be a bullet move) to a 95 bp 80 acc move for that! What again, And 90bp 100acc move of every Type would be lame With alwayd the same moves everywhere. Lastly, fighting is a great coverage Type And nerfing close combat would nerf all the non-fighting users, And would be real only if singes were a priority for gamefreak. Whicch they arent.

Tl;dr: such a bad Idea you guys have there
 
Tl;dr: such a bad Idea you guys have there
snipping the rest of the post because i am Also an ESL person posting from a phone so i get the struggle

nobody wants the fighting type to be nerfed - just no type should have a 120 BP move that is essentially drawback-free AND widely distributed. one of the fun aspects of pokémon is variety - not only of mons themselves, but also of what each mon can do. as you said yourself, everyone using the same moves is lame.
(it's funny that you mention koraidon because it's one of the very few fighting-types that doesn't even need CC - not only it has, yknow, a 100 BP signature that almost triples damage on super-effective hits, but also low kick hits most of ubers for 100 or 120 BP and it has like a billion times more PP. it's a testament to how busted CC is that even koraidon sometimes opts for it anyway)

i am struggling to understand the rest of your points to be honest but mega aggron, were it real in a current gen, doesn't really become unkillable without CC - it has two other weaknesses and not much special bulk, and also no recovery.
 
Yeah ok so u guys Just want fighting Type on its generalty to be nerfed. I dunnow of uR fav Type is Rock or smthing but no, strategically, it wouldnt be better. I mean, imagine aggron mega in a world where u can't Even cC it. And in opposition to the strong/reliable the isn't any 80/90 BP WIDELY DISTRIBUTED fighting move. In a world where Even altaria has Dragon claw, do you want koraidon to use body press? Haye you also forgot flamethrower/fire blast. 100/110 Bp on close combat would legitimately be a drop in gamefreak's effectiveness. bruh I can't Even gET why u want it nerfed. It kills you fav mon? Well O dont want BRAVE BIRD to be nerfed(altho moonblast should be a bullet move) to a 95 bp 80 acc move for that! What again, And 90bp 100acc move of every Type would be lame With alwayd the same moves everywhere. Lastly, fighting is a great coverage Type And nerfing close combat would nerf all the non-fighting users, And would be real only if singes were a priority for gamefreak. Whicch they arent.

Tl;dr: such a bad Idea you guys have there
snipping the rest of the post because i am Also an ESL person posting from a phone so i get the struggle

i am struggling to understand the rest of your points to be honest
Most of what I'm able to discern from the response seems to be a lot of semi-sarcastic lambasting of the CC talk. Examples and my responses
  • Mega Aggron you can't CC, i.e. not having a strong Coverage for a very tanky Physical Wall. Two points I have here: first is that Mega Aggron is SUPPOSED to be hard to break physically with Special as an Achilles' Heel (and even then it can't soak Physical hits forever without recovery); besides this, Close Combat's stupid good distribution started in Gen 8 when it became a TM, after the example mon was Dexited and making it a bad choice for such a comparison even if not for my first note.
  • Fighting lacks a good middle-ground Physical move akin to Dragon Claw or Surf, hence the "do you want Koraidon to use Body Press?" point. Ignoring that Koraidon has Low Kick for Ubers and Collision Course in general, the lack of a balanced Middle ground move doesn't make the solution to give everything the extremely strong option, as that is still a negative scenario regardless of alternatives. The thing I'd advocate there is to make a move to serve this purpose and distribute that.
  • 100/110 BP "would legitimately be a drop in gamefreak's effectiveness" is effectively saying nerfing Close Combat would be a bad move by Gamefreak, which is subjective but moreso doesn't really refute any argument made about why Close Combat as-is is a concern, so this particular sentence simply does nothing.
  • The subsequent lines seem to be attacking a hypothetical (or more cynically, strawman) user who wants Close Combat nerfed because its distribution hurts the viability of said hypothetical user's favorite Pokemon, when no one has even discussed a specific user, much less victim, of that wide distribution beyond Pokemon like Mienshao or Blaziken always taking CC because it's more reliable than something like HJK (and they're Fighting STAB users so doesn't change things like the more contentious cover users)
  • Regarding the idea that every type having a 90 BP 100 Accuracy attack akin to Flamethrower/Surf/Ice Beam etc. would be lame and homogenous in moveset. Every type not needing the same "kind" of moves is a topic that has come up and I don't fully disagree with, but is again not the full scope here: the criticism is that Close Combat is too low-risk/high-reward as a Fighting move to be distributed as if it is a 90 BP "generic" attack option rather than stronger than the lower-accuracy Nuke attacks. The more accurate point would be Close Combat at its current strength should be less narrowly given, or if it is given out this widely it should be a weaker move for coverage.
  • Second-to-Last point is stating Fighting is a great Coverage type (true) and that nerfing Fighting-Coverage access would weaken said Non-STAB coverage users. This is correct but also not an objective negative such that it being the case is an argument against reigning the move in.
  • Final point is stating this change won't happen because Gamefreak doesn't balance around Singles, which again doesn't affect whether it is a good or bad thing in singles, only that Gamefreak refuses to do anything regarding it even if it is a problem there because it is not problematic in VGC.
 
Close Combat was borderline egregious as an option before it became a TM in Gen 8 and then it just became absurd. Need physical Fighting coverage? Congrats, you probably learn Close Combat! It's all you'll ever need! Glad to see the vitriol toward it isn't just me. It existing is fine, but being a TM is too much, especially when Superpower was also a TM (it isn't anymore in SV, but was in SwSh, probably because Game Freak realized that no one is going to pick it over Close Combat).

I still remember Smogon players complaining that Kommo-o couldn't learn it in Sun/Moon and that it didn't have any good Fighting moves (I think Sky Uppercut is a sick move, and it learned that...). I was pretty disappointed in Game Freak when it got the move in Ultra.

Considering its downsides in Doubles formats is something I hadn't done before (thanks Worldie), but I still think the move is a little too much.
 

ScraftyIsTheBest

On to new Horizons!
is a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
There's definitely a lot of interesting things to cover with Close Combat. On one hand, it's an insanely powerful and spammable Fighting-type attack, 120 BP with minimal drawback (the downside being the defense drops), but I think I'll look at this less from a competitive standpoint and more from an in-game/flavor standpoint.

The Fighting-type I feel gets a lot of extremely high power moves because it's basically supposed to be the strongest physical attacking type, with its type matchups in one, and high BP moves in another. We have two 120 BP moves here, Close Combat and Superpower, that lower two stats, though Close Combat is more spammable because it doesn't lower firepower. It also has other very high BP moves like Cross Chop, High Jump Kick, etc. because it is the type defined by immense physical power, superhuman levels above everything else.

As a primarily physical type, its moves from a flavor standpoint get to have more power because I think they feel physical attacks can be counteracted by the burn status, which if inflicted, will halve the user's Attack making their physical firepower weaker. Contrarily, special moves cannot be weakened in such a manner, which is why they ended up getting the nerf in Gen 6 with 95->90 and 120->110 and 140->130 in many cases.

As for Close Combat and Superpower, I feel this has been something they've fallen into pretty hard before Close Combat became a TM with Superpower as a common tutor move and now Close Combat being a TM in Gen 8+9, but I think both need more limited distribution but should share being widely distributed strong Fighting moves, and less overlap between them. Not necessarily purely for balance, but also for flavor imo.

Because both work as "strong Fighting move" that can be widely distributed imo, but I think they need to more clearly distinguish flavor between them with their distributions. From a pure flavor standpoint, they have a clear distinction in my eyes that I feel can work: when I think of Close Combat, I think of something like Infernape using it: a lightweight, slim, and agile fighter that is very fast and can charge in and rapidly fire blows relentlessly. Superpower, on the other hand, strikes me as something more suited for slow, bulky, heavy fighters like Emboar: concentrating immense power and then delivering a single, heavy blow filled with strength and weight. In my eyes, things like Conkeldurr, Chesnaught, and Bewear shouldn't learn Close Combat imo, while things like Lucario and Infernape probably shouldn't learn Superpower.

Things like Throh and Ogerpon learn Superpower naturally but not Close Combat, which fits their fighting styles, while things like Urshifu can learn Close Combat naturally because their combat styles work for that kind of move.

I think those two moves should split up distribution and whatnot in that regard. Both as a STAB move and as coverage moves for other mons.
 

Castersvarog

formerly Maronmario
Personally I find Close combat to be just a little to easy to use. Like, if you have it then there’s no reason not to use it because it’s just so good.

Stuff like Superpower requires a little more behind it as it wasn’t spammable, HJK had a decent risk vs reward to it, Jump Kick was the same but at an earlier level and made for good coverage back in the day for some Mons. But close combat just doesn’t care, it’s a fire and forget move because it’s risk is so negigable for a lot of its users, and it’s a little boring because of it.
 
Personally I find Close combat to be just a little to easy to use. Like, if you have it then there’s no reason not to use it because it’s just so good.

Stuff like Superpower requires a little more behind it as it wasn’t spammable, HJK had a decent risk vs reward to it, Jump Kick was the same but at an earlier level and made for good coverage back in the day for some Mons. But close combat just doesn’t care, it’s a fire and forget move because it’s risk is so negigable for a lot of its users, and it’s a little boring because of it.
And? Most moves for types that aren't Fighting (or Rock) are completely without drawbacks.
Most of what I'm able to discern from the response seems to be a lot of semi-sarcastic lambasting of the CC talk. Examples and my responses
  • Mega Aggron you can't CC, i.e. not having a strong Coverage for a very tanky Physical Wall. Two points I have here: first is that Mega Aggron is SUPPOSED to be hard to break physically with Special as an Achilles' Heel (and even then it can't soak Physical hits forever without recovery); besides this, Close Combat's stupid good distribution started in Gen 8 when it became a TM, after the example mon was Dexited and making it a bad choice for such a comparison even if not for my first note.
  • Fighting lacks a good middle-ground Physical move akin to Dragon Claw or Surf, hence the "do you want Koraidon to use Body Press?" point. Ignoring that Koraidon has Low Kick for Ubers and Collision Course in general, the lack of a balanced Middle ground move doesn't make the solution to give everything the extremely strong option, as that is still a negative scenario regardless of alternatives. The thing I'd advocate there is to make a move to serve this purpose and distribute that.
  • 100/110 BP "would legitimately be a drop in gamefreak's effectiveness" is effectively saying nerfing Close Combat would be a bad move by Gamefreak, which is subjective but moreso doesn't really refute any argument made about why Close Combat as-is is a concern, so this particular sentence simply does nothing.
  • The subsequent lines seem to be attacking a hypothetical (or more cynically, strawman) user who wants Close Combat nerfed because its distribution hurts the viability of said hypothetical user's favorite Pokemon, when no one has even discussed a specific user, much less victim, of that wide distribution beyond Pokemon like Mienshao or Blaziken always taking CC because it's more reliable than something like HJK (and they're Fighting STAB users so doesn't change things like the more contentious cover users)
  • Regarding the idea that every type having a 90 BP 100 Accuracy attack akin to Flamethrower/Surf/Ice Beam etc. would be lame and homogenous in moveset. Every type not needing the same "kind" of moves is a topic that has come up and I don't fully disagree with, but is again not the full scope here: the criticism is that Close Combat is too low-risk/high-reward as a Fighting move to be distributed as if it is a 90 BP "generic" attack option rather than stronger than the lower-accuracy Nuke attacks. The more accurate point would be Close Combat at its current strength should be less narrowly given, or if it is given out this widely it should be a weaker move for coverage.
  • Second-to-Last point is stating Fighting is a great Coverage type (true) and that nerfing Fighting-Coverage access would weaken said Non-STAB coverage users. This is correct but also not an objective negative such that it being the case is an argument against reigning the move in.
  • Final point is stating this change won't happen because Gamefreak doesn't balance around Singles, which again doesn't affect whether it is a good or bad thing in singles, only that Gamefreak refuses to do anything regarding it even if it is a problem there because it is not problematic in VGC.
Close Combat being weaker than it is would legitimately make Fighting types bad again, the only moves with less 120 power that lower any of the user's stats are Hammer Arm (another Fighting move), Ice Hammer (Ice type Hammer Arm), and Spin Out same goes for recoil moves aside from Take Down and the also Fighting type (and genuinely always atrociously bad) Submission. Further more, no move that lowers the user's stats period has less than 100% accuracy.
Nerfing Close Combat in any way would genuinely make it and any Fighting types useless.
 
Nerfing Close Combat in any way would genuinely make it and any Fighting types useless.
Tbh I don't think they advocate for CC nerf per se, rather, it not be as widespread as it is.

To some degree I understand, in gen 7 the widely distributed move was Superpower, not CC, which has obvious drawbacks. Many fighting types would much rather just run Low Kick instead due to how bad dropping attack is.
 
It'd be funny if GF made it so if a mon wasn't a certain type, the move then has worse drawbacks
Like, CC used by a none fighting type would lower attack or speed alongside defenses
Imagine if using EQ as a none ground lowered speed, Ice beam lower SpAtk, etc
Heck, buff normal by having it not afflicted with these drawbacks. It'd highlight it being the true neutral type
Granted with Tera or Protean this CAN be circumnavigated...but then using a tera that way will be a drawback in of itself
Also this can be slippery in overdoing nerfing. CC is 120BP so that's fine, meanwhile Ice Beam is only 90, so that shouldn't be as harsh as I said
 
It'd be funny if GF made it so if a mon wasn't a certain type, the move then has worse drawbacks
Like, CC used by a none fighting type would lower attack or speed alongside defenses
Imagine if using EQ as a none ground lowered speed, Ice beam lower SpAtk, etc
Heck, buff normal by having it not afflicted with these drawbacks. It'd highlight it being the true neutral type
Granted with Tera or Protean this CAN be circumnavigated...but then using a tera that way will be a drawback in of itself
Also this can be slippery in overdoing nerfing. CC is 120BP so that's fine, meanwhile Ice Beam is only 90, so that shouldn't be as harsh as I said
I think there's also room to give (non-damage) buffs to STAB moves with this system in addition to nerfing off-type moves. Toxic having perfect accuracy when used by Poison types is a good example (or at least was when there was enough non-Poison Toxic users for 90% to be noticeable).
 
I think there's also room to give (non-damage) buffs to STAB moves with this system in addition to nerfing off-type moves. Toxic having perfect accuracy when used by Poison types is a good example (or at least was when there was enough non-Poison Toxic users for 90% to be noticeable).
You know what, I was mostly bullshitting, but having both of this would help minimize hyper coverage spam
Lord knows Ice types needed it, too many waters stealing Ice Beam
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 3, Guests: 5)

Top