Toxic Spike Supreme

[nyttyn]

Toxic Spikes has always been an interesting and powerful move that hasn't really enjoyed much prominence in the XY/ORAS generation. However, how would the meta look WITH a dedicated Toxic Spikes user? Dragagle and Scolipede already exist, but this would take it one step further, and turn Toxic Spikes into a reliable strategy. You know the drill: Does this concept require any changes, or can it work as-is? And is it a concept that CAP wishes to explore?

Name: Toxic Spike Supreme

General Description: This Pokemon would be a viable Toxic Spikes setter that can at least threaten some common Toxic Spikes removers.

Justification: As OU is oriented towards offense and balance, the effects of just a single layer of Toxic Spikes will have a significant effect on the battle. The difference between Toxic Spikes and Sticky Web, Spikes, and Stealth Rock is that Toxic Spikes will inflict the status on the opponent, which will stay with the opponent even if they remove hazards from the field. There are few viable grounded Poison-types in usage, so it is already unlikely that Toxic Spikes will be removed that way. It simply means that focusing on common Defoggers, namely the ones that hover over them, are the main priority. While there are still Toxic Spikes setters in OU (Dragalge and Scolipede), they are more often used for their offensive prowess as they have few methods of deterring the removal of Toxic Spikes. A setter that does deter hazard removal may prove to bring Toxic Spikes to the forefront.

Questions To Be Answered:

• Very few Toxic Spikers lack a Poison-typing, which hinders many of them. WIth the freedom to choose, how will typing affect the ability of this CAP to set up Toxic Spikes reliably?
• Can Toxic Spikes become a prominent aspect of the metagame if this CAP is successful?
  
• If successful, will grounded Poison-types rise to prominence to remove them?
• What other nuances separate Toxic Spikes from the other entry hazards?

Explanation: Toxic Spikes are so undervalued despite their level of effect. Stealth Rock is arguably more crippling short term, but Toxic Spikes inflicts a status condition rather than just damage, which cannot be removed as easily (unless Natural Cure or a cleric is on the opposing team). So if a hazard remove switches in and gets hit by Toxic Spikes, they'll be get Poisoned. Defoggers are pretty common, and there are still several Poison-types that see a good amount of play. Magic Bounce can be a problem as well. But just being able to deter these threats for a turn or two can be enough, especially if you manage to get a couple members of the opposing team Poisoned in the process. This is a clear-cut goal, and there are several possible paths to take with it, since the only requirement is Toxic Spikes.[/quote]

 

[NumberCruncher]

Stealth Rock is arguably more crippling short term, but Toxic Spikes inflicts a status condition rather than just damage, which cannot be removed as easily (unless Natural Cure or a cleric is on the opposing team). So if a hazard remove switches in and gets hit by Toxic Spikes, they'll be get Poisoned.

The issue with Toxic Spikes is that when a hazard remover comes in and gets hit by Toxic Spikes, it generally won't get Poisoned. Starmie is the only hazard remover in OU that isn't either Steel or floats, and he has Natural Cure. This means that our TS setter has to pressure every hazard killer in OU to make this concept work, since you can't rely on chip damage to eventually knock them out. I'm not even sure that'd be possible though, since the hazard removers range from defensive walls to offensive attackers to pivots.

 

[Empress]

Very few Toxic Spikers lack a Poison-typing, which hinders many of them. WIth the freedom to choose, how will typing affect the ability of this CAP to set up Toxic Spikes reliably?
Well, we do know that this CAP will need a good defensive typing if it wishes to set up TSpikes reliably and often. It should also, ideally, be able to threaten a variety of entry hazard removers, whether it be defensively or offensively (preferably offensively). Fairly straightforward here.

Can Toxic Spikes become a prominent aspect of the metagame if this CAP is successful?
I would say so. The move sees use on both Dragalge and Scolipede, but neither one of them is a dedicated setter (Dragalge maybe, but it's equally usable as a pure wallbreaker). With this CAP being built to specifically be a TSpiker, it can definitely introduce a relatively unseen and powerful niche in the metagame.

If successful, will grounded Poison-types rise to prominence to remove them?
If I were to guess, I'd say not really. If Poison-types match up well against this CAP, they might rise in usage, but I doubt we'd make this mon weak to Poison-types if we want it to keep its TSpikes up consistently. If anything, the mons that will rise in usage will be the certain hazard removers that will inevitably match up well with our CAP.

What other nuances separate Toxic Spikes from the other entry hazards?
On one hand, TSpikes suffers from a similar problem that Sticky Web does in the fact that a lot of mons are immune to it. On the other hand, it does incredibly well against stall with 2 layers, and it fairs kinda like regular Spikes does against offense with 1 layer. Despite being easy to remove safely and having immunities, it can match up incredibly well against teams of all archetypes.

The issue with Toxic Spikes is that when a hazard remover comes in and gets hit by Toxic Spikes, it generally won't get Poisoned. Starmie is the only hazard remover in OU that isn't either Steel or floats, and he has Natural Cure. This means that our TS setter has to pressure every hazard killer in OU to make this concept work, since you can't rely on chip damage to eventually knock them out. I'm not even sure that'd be possible though, since the hazard removers range from defensive walls to offensive attackers to pivots.

No... not at all.

 

[Albacore]

I don't think beating every hazard remover in OU is unfeasable at all, the only really relevant ones that get OU usage are Latios, Latias, Starmie, Excadrill, Mew, Skarmory, Scizor and Zapdos. 4 of these are Psychic types (the 3 most relevant ones sharing common checks and counters) and 3 are Steels, the only remaining one, Zapdos, being too uncommon and easy to pressure to really worry too much about. This means that we can just give our CAP a typing or movepool which specifically targets Psychics and Steels and it should inherently be pretty resistant to hazard removal.
Then there's the fact that Mew usually prefers a stallbreaker set, Skarmory tends to run Spikes more than Defog nowadays, and Scizor rarely runs Defog, so yeah, I don't think it would be hard at all to prevent a Toxic Spiker to be fodder for hazard removal against most teams.

Personally, I really like this idea, mainly becuase of how much potential a good Toxic Spikes setter can have, given how much synergy TSpikes has with really powerful Pokemon like MMetagross, XZard, MLopunny, Bisahrp, Talonflame, etc... (generally speaking, Pokemon that are checked by bulky Grass/Ground/Rock types).
Yet all viable Toxic Spikes setters are pretty fundementally flawed (Dragalge and Tentacruel can't stay in on the Lati twins, the most common hazard removers; Scolipede is too frail to be anything but a suicide lead, and therefore cannot serve as a consistent TSpiker which can be relied upon to reset hazards over the course of the battle; and everything else is mediocre for a variety of reasons), and none of them are OU by usage which shows how limited an impact TSpikes has on the OU metagame, despite being a fantastic asset for a lot of teams in theory.

 

[Alfalfa]

• Very few Toxic Spikers lack a Poison-typing, which hinders many of them. WIth the freedom to choose, how will typing affect the ability of this CAP to set up Toxic Spikes reliably?

It ultimately depends on what the typing of the CAP is; preferably, it is one that puts Starmie / Lati@s / Excadrill at a disadvantage and discourages them from coming in.

• Can Toxic Spikes become a prominent aspect of the metagame if this CAP is successful?

As Albacore stated, a lot of top tier Pokemon would love to have a Toxic Spikes setter on their team. If the CAP is consistent and reliable enough at setting TSpikes, then prominence is likely to occur.

• If successful, will grounded Poison-types rise to prominence to remove them?

It is possible, but there are already ways of counter-playing against this, as Ground and Psychic-types are really good at the moment, and most Grounded Poison-types have an Achilles' Heel that is easy exploited by top threats like Talonflame, XZard, Tornadus-T, etc.

• What other nuances separate Toxic Spikes from the other entry hazards?

The current meta is shifting away from Rotom-W and Landorus-T, Pokemon unaffected by TSpikes, and shifting more towards Pokemon like Garchomp, Hippowdon, and Slowbro, all of which despise getting hit with TSpikes. Stealth Rock and Spikes are already good and have sufficient distribution, but TSpikes suffers from lacking setters that beat opposing hazard removers.

 

[Ununhexium]

Loving this actually good concept.

Albacore has mostly outlined the idea of being able to beat most hazard removers and that its not an impossible goal. Also, I would like to point out a distinct lack of Poison-types in OU that would remove hazards when switching in. By usage, the only Poison-types are Mega Venusaur, which admittedly is a great Pokemon, but can be dealt with, and Gengar, whose Levitate renders it unable to remove the Toxic Spikes.

In regards to whether or not Toxic Spikes will be prominent in the metagame, it is almost certainly a yes. Again, like Albacore said, the main Pokemon who would be severely crippled would be the Pokemon who check a lot of top-tier threats.

One last thing I think needs to be addressed is Magic Bounce users, especially as there are two of them in A+ rank at the moment on the viability rankings. We would certainly needs coverage or necessary means of beating Mega Sableye and Mega Diancie, the two best Magic Bouncers. Funny enough though, Metagross has good synergy with Toxic Spikes and can beat Diancie, and Talonflame and Mega Charizard X have good synergy with Toxic Spikes and can beat Sableye :)

 

[Deck Knight]

At issue is Toxic Spikes has a lot of inherent problems, some of which are addressed by existing Pokemon and yet do not bring the move into a very viable position.

Inherent issues:
Immunities: Flying (+ Levitators,) Steel, and Poison (remove hazard if grounded).
Grounded Poison Users will also be Grounded Poison Counters.
Spinners: Starmie has Natural Cure, Excadrill and Forretrss are Immune, Tentacruel absorbs the hazard.
Defoggers: Almost by definition, anything with Defog is a flyer/levitator and therefore immune to Toxic Spikes.

Non-Poison user examples:
Cloyster - Questionable Defensive type, overshadowed by offensive sets.
Omastar - Questionable Defensive type.
Forretress - Good defensive type, low speed, also a spinner.
Cofagrigus - Lacks resistances, no offensive presence, horrible speed.
(Greninja technically, but it's banned, and never ran it anyway.)

That said, I've already played out a few scenarios in my head about a typing and/or distribution that might be viable (strong offensive typing with key resistances, plus abilities that play into hazard removal - the set being some variant of STAB/STAB/Toxic Spikes/Filler). In this particular scenario, I do expect Grounded Poisons to become more popular, or at least some of them that aren't threatened by the typing.

 

[Alfalfa]

At issue is Toxic Spikes has a lot of inherent problems, some of which are addressed by existing Pokemon and yet do not bring the move into a very viable position.

Inherent issues:
Immunities: Flying (+ Levitators,) Steel, and Poison (remove hazard if grounded).
Grounded Poison Users will also be Grounded Poison Counters.
Spinners: Starmie has Natural Cure, Excadrill and Forretrss are Immune, Tentacruel absorbs the hazard.
Defoggers: Almost by definition, anything with Defog is a flyer/levitator and therefore immune to Toxic Spikes.

Non-Poison user examples:
Cloyster - Questionable Defensive type, overshadowed by offensive sets.
Omastar - Questionable Defensive type.
Forretress - Good defensive type, low speed, also a spinner.
Cofagrigus - Lacks resistances, no offensive presence, horrible speed.
(Greninja technically, but it's banned, and never ran it anyway.)

That said, I've already played out a few scenarios in my head about a typing and/or distribution that might be viable (strong offensive typing with key resistances, plus abilities that play into hazard removal - the set being some variant of STAB/STAB/Toxic Spikes/Filler). In this particular scenario, I do expect Grounded Poisons to become more popular, or at least some of them that aren't threatened by the typing.

These flaws are not as problematic as you state because these flaws can easily be fixed with CAP development and teambuilding. Some Pokémon are not affected by TSpikes, but some of the most common defensive Pokémon at the moment are affected enough for TSpikes to be relevant.

 

[WhiteDMist]

Nice to see so much support for the pitch. For the argument that has been noted that there are plenty of hazard removers that are immune to Toxic Spikes and can remove it without consequence, that would likely be the focus of the CAP. Setting up Toxic Spikes isn't that hard compared to keeping them up, and thus orienting this CAP to threaten some common removers would be ideal. All Toxic Spikes really needs to do is have 1-2 grounded Pokemon get affected, and then your opponent can remove them for all it matters. And would it be a bad thing for some less common hazard removers/Poison-types to rise in popularity? If the metagame adapts because of Toxic Spikes, then that would mean the concept succeeded (if it gets picked ofc). As already noted, there are only 2 Poison-types that are OU by usage, and only (Mega) Venusaur can actually absorb them on switch-in. Maybe this concept will push something else, such as Dragalge, up to OU-level usage.

 

[vyomov]

• Very few Toxic Spikers lack a Poison-typing, which hinders many of them. With the freedom to choose, how will typing affect the ability of this CAP to set up Toxic Spikes reliably?

With a free-hand with regards to typing, we gain a key advantage by avoiding a bad match-up with current meta SR Leads, as Landorus-T and TankChomp both destroy Poison types with impunity, which impacts Toxic Spike setting; by handling typing well, we can definitely ensure that Toxic Spikes are set reliably and stay on the field by tailoring our typing to beat common hazard removers as well as stay neutral to most hazard leads. Another advantage is team synergy, as a non-Poison T-Spike setter would enable balanced/bulky teams to run another Poison-type Toxic Spike setter, making the strategy more consistent as well as helping with mirror matches.

• Can Toxic Spikes become a prominent aspect of the metagame if this CAP is successful?

It depends on how the metagame reacts to the CAP; Steel-types and Flying-types are very popular atm, so it may not be easy to give Toxic Spikes a place in the metagame when players may not want to risk momentum on a move not impacting such a common type(as well as Levitators and Poison-types themselves), which is why this CAP must also be capable of performing another team role(and not simply exist as a T-Spike setter; a good example is Dragalge, who can actually set Toxic Spikes and perform the wallbreaker role, although it will be challenging to ensure that the secondary role does not dominate the concept itself)

• If successful, will grounded Poison-types rise to prominence to remove them?

Possibly, although there are many means of counterplay against Toxic Spikes in addition to these; additionally, many of the grounded poison-types in the tier have opportunity costs(like M-Venu) or other problems(such as lack of power in case of the Nidos or low speed with Dragalge) which may hinder their rise; having said this, it also depends on the match-up of Poison types vs our CAP and how the metagame shapes up.

• What other nuances separate Toxic Spikes from the other entry hazards?

A key nuance with Toxic Spikes is that it prevents you from inflicting other statuses on your opponent's mons, which can be a disadvantage; for instance, if you need to use an emergency Thundurus-I T-Wave to stop your opponent from sweeping the entire team(or if you want to burn an opposing sweeper), that play is no longer available once a layer of T-Spikes hits the field, which can be a big problem(especially if only one layer is set as opposed to two, because the sweeper might survive long enough to 6-0 your team). Having said this, the trade-off is also good, as a toxiced sweeper has a clear timer set, which can sometimes be more useful than a clutch T-Wave, so I don't think the issue is too detrimental to the concept.

 

[WhiteDMist]

It depends on how the metagame reacts to the CAP; Steel-types and Flying-types are very popular atm, so it may not be easy to give Toxic Spikes a place in the metagame when players may not want to risk momentum on a move not impacting such a common type(as well as Levitators and Poison-types themselves), which is why this CAP must also be capable of performing another team role(and not simply exist as a T-Spike setter; a good example is Dragalge, who can actually set Toxic Spikes and perform the wallbreaker role, although it will be challenging to ensure that the secondary role does not dominate the concept itself)

A key nuance with Toxic Spikes is that it prevents you from inflicting other statuses on your opponent's mons, which can be a disadvantage; for instance, if you need to use an emergency Thundurus-I T-Wave to stop your opponent from sweeping the entire team(or if you want to burn an opposing sweeper), that play is no longer available once a layer of T-Spikes hits the field, which can be a big problem(especially if only one layer is set as opposed to two, because the sweeper might survive long enough to 6-0 your team). Having said this, the trade-off is also good, as a toxiced sweeper has a clear timer set, which can sometimes be more useful than a clutch T-Wave, so I don't think the issue is too detrimental to the concept.

I'm going to respond mostly to these points. Possibly, with the prominence of these Steel-types (and Ground-types), grounded Poison-types won't rise much in usage regardless of the effectiveness of Toxic Spikes. But regardless, it does leave these Pokemon open to being Burnt or Paralyzed, so perhaps it won't clash too much with Toxic Spikes. As for this concept being able to perform another role, I kind of agree that it should be considered, as long as it doesn't distract too much from the actual concept. Then again, this concept has no real limitations, only requiring a single move to be in the movepool; this leaves the end result extremely customizable, which I feel is the biggest benefit of this concept. Personally, I think that a good typing is all this concept really needs to succeed, assuming good STAB, but the community may go in another direction which is the whole fun of CAP.

 

[Bughouse]

The only Pokemon I can recall seeing successfully using Toxic Spikes in OU are Dragalge and Cofagrigus (but this was way back in XY on an Eo stall team, don't think the team is posted on smogon anywhere, but here's a replay of it being used recently http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-ou-72996)

Other mons can use TSpikes - Scolipede, Roserade, Nidoqueen, Tentacruel, Forretress are the only remotely viable users - but they are rarely seen doing so (I mean most are just rarely seen period). Scolipede is the most used by far and it's still not even OU by usage and even then it was overwhelmingly using Baton Pass sets.

So why isn't Toxic Spikes getting used? I'd argue that it has absolutely nothing to do with the setters and everything to do with the metagame. Let's take a look at some teams that exemplify the current (or at least pretty recent) OU metagame, all taken from showcase/archive bc I am lazy:

preliminary examples

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/landorus-balance-by-ctc.3541961/ - 3 immunities, an absorber, a natural cure spinner, and 1 weak which is scarf and likely doesn't give a shit
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/dancing-darks-peaked-19.3538441/ - 3 immunities, an absorber, 2 that mind

OK, you're saying but Bughouse, those are Mega Venu teams. Of course they don't mind!! So let's look at other teams. How about Stall?

stall

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/nunc-et-semper.3542076/ - 2 immune, Heal Bell, Magic Bounce, can however cripple some wincons if the stall player gets in a bad position... and that's about as good a matchup as you'll get vs stall with Toxic Spikes. I won't bother showing others. In this generation Stall can play around Toxic Spikes quite easily.

But if Stall isn't the target, what is? Balanced teams? Bulky Offense? More straight up Offense might have a lot of mons affected by TSpikes, but that rarely matters. So let's look at some other balance and bulky offense teams, aside from the Mega Venu teams I already posted because clearly Mega Venu is cheating.

bulky offense and balance

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/spacebound-to-infinity-and-beyond.3539567/ - 2 immunes + Crocune who can rest off, with Defog
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/avante-palestra.3520320/ - 3 immunes, 2 others mind a good bit and Keldeo minds somewhat
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/ayahuasca.3538841/ - 3 immunes, natural cure rapid spin, and 2 that mind

Hm, but that means that balance and bulky offense teams, even ones without Mega Venusaur, tend to have 3 immunes and probably hazard removal as well. That doesn't sound friendly to using Toxic Spikes at all! Maybe it really is meant for Offense? It seems like at least they've got the most mons affected, right? Not quite:

offense

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/godzillaaa-42-1-on-suspect-ladder.3540273/ - 3 immunes, with Defog
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/yesterday.3542317/ - see above^
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/retirement-in-diamonds.3542447/ - 3 immunes, with Magic Bounce
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/the-mastermind-peak-1.3533083/ - 3 immunities, another half immunity cuz Garchomp has Lum
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/magic-adapting-to-a-new-metagame-peaked-2.3515490/ - 3 immunities, including immune Rapid Spin

Even offense just doesn't seem to mind, even if the battles were lasting long enough for it to rack up. Half the team is still immune and they often still have a way to remove hazards.

So considering how harsh the metagame is to TSpikes I think you'd be hard pressed to make a mon that has exactly 3 moves it wants to be running alongside Toxic Spikes and not a 4th to be found that wouldn't just be a better use of the moveslot. Even beyond that, you'd need for the mon to beat numerous hazard removers too (Excadrill, Latios, Latias, Skarmory, Starmie, Empoleon, Scizor, Tentacruel, Zapdos, and Mandibuzz are all at least somewhat seen) as currently none of them, except for the occasional Defog Mew, mind coming in on TSpikes at all. And it's not even like removing hazards is now an undue use of their time. Presumably you are intending on using TSpikes alongside other hazards that they were already intending on removing.

I just don't see this working in the current OU meta. At all.

 

[Albacore]

Bughouse I don't think you understand how Toxic Spikes actually work lol. You're not supposed to hit everything on the opposing team with it, just certain key threats to your sweepers. Saying a team isn't weak to TSpikes becuase it has 3 Pokemon immune to it is just like saying that a team doesn't need a hazard remover becuase it has 3 SR resistant Pokemon, if your 3 other mons are Volcarona Thundurus and Weavile you do need a hazard remover.

Let's just break down some of those examples you gave (disclaimer : most of these are oversimplifications which imply a non-terrible matchup for the TSpikes team; when I say for example that "Bisharp wins", I actually mean "Bisharp easily outlasts its checks given that it is supported by swicthins to said checks")

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/nunc-et-semper.3542076/ - 2 immune, Heal Bell, Magic Bounce, can however cripple some wincons if the stall player gets in a bad position... and that's about as good a matchup as you'll get vs stall with Toxic Spikes.

Heal Bell is completely irrelevant when talking about Toxic Spikes because they are a field effect. As long as you can prevent Zapdos from defogging (which isn't hard becuase of how easy Zadpos is to pressure), you've basically reduced the number of Pokemon you have to worry about to 3.5 (counting Chansey as .5 since it liteally has to waste a turn Headl Belling every time it comes in and can only do this 8 times). I doubt we'd be dumb enough to create a Tspiker that loses to Sableye.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/spacebound-to-infinity-and-beyond.3539567/ - 2 immunes + Crocune who can rest off, with Defog

loses to TSpikes+Pursuit+any physical attacker that beats Scizor, Suicune is forced to rest every time it comes in which is super exploitable.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/avante-palestra.3520320/ - 3 immunes, 2 others mind a good bit and Keldeo minds somewhat

loses to Tspikes+SD Bisharp, or anything Keldeo or Mew is used for.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/ayahuasca.3538841/

loses to TSpikes+Pursuit+anything Hippowdon is supposed to beat (XZard for example).

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/godzillaaa-42-1-on-suspect-ladder.3540273/

see above but replace Hippo by Chomp and I guess XZard by Talonflame

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/yesterday.3542317/

loses to TSpikes+Bisharp.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/the-mastermind-peak-1.3533083/ - 3 immunities, another half immunity cuz Garchomp has Lum

lol Lum, anyway this has huge trouble vs Bisharp if TSpikes are up.

http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/magic-adapting-to-a-new-metagame-peaked-2.3515490/

hazard remover needs Sand to be up for Excadrill to actually get rid of TSpikes reliably, team has a very hard time vs Bisharp once they are up (I know I keep saying this but almost all the teams you posted have Keldeo who is one of the main TSpikes targets so yeah)

so just to recap, only the MVenu teams actually didn't mind TSpikes, all the others had really exploitable removers and see their defensive backbones fall apart once they are up.
You basically looked at TSpikes vs the world here, not taking into account what actually benefits from their support, which is obviously the wrong way to look at it.

 

[Bughouse]

I challenge you to find me many teams in WCoP that would even remotely mind tspikes. Almost all of them that I can recall are at least 3 immunities.

This is a global trend.

And the point is not whether or not tspikes can be useful against the other mons on the team. There's no doubt that poisoning a Hippowdon is incredibly handy, for example. The problem is how matchup specific (meaning it's usually not helpful, but maybe rarely it would be) the move is. The moveslot, and generally the teamslot, are better used elsewhere.

For the record I think current OU is far more primed for a Sticky Web concept than it is TSpikes. Offense, especially with mons like Mega Zam and Raikou has become reasonably prevalent. Also, as Sticky Web's users are truly awful, there's at least much less proof against the utility of the move. If TSpikes were usable, they'd be used more. There are plenty of potentially viable mons who could use it but don't get used, which is as strong a test as any. If TSpikes is so potentially viable, prove it. Go win some games with Scoli/Drag/etc. Blaming the users when there's a half dozen or so is a funny way to go about it. It's quite clearly the move itself. If the move were good, the users would become good.

But thank you for condescending to me about my metagame and frankly mechanical knowledge. Was truly an enjoyable read. For the record, in both DPP and BW, I greatly enjoyed playing with more stallish builds, and I am very knowledgeable about playing with TSpikes as a result. I've never been inclined to try it in ORAS OU because it just won't work.

 

[Alfalfa]

I challenge you to find me many teams in WCoP that would even remotely mind tspikes. Almost all of them that I can recall are at least 3 immunities.

This is a global trend.

And the point is not whether or not tspikes can be useful against the other mons on the team. There's no doubt that poisoning a Hippowdon is incredibly handy, for example. The problem is how matchup specific (meaning it's usually not helpful, but maybe rarely it would be) the move is. The moveslot, and generally the teamslot, are better used elsewhere.

For the record I think current OU is far more primed for a Sticky Web concept than it is TSpikes. Offense, especially with mons like Mega Zam and Raikou has become reasonably prevalent. Also, as Sticky Web's users are truly awful, there's at least much less proof against the utility of the move. If TSpikes were usable, they'd be used more. There are plenty of potentially viable mons who could use it but don't get used, which is as strong a test as any. If TSpikes is so potentially viable, prove it. Go win some games with Scoli/Drag/etc. Blaming the users when there's a half dozen or so is a funny way to go about it. It's quite clearly the move itself. If the move were good, the users would become good.

But thank you for condescending to me about my metagame and frankly mechanical knowledge. Was truly an enjoyable read. For the record, in both DPP and BW, I greatly enjoyed playing with more stallish builds, and I am very knowledgeable about playing with TSpikes as a result. I've never been inclined to try it in ORAS OU because it just won't work.

TSpikes are not being used more because there are a lack of viable setters in OU. Dragalge and Scolipede are the only two viable setters in OU, but Dragalge is the only setter worth running TSpikes. While Dragalge has good offensive and defensive synergy that makes it a respectable choice, not all of the teams that want TSpikes are capable of getting past Dragalge's caveats (think faster-paced offensive teams and certain balance teams). TSpikes is not meant to poison the entire opponent's team, but to poison a select few Pokemon, such as Hippowdon, Slowbro, and Garchomp, all of which are the current defensive backbone of the current OU metagame.

 

[Albacore]

I challenge you to find me many teams in WCoP that would even remotely mind tspikes. Almost all of them that I can recall are at least 3 immunities.

Can you find me many that wouldn't? I specifically outlined why Toxic Spikes can be a problem for all the teams you brought up bar the MVenu ones, and how TSpikes can break down teams which have even just a couple of mons affected by it.

And the point is not whether or not tspikes can be useful against the other mons on the team. There's no doubt that poisoning a Hippowdon is incredibly handy, for example. The problem is how matchup specific (meaning it's usually not helpful, but maybe rarely it would be) the move is. The moveslot, and generally the teamslot, are better used elsewhere.

Matchup based =/= bad. For example Manaphy is only really useful againts bulkier teams, doesn't make it bad. Same for Lopunny and offense. But both of these Pokemon are very good because they can potentially ruin these builds. Same for Toxic Spikes: it only affects a bunch of Pokemon, but those it does are almost completely invalidated (well, the defensive ones are at least). This means you can afford to stack your team against threats that aren't affected by TSpikes, running sweepers that are only walled by TSpikes prone mons since you don't have to worry about them anymore. When something has a bad matchup against something, just fix it with teammates which have a great matchup against said thing.
Also we're not creating a Pokemon that gets 2 layers of TSpikes up and dies, we want it to actually fit on teams besides that, so you're obviously not going to waste a teamslot on Toxic Spikes alone.

For the record I think current OU is far more primed for a Sticky Web concept than it is TSpikes. Offense, especially with mons like Mega Zam and Raikou has become reasonably prevalent. Also, as Sticky Web's users are truly awful, there's at least much less proof against the utility of the move. If TSpikes were usable, they'd be used more. There are plenty of potentially viable mons who could use it but don't get used, which is as strong a test as any. If TSpikes is so potentially viable, prove it. Go win some games with Scoli/Drag/etc. Blaming the users when there's a half dozen or so is a funny way to go about it. It's quite clearly the move itself. If the move were good, the users would become good.

Usage isn't a great indicator of viability so I'm going to base the legitimacy of Toxic Spikes on the viability rankings. Currently, we have two Pokemon which are ranked solely for their ability to lay down Toxic Spikes, namely Roserade and Nidoqueen. You could possibly add Foretress to that list since TSpikes were one of the main reasons it was ranked in the first place. Heck, Dragalge is currently B+ rank and only really viable becuase of TSpikes, if it didn't get them it'd probably be somehere in the high C ranks, where it was before its TSpikes set gained popularity. So don't pretend that access to TSpikes doesn't make Pokemon more viable becuase it absolutely does.
Also, the reason other TSpikers aren't used is becuase they are just flat-out outclassed, Dragalge is the best TSpiker and everything else just lags behind for various reasons. TSpikes isn't going to magically make somthing viable any more than acess to SR will, and I think we can both agree that SR is a very, very good move to have.

But thank you for condescending to me about my metagame and frankly mechanical knowledge. Was truly an enjoyable read. For the record, in both DPP and BW, I greatly enjoyed playing with more stallish builds, and I am very knowledgeable about playing with TSpikes as a result. I've never been inclined to try it in ORAS OU because it just won't work.

sigh I didn't mean to condascend to you at all, I just wanted to point out that all the teams you claimed were resistant to TSpikes really aren't when you consider Pokemon that are commonly used on TSpikes teams. Admittedly, claiming you didn't understand how TSpikes work was uncalled for and I apologize for that, but I stand by the fact that calling a team Tspikes resistant because "only" half its mons are affected by it is misleading when those hit by it are hit hard, and when a well-built TSpikes team is designed to have an excellent matchup against the other half of the team. Besides, you can't just dismiss something as unviable in a specific metagame without even trying it in said metagame. I actually do think XY was a metagame where TSpikes were not viable, but ORAS is a lot different from that for multiple reasons (mainly the increased usage of TSpikes-prone Pokemon like Hippowdon and Garchomp, decline of Latis, increased usage of balanced builds in general, etc).

I'm going to stop replying here after this since I probably won't convince you no matter what, but hopefully I convinced other people.

 

[nyttyn]

I'm not even going to get into the details of who's right or wrong in this argument but guys, stay civil, this is internet fakemons ffs you don't need to get nasty to oneanother.

 

[tehy]

I'd like to interject to ask, what happens if this Pokemon is a grounded Poison-type? Would that have the potential to screw up the concept as each team just has a solid Tspikes absorber ? Especially in a playtest where the mon is going to get very high usage

outside of that, Tspikes are awesome, let's get it boys


nyttyn edit: i don't want to double post so I'm editing this post, grounded posion is hilariously awful because you're weak to both excadrill and latias, aka public enemies #1 and #2 for any sort of entry hazards.

 

[dex]

Another issue with toxic spikes is only being able to set up one layer before your setter gets knocked out. At that point the opposing Pokemon would be poisoned, and not inflicted with toxic, which would kind of defeat the purpose of toxic spikes which is to make your opponent think twice about sending out a wall. Still, making toxic spikes more viable would be pretty awesome since it is the least used entry hazard.

 

[Da Pizza Man]

Another issue with toxic spikes is only being able to set up one layer before your setter gets knocked out. At that point the opposing Pokemon would be poisoned, and not inflicted with toxic, which would kind of defeat the purpose of toxic spikes which is to make your opponent think twice about sending out a wall. Still, making toxic spikes more viable would be pretty awesome since it is the least used entry hazard.

Unless your opponent has priority other than Sucker Punch or is Sableye/Diancie un mega evolved, this just doesn't happen. If our CAP is not bulky enough to take a hit, then it can just hold Focus Sash, and if we are then we are.

 

[WhiteDMist]

Only getting up one layer isn't the end of the world, though it obviously hurts offensive teams more than defensive teams. Whether Toxic Spikes is effective NOW may not be an issue, as the goal is to try and make Toxic Spikes more viable in the first place. To some, it may be an impossible goal, but isn't that the point of CAP: to use theory to create a Pokemon and see the end results of how the creation impacts the metagame?

I haven't seen too much simulation in this discussion, so I'll take a stab at it (though I am not sure where the fine line is between simulation and poll jumping is, so I'll hold back a bit, and the mods will likely edit away anything that goes too far).

Simulation

I see people being worried about the variety of Defoggers, Rapid Spinners, and Magic Bouncers making this concept almost impossible to accomplish. I still think the process is a bit more important than the end goal, but I think that there are plenty of ways to get around these issues without making a CAP overpowered. Simply in the typing alone, I feel a good typing can alleviate most of the problems, assuming a mediocre stat spread. There are a variety of typings (such as Fairy/Ground, Fairy/Dark, Dark/Fighting, Fire/Bug, Ghost/any other type, etc) that can threaten at least half of the Pokemon that fulfill those roles.

Enough offensive power to deter these Pokemon from switching in is all this CAP would need, and the Speed and bulk can vary depending on how the community would want the CAP to fulfill this concept. Really, the only type that might be worth putting aside is the Poison-type, and even then only if grounded; it would be redundant to attempt this concept if the created CAP can actually counter itself.

At least part of the goal should be to make a hazard removal deterrent as the secondary role of the CAP. How the community will go about it is an interesting side effect. This might be something that needs to be added to the OP.

 

[Blackdrakon30]

Toxic spikes is very viable, but it currently has no viable user as stated earlier. Some of the most common Hazard Removers include Skarmory, Latias, Starmie, Excadrill, Forretress, Donphan, Tentacruel, and Cloyster. Nearly impossible to beat these threats with merely typing. Some possible typing for offensive pressure could be Ground and Ghost, Grass and Dark, and Electric and Fire (All except Latias covered by electric+fire). The toxic spikes targets the few Pokemon, as Albatross stated, that form a defensive core for the team and bear most of the weight. Some OU Pokemon that would be easily worn down are Azumarill, Celebi, Charizard X (As it becomes grounded), Garchomp, Keldeo, Kyurem-B, Sableye-Mega, and T-tar. Plenty of options right then and there.

 

[Soli]

Sorry if this is a little old, but I actually really like the idea of a Toxic Spikes user. I see the following as being crucial to the success of this project.

1. Typing
2. Offensive v Defensive stat spread
3. Ability

Now a common feature of the best two SR setters is ground typing and high physical attack. Hippowdon also fits this, as does T-tar in regards to attack. An obvious solution would be either Levitate or Flying type. Another option could be to make it rather physically tanky and give it Intimidate. A pure poison typing with Levitate (cough Weezing cough) could be a very strong check to some of the physical attackers in the tier. It would still have to worry about the Lati twins, but on that note, a Dark/Poison typing like Skuntank could be awesome with Levitate, assuming it had a decent defensive spread. Ghost is an option as well to halt Starmie.

Defiant/Contrary could be extremely useful for halting Landorus or Defoggers. Contrary is so rarely used in singles that I think it might be an awesome ability to have simply for the novelty of using boosted STAB attacks on Landorus, Skarmory and other sweepers that might not have the best special defense ever.

So on that note:

Poison/Flying?

Poison/Ghost w/ Levitate/Intimidate?

Poison Dark w Levitate/ContraryIntimidate?

 

[Durengardnit]

I think the most important thing for a Toxic Spiker would be a way to get past the two Magic Bouncers Mega-Diancie and Mega Sableye.

The newest CAP, Crucibelle, has Mold Breaker (which ignores Magic Bounce) and gets both Toxic Spikes and Stealth Rock, and it can threaten some of the Flying Pokémon immune to Toxic Spikes with its powerful Rock-type attacks. It sounds like the perfect Toxic Spiker, but most people are just focusing on its Magic Guard + Head Smash combo.