"Making the gen 2 attacker tier list: methods and observations"

#PokemonGO: Matchup data obtained from creating the defender tier list was also used to create this attacker tier list. In general, there are 4 rough categories of attacker:Generalists (which are good against most defenders)Specialists (which are optimal against specific common defenders)Tanks (which win matchups handily but are slow)Glass cannons (which have high DPS but are frail)A species may not fit squarely into a single category, but these categories illustrate the priorities taken into account when creating this list.The spreadsheet used for creating the defenders tier list is useful here, although it doesn’t contain all of the matchup information that I'll refer to in this post. For everything not listed, you can run a sim on Pokebattler. We used level 30 vs. level 30 matches with expected defender charge move use.Spreadsheet linkThe way in which players choose attackers is fundamentally different from the way in which players choose defenders, which introduces a problem for the traditional tier list format. Because attacking occurs with teams of 6 Pokemon, each attacker tends to fill a specific role tailored to the gym’s defender composition. Originally I was planning to scrap the tier list format altogether and use a chart similar to u/ryanoftheday’s recently posted graphic.Eventually I decided against this for 3 reasons:The chart format doesn’t adequately differentiate between good Pokemon in an archetype and worse Pokemon in that archetype. For example, Jolteon and Magneton are both specialists in the Gyarados matchup, but lumping them together in a “specialist” group (with other Pokemon such as Scizor and Houndoom) doesn’t indicate that Jolteon is a much better option for this role. Ideally one could have tiers within groups, but that’s just confusing. I had thought that it would be sufficient to detail an attacker’s role in their individualized explanations, but as it turns out, people don’t read things - a recurring pattern in this exposition, as will be evident.Some Pokemon belong to more than 1 archetype; for example, Vaporeon is both a specialist and a tank, Machamp is both a specialist and a glass cannon, and so on.As it turns out, the competitive Pokemon community at Smogon have been creating tier lists for years. In that setting, there has never been any need to subdivide tiers by roles.I won’t bother justifying the position of every Pokemon in the list. The general weighting assignment was pretty simple: if a Pokemon was the best at a specific role in some meaningful way, then it fits somewhere in tiers 1 to 2.5. If a Pokemon wasn’t the best, then it doesn’t fit in tiers 1 to 2.5. There were some exceptions to this rule:It’s okay to be worse than Dragonite or Blissey; they are just too good.Heracross got an exemption from being relegated to tier 3+ because Machamp loses >80% of its HP defeating Blissey efficiently; if you want to beat multiple Blissey efficiently, you need multiple fighting-types.So let me address the 3 most common contentions presented against this tier list:Machamp in tier 1.5 instead of tier 1In preliminary iterations of the tier list I was undecided about Machamp being in tier 1. After comparing its matchup data to Dragonite, however, I simply couldn’t justify them being in the same tier. I think that Machamp is the best of the tier 1.5s but it's not in the same league as Dragonite.Blissey in tier 1 (but she’s so slow)A lot of people ignored the statement that this tier list accounted for a spectrum of playstyles, so they grabbed their pitchforks and declared GamePress’s methodology trash. For me, this is a position of damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t. If I put Blissey in tier 1, one camp of users would shout how wrong I was because she’s so slow. If I didn’t put Blissey in tier 1, another camp of users would shout how wrong I was because she beats everything.The matchup data absolutely cannot justify Blissey in a lower place on the tier list. Pokebattler ranks her #1 in power (the number of times attacker could defeat defender consecutively) by a long shot.Gyarados in tier 3+Hoooly crap, I got so much feces for this. Let me take this opportunity to debunk every defense for Gyarados, because many of them are factually incorrect and some are ridiculous.Gyarados is just, like, a slightly worse Dragonite, I mean, it has a little less atk and no STAB on its dragon movesTyranitar is a slightly worse Dragonite. Gyarados is a much worse Dragonite. In a classic generalist go-to matchup vs. ZH/BS Snorlax, Gyarados wins at least 10 seconds slower depending on moveset (if both dodge specials only) while also taking more damage. Even SW/HB Dragonite - the worst attacking moveset - outperforms DT/O Gyarados in this matchup.By the way, if you evolved a Pokemon and rolled a moveset that had only 72% the DPS of the optimal moveset, you would consider that a failure and start gathering candy to try again.DT/O Gyarados is one of the best Dragonite countersNo, certainly not. Very few Pokemon can beat Dragonite without dodging; Gyarados is not one of them, but Lapras is.Supposing dodge specials only, as far as speed is concerned, Lapras, Cloyster, Jynx, Piloswine, and Golem are all faster, all of them are more potion-efficient, and of course, Dragonite wins the mirror match faster too. Lapras has enough HP remaining to take down a second Dragonite.DT/HP Gyarados is better than Vaporeon as a specialistIn the 2 matchups where it really matters - vs. Rhydon and Tyranitar - Vaporeon wins faster and with more % HP remaining. So no. They do about the same vs. Flareon but Flareon is such a joke and uncommonly seen in gyms nowadays. Donphan is also uncommon but less of a joke, and Vaporeon does way better here.My personal experience dictates that Gyarados is a superior attackerIf you like using Gyarados as an attacker, then by all means, continue using Gyarados as an attacker, don’t let me stop you. If you lack half of the Pokemon in tiers 1 to 2.5, then Gyarados looks pretty good. If you have a maxed out copy of each of the Pokemon in tiers 1 to 2.5, then I can't see a situation in which including Gyarados on your 6-mon team is ever ideal.The purpose of a tier list is not to validate your opinions. If the tier list disagrees with your opinions, then the default conclusion is not that the tier list is wrong. It’s easy to be fooled by personal experience. Players often don’t meticulously document their battle results, nor do they conduct their experiments in controlled settings, not to mention the impact of subtle personal biases.Thanks for reading. In some way I feel that I owe an apology to Nick (GamePress site admin), because in speaking truth to the mob I have damaged GamePress’s reputation in the eyes of a subset of its users. via /r/TheSilphRoad http://ift.tt/2nYi4h6