Multi Gen Ubers Premier League discussion thread[Read Post #87]

[Hack]

To elaborate on my previous post and more:

The interesting parts of my proposed tiers are 2 ORAS+1 XY and 1 DPP+1 DPP Farceus. ADV is something we all want and 2 BW2 isn't something we need to discuss, everyone loves that tier even if we hate Palkia/Ghostceus sometimes. The reason why I want XY in personally is because it had such an abrupt ending, and I feel there was more to do in the tier. It was also very fun, and I'm sure a lot of players wouldn't mind going back to duke it out in it.

1 DPP+1 DPP Farceus is hard to enforce with the current implementation but Orch is spot on. If we could change rest mechanics in ADV OU and Body Slam Mechanics (among other things) in RBY then why can't we implement Arceus correctly in a generation it was actually released? If it doesn't get implemented, however, it's very hard to combat cheating. Sparksblade's current DPP Farceus tour takes the approach of having to send in teams to the host before games, but that method isn't thought through... What's stopping you from sending in a legit team and changing your Arceus speed evs to 104 right before the game? One game isn't a large enough sample size to statistically reject that there isn't a difference between the Arceus's speed in case of multiple speed ties, we all know that. So Farceus can only be played if implemented correctly. I also disagree with abs who points out that the good dpp players are the good farceus players- from what I've experienced most players just brings dpp builds to dpp farceus (even the good dpp players), which is about as good as bringing bw1 teams to bw2 games.

Regarding amount of teams: Decide after sign ups. 7 isn't a bad number just because it is odd, and I also dislike that only 2 teams get to "play offs" because it really eliminates some teams after like 2 weeks. On a similar note, why the fuck do we use 2 point per win system for a competition with such a small amount of games? It will just inevitably lead to separation often being made not by points but by w/l... Which I can give plenty of reasons for being awful. Just get 3 points per win and 1 points per draw and you promote going for wins, make it easier to teams to bounce back, and easier to separate placings properly.

Starting during spl would be fine to me, but I wouldn't be able to manage then.

 

[AM]

Trashtalk threads are always a disaster please no. 3 oras ubers is way too much also.

 

[Reymedy]

To elaborate on my previous post and more:

The interesting parts of my proposed tiers are 2 ORAS+1 XY and 1 DPP+1 DPP Farceus. ADV is something we all want and 2 BW2 isn't something we need to discuss, everyone loves that tier even if we hate Palkia/Ghostceus sometimes. The reason why I want XY in personally is because it had such an abrupt ending, and I feel there was more to do in the tier. It was also very fun, and I'm sure a lot of players wouldn't mind going back to duke it out in it.

1 DPP+1 DPP Farceus is hard to enforce with the current implementation but Orch is spot on. If we could change rest mechanics in ADV OU and Body Slam Mechanics (among other things) in RBY then why can't we implement Arceus correctly in a generation it was actually released? If it doesn't get implemented, however, it's very hard to combat cheating. Sparksblade's current DPP Farceus tour takes the approach of having to send in teams to the host before games, but that method isn't thought through... What's stopping you from sending in a legit team and changing your Arceus speed evs to 104 right before the game? One game isn't a large enough sample size to statistically reject that there isn't a difference between the Arceus's speed in case of multiple speed ties, we all know that. So Farceus can only be played if implemented correctly. I also disagree with abs who points out that the good dpp players are the good farceus players- from what I've experienced most players just brings dpp builds to dpp farceus (even the good dpp players), which is about as good as bringing bw1 teams to bw2 games.

Regarding amount of teams: Decide after sign ups. 7 isn't a bad number just because it is odd, and I also dislike that only 2 teams get to "play offs" because it really eliminates some teams after like 2 weeks. On a similar note, why the fuck do we use 2 point per win system for a competition with such a small amount of games? It will just inevitably lead to separation often being made not by points but by w/l... Which I can give plenty of reasons for being awful. Just get 3 points per win and 1 points per draw and you promote going for wins, make it easier to teams to bounce back, and easier to separate placings properly.

Starting during spl would be fine to me, but I wouldn't be able to manage then.

not my biz but what you could do about farceus is actually fairly simple
force each player to take a screenshot with their mouse at preview over the arceus which would reveal the exact stats
then you can ask the players to send it during the game to the host (no way you can cheat it fast enough, since there would be your opponent team on the screenshot, which is something you shouldnt be able to predict)
idk if it's clear, but i dont think you can cheat this way

 

[orch]

or we can just bug zarel/whoever is developing ps to implement it? we did it for adv ubers, why can't we do it again for farceus?

 

[SparksBlade]

eh i just vm'd hack about the same, but it's here as well
i did consider enforcing 3 things: replays, teams, and screenshots of whole screen. I shelved it cos the screenshot part is, imo, as avoidable as it is efficient in preventing any cheating. There's been plenty cases in first 2 rounds of my tour where i wasn't sent a team at all, and i chose to let it slide for then as i was more upset about the pullouts(i admit it was my fault for not being more strict and demanding about teams in round 2). I chose not to enforce screenshots cos it's still a chore for the player(minor, as it's just 6 screenshots, but it did matter), and a player could easily say that they just forgot or w/e, and i wouldn't be able to do much about that at all except force them to play 3 more games, which likely means rescheduling and building 3 more teams, and i anticipated low activity anyway and then if i enforced this and drew away the players that were willing to play, or provide extensions to such cases, then the tour wouldn't be much of a success. So yeah, here i'm taking a risk of trusting the player to not be a dick about it and play the tour in a legit way.

 

[Krauersaut]

in general everyone should have puu.sh if they don't already, its practicality extends far beyond just smogon. isn't that hard to take 3 seconds before each game to screenshot, and puu.sh auto uploads for you and copies the link to your clipboard, its really as good as it gets for quick screenshots.

also, changing what i said in my previous post, i think manager sign ups should open asap and remain open for <1 week, and that player sign-ups can start first-second week of january, remain open for 2 weeks, and then we hold auction mid-late january ish, and week 1 starts beginning of february.

 

[idiotfrommars]

I support the inclusion of GSC Ubers.

 

[Nayrz]

2 ORAS / 1 XY / 2 BW2 / 1 DPP / 1 Farceus / 1 ADV / 1 GSC / 1 Doubles Ubers
10 matches, 12 players, 6 teams

Since UPL is now our "SPL" we might as well open all the gates.

2) instead of more teams, more matches (see above)

3) yes

4) ur idea is the only one i can see working

5) has a designated smack talk thread ever been good? spl's version is bearable

6) one side of me says "after spl cuz more great players are open" and the other side says whenever - some of them might play anyway. no solid opinion.

 

[Jibaku]

Spitballing a few things

1) 2 ORAS/1 XY/2 BW2/1 DPP/1 DPP+Farceus/1 ADV would have my support. I just really want Farceus representation here as we couldn't do it last time.

2) 2 ORAS/1 XY/2 BW2/1 DPP/1 DPP+Farceus/1 ADV/1 GSC/1 Doubles is another possibility. Do we have enough users for this?

screw Nayrz for ninjaing me on the 2nd list.

EDIT: Or we could have VGC16 instead of Dubers since VGC was a thing in spl that got removed only because doubles became popular or something. It has Ubers so why not xD?

 

[Level 56]

1: Tiers:
2 ORAS
1 XY
2 BW
1 DPP + 1 Farceus
1 ADV

2: 6 teams

3: Yeah

4: Manager sign up thread sounds cool

5: Nope

6: Its best to start upl after spl, since many users who play in upl are also playing in spl such as hack, zf, dice etc. If upl starts during spl, players that are playing in both, will not give much attention to upl due to spl

 

[Krauersaut]

I don't know about Doubles Ubers... it has no playerbase within Ubers, it's an entirely doubles-sided thing. It's also an irrelevant meta that has not and will never receive representation in an official tour - like in my first post, I'm against including these metas, for even though they might be fun, it's pointless to focus resources on them.

I do still think we should have 3 ORAS Ubers; a heavy emphasis should be placed on the current gen with the knowledge that a) it will receive 2 if not 1 slots next year, b) it has the exponentially largest player base and c) it is the only Ubers tier with official tour representation (Grand Slam). That's the only thing I'm really deadset on, as far as tiers go - I'm indifferent as to how the remaining 7 match slots would be divided up, so long as there's 3 ORAS. :D

 

[Nayrz]

"Focus resources" ? What resources? When you have a tournament around one specific tier, variety is never a bad thing. It opens up interests from users that may not want to play the usual standard shit, too.

Ubers itself is not receiving representation in any upcoming official tour, and old gens will never see that light again (plus z might be out before next slam for all we know) so that argument is questionable.

3 ORAS is lame and can dilute the quality of the player pool - this argument was used against 3 ORAS OU slots in SPL so it likely applies here too. It also makes it hard to have more tiers and balance the slots with 3 ORAS slots, as you either remove some tiers (no gsc) or have like 12 matches a team (14 players to draft) so I'd be against that. ORAS might be the main tier but its also the most disrespected and controversial among players and spectators alike... I don't think spamming it is worth the drawbacks.

 

[Isa]

If there's six teams and one gsc ubers slot I think you could fill those with players just as competent as the, say, adv ubers one

Source: people who posted in this thread are good

 

[DoubleOD]

I've always wondered why the Ubers room doesn't ever even touch Doubles/Triples/etc. Ubers. It would seem entirely appropriate to do so and might even increase the playerbase for regular Ubers through room tournaments as people tend to stick around after. Unlike other tiers, Ubers tournaments are actually advertised in the Tournaments room. I think this is at least partially responsible for our room's population having gotten much bigger in the last several months as I've seen instances where over 100 people have been in the room which was unheard of earlier in the year.

I would argue that if you truly want Ubers back in SPL you should increase the playerbase.

 

[Starmei]

Dubers is still pretty unexplored and as far as I know a very small amount of players that actually play it actively. It's not a great idea to add something like that to UPL at this stage. Sometime in the near future maybe we experiment with DUbers a bit and do some tours/whatever and if that goes well perhaps it wriggles its way into next UPL but for now I don't think it's a good idea. I'd be down to play it honestly but I don't think it's a good time to be adding it into UPL.

 

[Sweep]

My argument for 3 ORAS slots is simply this: the Ubers playerbase is larger than even before, and as Opens / Seasonals have proven, there are plenty of solid & capable players at this tier to fill the 18 open slots.. I don't like ORAS Ubers myself and would hardly care if we didn't go with a third ORAS, but that doesn't mean that the majority of active Ubers players wouldn't want representation from the tier they're most familiar with. If we go with only 2 ORAS Ubers slots, some very capable current players will go undrafted / be relegated to the bench. If the playerbase hadn't improved since last UPL I wouldn't advocate a 3rd slot, but it has. At the end of the day, over half of UPL's representation will be old gens regardless of what we do, and I can live with 2 ORAS / 1 XY as an alternative to 3 ORAS.

I support GSC (we have more than enough support to find 6 players for this). It'd be nice to explore the final non-cancerous Ubers generation! I saw a GSC game between Isa and Raseri last night and was reasonably entertained. Maybe that's because of my Zapdos fetish, idk. What we can do is open sign-ups before Fireburn and I finalize the tiers to determine what old gen tiers receive the most amount of interest.

I agree with Hack that teams should be awarded 3 points for winning instead of 2.

Note: FWIW the Ubers room strongly voted against Doubles representation in UPL, and I tend to agree. Sorry Doubles / VGC supporters :E

 

[SparksBlade]

went to look, might as well post here: http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/smogtours-gen2ubers-109723

Forretress used Explosion!
The opposing Lugia lost 100% of its health!

 

[Nayrz]

In that case my vote would be:
3 ORAS / 1 XY / 2 BW2 / 1 DPP / 1 Farceus / 1 ADV / 1 GSC

10 matches is a solid baseline. I guess 3 ORAS can be good for testing, synergy and more open to our newer playerbase. Also means they get exposure to the old generations as part of a team oO

 

[Mr.378]

I hear gsc ubers is a pretty good tier. I think we should give it a try. Nayrz's lineup looks good.

Will give full thoughts later if wanted.

 

[orch]

I think that it's insane that we're even considering including GSC Ubers. There have been no tournament for GSC Ubers whatsoever. I'm not taking a RBY OU player's word that we actually have a viable player base for a prehistoric meta.

 

[benbe]

just base the amount of slots per meta on the sign ups. idk how ull do it but im sure Fireburn can figure it out
id recomend havin an odd number of matches tho...F ties

 

[Don Slime]

1: Tiers:
2 ORAS
1 XY
2 BW
1 DPP and 1 Farceus would be cool
1 ADV

2: 6 Teams

3: Yes

4: A manager sign up thread

5: No

6: After SPL or towards the end

 

[Lady Gaga]

1) 1 DPP, 1 BW2, 5 ORAS.

2) Because of how good our activity was last year, we can move up to 8 teams imo.

3) No.

4) Managers should be decided by the community. I do not trust Fireburn with any decisions.

5) No. Let the smack talk happen in the thread for each round.

6) UPL should happen as soon as possible.

 

[orch]

Proposal:

UPL Smack talk thread should be a viability thread for players. Here's few example submissions for a such thread:

%absdaddy: Krauersaut is outclassed in every way and shouldn't be used on a serious team.
+Krauersaut: "I find Sweep overcentralizing and unhealthy to this meta."

Ideally, it would be regularly updated to ensure a constant discussion and ranking eminent UPL players.

 

[Inspirited]

Making the tour's regular season longer (6>4 weeks) would be nice for teams to make adaptions and make up for weeks luck played a massive factor. I know the tier leaders and managers have time constraints and the tour will never be long enough to weed out all luck factors, but i feel that a 4 week regular season is far too short. You can add more teams to justify this or whatever conditions you want in order to make it longer, but please do make it at least 2 weeks longer (ties are fun).