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

[8-BIT Luster]

I really want the inclusion of XY, and somehow glossed over it
The thing that makes XY and ORAS different from BW and BW2 is that ORAS introduced like 8 new Pokemon, brought back Soul Dew, brought new moves that didn't fucking suck, and had probably the biggest intragenerational metagame shift of all. XY was really fun and dare I say more diverse, and it's a shame that there isn't a ladder or somethin

basically free xy

 

[Fireburn]

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.

No one cared about ADV Ubers until it was played in last UPL and ppl realized it was actually a good metagame. If ppl wanna give GSC Ubers a shot (several solid old gens players have expressed interest already) I have zero problems with including it.

Just FYI I've been monitoring the responses in this thread and I'll discuss them with Sweep ASAP. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

 

[Haruno]

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

late as fuck but with VGC's now inclusion of ubers, I feel that the amount of interest in dubers should go up exponentially as compared to before (VGC is far more popular/prestigious than smogon's ou) since although dubers might be similar to vgc16, you have several key differences that I feel would make it more diverse with arceus/darkrai (no dark void makes it ass though)/no uber restriction. Mostly arceus/uber restriction will allow it to be vastly different than vgc but similar enough to warrant a slot in upl. ORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR we can just say fuck dubers and put in a vgc slot.

Most acceptable format is nayrz post but again I'm willing to compromise with vgc16 > dubers if needed.

 

[Hack]

No one cared about ADV Ubers until it was played in last UPL and ppl realized it was actually a good metagame. If ppl wanna give GSC Ubers a shot (several solid old gens players have expressed interest already) I have zero problems with including it.

Just FYI I've been monitoring the responses in this thread and I'll discuss them with Sweep ASAP. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

I don't have any problems with including gsc either, but atm I've only seen like 3 players (who are undoubtedly good) expressing interest in playing it. You can argue ADV had similar issues last year but keep in mind GSC is so vastly different from any other uber tier. Granted I pretty much got ADV represented last year by similar logic (a presumed good and maybe unexplored meta) so as long as there are players I think it should be fine.

I'd rather get in Farceus, where we had 2 tours recently, represented. Or I guess add both and expand the slots, just don't get rid of ties (and btw pls make wins 3p, 2p is retarded).

also lol @ dubers

 

[A wild waifu]

2 ORAS 1 BW 1 DPP 1 ADV
6
Ok
Nah
Ok
February

 

[Sweep]

I like fresh blood on teams in general, but I'm not opposed to allowing each team keeping 1 retain (same rules as SPL, 3k more than the user cost the previous year, 10k minimum).

Edit @ below: we'll figure that out when we finalize the # of slots.

 

[Aberforth]

Speaking of k minimum, how many credits will each team have and for how many slots?

 

[March Fires]

1.

2 ORAS
1 XY
2 BW2
2 DPP
1 ADV

- to be honest, there's a lot of overlap between "strong [?]" OR/AS players and BW2/XY/DPP players. So, i reckon 2 OR/AS should adequately represent the tier despite its relevance, as a lot of older, pre-established players who have learnt the tier have a passion for the older generations, and tend to lean towards them when choosing playing preference. Because of this, a lot of "up and coming" or "newly established" OR/AS players are likely to have a perfectly fine amount of representation.

GSC is definitely an interesting option to explore.

And the idea of 10 slots (3 oras/1xy/2bw2/2dpp [maybe 1 farceus]/1adv/1gsc) is also appealing i suppose.

 

[ApplepieFTW]

nayrz' format is pretty good I agree. however, like sweep agreed to a few posts back, the main focus should be oras whether you like the tier or not since it's what most people play and will want to play. if we go with that many tiers, oras is suddenly underrepresented again. what I'm trying to say is that it's not a good idea to just add tiers just because "this tier is ok, let's do this" because it'll quickly become chaotic. take farceus for example. you're really gonna tell me that out of 6 teams all of them will even be remotely capable of finding not only a dpp player but on top of that someone familiar with farceus. "Oh but just learn farceus!" Well, there's already people going to have to learn adv. And gsc. Keep in mind that by buying someone to play tier x they can't play tier y without having an adequate replacement, in which case y becomes x and uh yeah.. There's two practical solutions to this:

1. Ghosting. We are trying to emulate SPL after all, so this might as well be tbe option right ha.

2. No farceus, and only gsc or adv. Not both. Or have a non-tie system and remove farceus. There were barley enough dpp players last year may I remind you.


edit: my ideal format would be 3 oras/1 xy/1 bw/1 dpp/1 gsc/1 something else like another bw spot or adv in the 8th slot. 10 is just too much lol

edit2: do note that we could also fix post below by limiting the amount of older gens, which I think is desirable (to a certain degree)

edit3: look at me trying to beat around the bush, I agree with hyw tbf. no one really plays those tiers anyway -_-

 

[Aberforth]

yo I'd like to retract my support for 3 oras plz. Talking on PS and the quality of good players takes a noticeable dive after 8 or so, and we want as many good games as possible. This is taking into account managers not playing (so no astounded or 378 and possibly level56), guys who will probably be too busy cause of SPL (Hack, Sweep, ZF) and guys who'd rather play tiers like BW and DPP.

 

[hyw]

I've skimmed through this and am agreeing with the general consensus of the sentiment expressed here EXCEPT FOR ONE THING: I am 100% OPPOSED to BW1 or DPP Farceus becoming a tier for the tournament; I don't give a fuck about political correctness or whatever bullshit, PLEASE do not force us to compete in a player maybe half of a soul in the entire community genuinely gives a shit about. Seriously literally everyone here is excited for some epic matches in BW2 and DPP non-Farceus, how are you going live with yourself knowing you killed the hype bringing up BW1 and Farceus is literally the stupidest idea I didn't even begin to think about oh my God just leave BW2 and DPP alone please, PLEASE.

k thx

 

[Nayrz]

<BKC> gsc ubers is a great metagame, it is the most skill reliant of any of the gens, and its pretty easy to pick up, plus quite a few people already know it and i'd like to play it, therefore it should be included
<BKC> c/p that

BKC adding his support to the GSC Ubers cause

<BKC> oh also edit in
<BKC> i dont really care about farceus vs. no farceus but no farceus is better
<BKC> maybe 1 & 1 is fine but i would prefer both regular

 

[Krauersaut]

so right now what are we looking at? general consensus seems to be

2 ORAS / 1 XY / 2 BW2 / 2 DPP (farceus or not, w/e) / 1 GSC?

i'm all for gsc if there's actually a relevant playerbase for it.

since a lot of people seem to want XY i can live with it, it's a fun meta anyway :o

as for DPP. i do think that we should roll with whatever is the "official" meta for that generation, simply for some kind of posterity and because it's the meta most dpp ubers'ers are more familiar with.

on an entirely separate note:

(つツ)つ GIVE UPL (つツ)つ

 

[Sweep]

i support that, except with one DPP slot and one ADV slot. with GSC now in the fold taking some old gen players, I'm not sure we need 2 slots devoted to DPP (as fun as it is)

 

[hyw]

Let's be honest here. All this talk of "general consensus" and measuring demand and supply per metagame is all COMPLETELY subjective and unscientific; your opinion =/= fact. :O

In turn, I believe that the ultimate compromise is to FIRST post a sign-up thread to acquire a gauge for which metagames have whatever amount of momentum behind them, and THEN to figure out which metagames to elect into tournament play.

Frankly it's quite beyond me as to why we are blindly picking and choosing for the slots before we have any actual hard evidence to discuss this matter in a democratic fashion; Fireburn isn't known for following such principles too faithfully, but come on, Sweep, this is all so backwards, you know that.

We all have our personal agendas we wish to shove upon the final picture; I'm not a big fan of ORAS and feel that XY was still immature and love BW2 and DPP to death so my proposal would naturally be 2 ORAS, 1 XY, 2 BW2, 2 Non-Farceus DPP, and 1 ADV, but where the hell is the fairness in that? Instead, by creating a thread where we literally tell the lovely tournament directors which metagames we wish to play of all the possible ones up in the air right now, collectively, at the end of the day, we'll all have obtained a much better sense of in what form the playerbase hopes to compete amongst one another. Edit: So, for example, in my case, I would say I'd compete in BW2, DPP, XY, and ORAS, and not in ADV or GSC. What if after that, 5 people say they'd do ADV and 10 people say they'd do GSC? We now have an easy answer as to whether we should implement ADV or GSC if it comes down to the two.

Let's all get our heads out of our asses and settle this like men: halt projections of metagame selection and commence a sign-up thread as a channel through which everyone can express their feelings!

So let's get to gathering information on which metagames people are really willing to put their efforts into! ONLY THEN would we as a community have fulfilled the moral quota to debate issues like whether there's an ample supply of eager and capable ORAS players, whether ADV or GSC can garner more support as a tournament metagame, and so on.

 

[Freeroamer]

2 ORAS / 1 XY are fine, but like hyw says free signups :3

 

[p2]

free rby ubers

 

[Fireburn]

In turn, I believe that the ultimate compromise is to FIRST post a sign-up thread to acquire a gauge for which metagames have whatever amount of momentum behind them, and THEN to figure out which metagames to elect into tournament play.

There isn't enough variance in the metagames played to really justify doing this. All of ORAS/BW/DPP/ADV were successful last year so the only real major decision is whether or not to include GSC Ubers, which there seems to be sufficient interest in doing.

free rby ubers

no

Sweep and I are probably going to be using the following metagame lineup:

ORAS x 2
BW2 x 2
DPP x 2
ADV x 1
GSC x 1

I know some people wanted XY but I can't really justify giving up any of the other slots for it (certainly not going below 2 for ORAS, BW2, or DPP when it worked out fine last year) and it would take away from the ORAS player pool. DPP with Farceus will probably not be included this year due to difficulties enforcing the EV limitations properly (yeah we can theoretically make ppl hover over their arcs and submit screenies but that's too much effort to enforce when regular DPP Ubers is a fine metagame), but it is something I would still like to consider for future UPLs.

Player signups will be posted once we get managers picked out. Signups for that will be open for a few more days.

 

[benbe]

gsc and no xy? u got it mixed up since some people wanted gsc..not xy. im pretty sure there are like 4 "gsc uberers" so why is this a slot lol. if u really want gsc to be included why dont u just include both? u can make both sides happy plus there are no ties

i dont like either tier but cmon. if ur gonna include 1 dead meta u might aswell include the other

 

[yohoE]

why was xy left out x.x

it should def be in, probably over gsc there

also, were retains talked about at all? i brought it up and the only response was from sweep who basically said he doesnt care

 

[Raseri]

nah man gsc ubers is the tier of legends, good call

 

[yohoE]

im definitely fine with gsc being in.. but it being in over xy is kinda silly imo

 

[Sweep]

We didn't talk about retains but I don't see why we can't have one per team (same rules as SPL).

 

[hyw]

If we did an all-inclusive sign-up thread for screening, this would be resolved quick and painless, but putting that aside, I have to weigh in here to back benbe and yohoE; I think Hack or Orch or someone said this before but I feel as though many seem to underestimate how much potential there is for XY, and it being lapsed by an outmoded tier next to no one in the current active Ubers community is familiar with is nothing short of ludicrous.

Again, to reiterate from my previous post, if there are in fact enough people willing to compete in GSC (I saw a few posts by long-time players in this thread alone showing interest), we should give it serious consideration, but EVEN THEN, we'd subsequently have to compare the demand there to the numbers behind XY.

I respect the enthusiasm of the few backing GSC but, in my opinion, on top of XY Ubers having a larger pool of participants willing to play, and the fact that it's much more familiar to ORAS and BW2 players, more recent in its termination (meaning most grandfathered ORAS players ALL possess working knowledge in this tier), and unexplored by the majority of the ORAS-devoted Ubers community today should warrant it more weight from the get-go, and I'm sure a good number of players looking forward to this UPL would agree with this sentiment. XY would be funner to spectate, too, since so many of us are familiar with its environment already. If anything, I view XY as an add-on to ORAS that's still very expandable and competitive, while GSC is the last slot pick played mostly by old-timers outside of the active Ubers community, kind of like ADV last year.

I just can't see GSC Ubers being played in a more relevant fashion than XY and find it unjustified that GSC be implemented over XY at this stage. If you can provide me with evidence as to GSC's superiority in relevancy in contrast with XY, I'd concede, but until then my point, shared by a great portion of the current Ubers community, stands.

 

[Fireburn]

I am fine with retains