Hey everyone, Eggs here. Not gonna lie, this post is going to be a bit of a doozy. First things first, the elephant in the room:
As soon as I saw the Keldeo suspect test, I promptly haha'd the post because there was no way such an obviously broken Pokemon could be let back in to the metagame. Hell, I was
literally the dude who banned it a year ago.
beauts's excellent post has captured about 90% of my feelings as a STABmons Mix and Mega Player about the Keldeo unrestriction. However, as the former tier leader and a current mashups leader, I have many more issues with this situation. First things first though:
1. Keldeo is broken. Obviously.
Just read my
post from last year. Keldeo was so absurdly powerful and metagame-warping that at one point I started running Heavy-Duty Boots Jellicent to counter it. The majority of other players from that time agree, which begs the question:
2. Who wanted this?
Councils exist for the purpose of allowing experienced players with intimate knowledge of a metagame to guide it on the right track. They're supposed to prevent things like unnecessary complex bans and uncompetitive elements, or absurdly improbable scenarios like arbitrarily deciding to unban one of the most feared wallbreakers in a metagame's history and providing little-to-no justification as to why. Wild, I know. As beauts mentioned, the justification behind the Keldeo suspect test was woefully lacking. This wouldn't fly in a regular OM, and the only reason it flew here was because I was on vacation and it slipped under my radar for a few days. However, this wasn't the only thing wrong with this suspect:
3. Suspect Tests require a supermajority to implement change.
This vote was 7-6, with 54% in favor of unrestricting Keldeo. Notably, 54 is less than both 55 and 60, the most common standards for a "Supermajority". Although this specific test did not have any stated requirements for a victory, that doesn't mean that a victory decided by a swing vote is perfectly valid. Mashups leadership has unanimously raised concern over the fact that this was decided 7-6, with many prominent STABnMega players not included among the votes. Speaking of voting:
4. Voting and Requirements
Two major issues occurred while the suspect was ongoing. On August 15th,
Aggrometaile was observed offering to throw a tournament match to a friend with the explicit purpose of getting that friend suspect requirements. Thanks to timely intervention by a staff member who informed them this was illegal, the scenario was avoided (the match was played to the end and Aggro was the winner); but the fact that we even had a brush with voting manipulation is frankly disgraceful. Secondly, there was a minor issue with accidentally counting non-suspect tournament tour winners as voters, but this was quickly corrected. However, the existence of an issue like that leads into another problem:
5. Suspect Tournaments are (forgive the pun) kind of suspect.
Fun fact: I'm coming up on my second year in mashups and I've never achieved reqs via suspect tournament before. While that's fairly normal for most of the playerbase, I have been on multiple councils for formats running suspect tournaments, and have even hosted a suspect tournament before. I think it's safe to say that I qualify as a "knowledgeable" mashups player, yet I've never voted in one of these. At the same time, concerns have been raised over the lower barrier to entry of suspect tournaments. Unlike a ladder suspect (or my proposed solution, later in this post), requirements for a suspect tournament can be met in as little as 1-2 games, depending on the number of entrants. It's not unheard of for someone to join a tournament of 2 people, use a sample team, and get voting requirements on a format they've played for two matches. This system clearly isn't doing what suspect tests are supposed to do: make sure that the voters are knowledgeable and familiar with the metagame.
What happens next?
Because of this series of events, it's clear that some changes are necessary. Starting from the top:
1. Effective immediately, Keldeo has been re-restricted in STABmons Mix and Mega
The temporary unbanning of Keldeo will not affect STABmons Mix and Mega matches played in Tours Plaza Premier League IV. Tagging
Daki to make sure this goes through.
2. Starting now, all OM Mashups tiering decisions must be ran through a Moderator or Room Owner
Previously this was just common practice, but following a few minor mixups and this event, it's become clear that this should be made a formal requirement for all councils to follow. Before announcing a tiering decision, please run it by a moderator or RO, and tag them in the post.
3. Defining "Supermajority" for use in voting decisions
From now on, an action that must be decided by Supermajority must be approved by a majority of voters that has an advantage of either 2 votes or 20% of the total votes, whichever quantity is the largest. Example: 7-5 is a supermajority, but 32-28 is not.
4. Accountability
While no voting manipulation actually occurred, the fact that we were concerned is unacceptable. Additionally, this is not Aggrometaile's first brush with voting manipulation (he previously instigated a brigade for Mashups Spotlight voting). Given the serious nature of this issue and the history of this user, the Mashups leadership has made the decision to remove Aggrometaile from all positions of leadership within Mashups. Additionally, the STABnMega leadership will be undergoing a review process to better understand how this situation occurred.
5. A possible alternative to Suspect Tournaments
I did some brainstorming on a replacement for our current system (note that this is a suggestion and not an announcement). My solution would be a ballot box, open to all submissions, and all valid votes must meet the following requirements:
- At least a paragraph explaining the reasoning behind the voter's decision
- At least one original replay relevant to the discussion
- At least one team used, with commentary on how it plays into the discussion
This potential system is better suited to the lower amount of games played in Mashups, while also accommodating the theorymon and discussion-heavy nature of Mashups. Additionally, this solves the issue of players unable to attend any tournaments, as relevant replays from any matches can be used in the discussion. For shits and giggles, I'm calling this the McGee Metagame Management System.
I wanted to finish this post off by reminding everyone that it's OK to make mistakes and bad calls. Anyone who's been around for a while knows that I'm no stranger to
bad decisions either, and a few mistakes won't the end of the world or a your career in mons. Posts like this exist to correct mistakes we've made, and to stop them from happening in the future.