All Gens RoAPL XI - Format Discussion

Vertigo

Vertigo

new signature just dropped
is a Tournament Directoris a Top Social Media Contributoris a Community Leaderis a Top Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris a Contributor to Smogonis a Top Dedicated Tournament Host
Community Leader
Hello everyone! With RoAPL XI coming up relatively soon, we want for the first time in a while open discussion for the format. For those of you that aren't aware, previous editions used the following format:
  • ORAS OU
  • ORAS OU
  • BW OU
  • BW OU
  • DPP OU
  • DPP OU
  • ADV OU
  • ADV OU
  • GSC OU
  • GSC OU
  • RBY OU
  • RBY OU
Recently, people have expressed interest in changing the format since this one has been used for years and doesn't entirely reflect all generations RoA supports. Here are a few discussion topics we would particularly like to hear opinions on:
  • Classic Bo5 and Masters Bo3 slots
  • Bo3 option on the table for all tiers
  • Potential expansion to 10 teams should we go from 12 to 10 slots depending on what format we settle on
  • Tiebreaker format
If you have strong opinions on the above please give input in this thread. If you have other ideas in mind that you think would add to the discussion you are also encouraged to share them!

Shitposting will not be tolerated in this thread, and we reserve the right to delete and infract posts as we see fit. Please give substance to your posts and refrain from posting one-liners; if you don't have a lot to say, a like on a post you agree with will achieve the same.

This thread will stay open for roughly 2 weeks and will close a few days before manager signups open (May 5th).
 
- not a big fan of including a classic bo5 slot. having to do that for 7 to 9 weeks in a row is extreme and it's difficult to include with 2x each generation.

- giving each gen's playerbase the option to decide if they want bo3 is a good idea but bo1 all is also ok.

- zero reason to include masters bo3 when ss and sm aren't even included in the tournament, and same issue as classic bo5 re: inclusion with 2x each gen

- one way to include classic bo5 and masters bo3 would be to do 1x of each gen 1-8 and then classic and masters for 10 slots. However, this idea is TERRIBLE. I believe it almost entirely kills the point of the tournament by removing 2x each gen, which is to give exposure to as many competent players as possible. This is also not to mention that ss and sm are included in OUPL and smogtours, so they don't exactly need representation.

- 10 teams with a 9 week regular season is extreme. It's not the worst idea ever but it very quickly becomes an exhausting drag, and signups this year may not be as good as previous editions

- consider changing tiebreaker system. I don't think pick strike is awful but ranked choice is probably better

TL;DR keep the format as is or cut oras. I don't really care either way so I'm inclined to say just keep it as is.
 
Huge fan of bo3 everything.

For sure no masters slot unless we add sm and ss as seperate slots, but the masters tiers already have their own tour (which is currently ongoing!) so I don't feel too bad about not including them in the certified boomer tournament.

I think the best format is RBY-BW each x2 and 2 classic bo5 slots. Bin oras from the tour and keep this tour strictly to the non-fairy gens, oras has masters league now anyway. Classic bo5 is a great addition to the tournament but hard to implement without creating uneven slots or doubling down on it, but would be an easy fix for the tiebreaker scenario: just have classic bo5 as default tiebreaker tier.

edit: perhaps we can use this tour to experiment on the whole bo3 vs bo1 thing by giving every gen a bo1 slot and a bo3 slot? every gen has 2 slots anyway so that works out nicely
 
Last edited:
I’m a fan of bo3 all tiers but I’ll let other tiers speak for themselves - I think DPP should definitely be bo3. The bo3 slot in DPPPL has been very successful 2 years in a row at getting high level players who wouldn’t participate otherwise to sign up for the tour, and I think we will see something similar here.
 
Masters bo3 does not belong in RoAPL

Classic Bo5 is interesting, and I'm willing to at least try it, but prepping for it every week over the course of a season sounds like an absolute motherfucker. Honestly if y'all are trying to play with the tiebreaker format, maybe you could use Classic Bo5 for that. One set, our best player vs yours, Classic Bo5

And I'll gladly support bo3s across the regular slots
 
In the event the slots stay relatively the same, I would just suggest the tiebreak option be done in a way where both teams send in a ranked choice to hosts for tiers and the tier that's highest on average from both team's lists is default tier and in the event two tiers are tied for highest average then give priority to higher seed.

If u want to include classic bo5 for tiebreaks as default tier then that's ok too although I'm mildly skeptical on how many ppl would want to Bo5 as a regular slot for 7+ weeks in the tour so maybe just keep it as a tiebreak only thing.

Masters Bo3 doesn't really work when the only fairy gen in the tour is ORAS unless you go out of the way to include SM and SS as well and those tiers are certainly not lacking in representation on the site.

DPP should be bo3, it's been a strong sentiment within the dpp community to see more bo3 and the bo3 slot in dpppl is well-received. If the other tiers that aren't already bo3 want to follow suit then they should be welcomed to do so.
 
Last edited:
3d Vulpix03 TPH following up since you said I wouldn't ever remember to discuss tiebreak during the format discussion, glad I can put this beef behind us

The tiebreak format last year was an absolute sham. The higher seed being able to both pick and ban before the lower seed picks is a disproportionate advantage to the high seed.

Pick/Ban should probably look something like this, with 1 being lower seed and 2 being higher seed:

P1P2B2B1B2, with the tiebreak metas being P1, P2, and the remaining tier after the bans.

I do not mind cutting a ban and randomizing the final tier if that's wanted. I do not mind any alternative equitable tiebreak format so long as the high seed does not get to ban the low seed's best tier before they can do anything.

============

With that out of the way, personally find it a little weird we call this tour RoAPL when it has like half of RoA in it, especially if we cut ORAS. That said if the consensus is 2 slots per gen I get it, since the tournament fills a niche of mid-level players getting to play after coming off their genpl performances.

If the tournament goes to 1-5 I really like the idea of classic Bo5 being the neutral tier instead of any sort of pick/ban, and just having lower seed pick first. Classic Bo5 is cool as a regular slot too but it seems the support for it isn't there.

Huge fan of Bo3 in every slot of the tournament. Its a boon to each meta and has an added bonus of "testing" a Bo3 team tour, which I'm in favor of. The 1 slot Bo3 1 slot Bo1 idea is a fine midground if Bo3 every slot gets that much pushback.
 
Last edited:
As a former RoAPL champion (pichus swag) - Gens 1-5, all BO1 except RBY, 2 slots each for 10 slots total. I like the idea of a Classic BO5 as the default tiebreaker slot too.

Have OUPL cover Gens 6-9. Can do 2 slots each with the remaining 2 being some mix of Masters BO3, STour BO3, additional SV slots, etc.

In the past when the shift was made to just Gens 1-5, I remember Lutra had talked with the OU forum mods about having an OUPL format that complimented this to better accommodate for the sheer number of old generations we now have. I don’t know why this was ever undone.

10 slot formats are far superior in unofficial tournaments due to playerbase quality, but if the additional 2 slots are more interesting picks (like some Classic BO5 slots), then I think 12 can be justified. This isn’t to say I think there should be 2x Classic BO5 slots… seems like it would be insane to draft 2 of those lol.

I am a fan of BO3 in principle and I think BO1 has a lot of issues, but I think this applies more to individual tournaments than team tournaments. I think it is annoying to fit BO3 in team tournaments, especially in an unofficial where effort is generally lower. Functionally, you have a BO10 or BO12 anyway. The system we have works well for team tournaments. While the better PLAYER doesn’t necessarily win as often as they would in BO3, the better TEAM does. These are team tournaments, after all.

edit: also someone revive me and Kim’s goated ass Pichus franchise this year plz
 
goldmason said:
3d Vulpix03 TPH following up since you said I wouldn't ever remember to discuss tiebreak during the format discussion, glad I can put this beef behind us

The tiebreak format last year was an absolute sham. The higher seed being able to both pick and ban before the lower seed picks is a disproportionate advantage to the high seed.

Pick/Ban should probably look something like this, with 1 being lower seed and 2 being higher seed:

P1P2B2B1B2, with the tiebreak metas being P1, P2, and the remaining tier after the bans.

I do not mind cutting a ban and randomizing the final tier if that's wanted. I do not mind any alternative equitable tiebreak format so long as the high seed does not get to ban the low seed's best tier before they can do anything.

============

With that out of the way, personally find it a little weird we call this tour RoAPL when it has like half of RoA in it, especially if we cut ORAS. That said if the consensus is 2 slots per gen I get it, since the tournament fills a niche of mid-level players getting to play after coming off their genpl performances.

If the tournament goes to 1-5 I really like the idea of classic Bo5 being the neutral tier instead of any sort of pick/ban, and just having lower seed pick first. Classic Bo5 is cool as a regular slot too but it seems the support for it isn't there.

Huge fan of Bo3 in every slot of the tournament. Its a boon to each meta and has an added bonus of "testing" a Bo3 team tour, which I'm in favor of. The 1 slot Bo3 1 slot Bo1 idea is a fine midground if Bo3 every slot gets that much pushback.
Click to expand...
Agree on the tb tier picking, being able to ban the opposing team's strongest tier or the tier with the biggest differential before they even get a chance to protect one is unfair, and there is a reason why its not seen in other tours. Having the second pick and second ban is already advantage enough for being the higher seed (similar to spl), and i think P2P1 B2B1 is fair, while still giving advantage to the higher seed. iirc there was some confusion when it was being discussed at the time, where either the higher seed team or the host thought that picking first was as advantage, so i think its fair to change the format as the options were not considered correctly.

As for the other proposals:
1. Personally I though oras was a fun addition to the tour to watch, and they were well integrated into the team, would rather keep them there then have bo5 classic, 10 slots or masters
2. For GSC at least, I prefer bo1 - either I have to prep much more than an individual, or I reuse and am potentially at a disadvantage. Plus roapl overlaps with a lot of other tours (gsc gc, early classic, potentially johto league) and I think it would be hard to fit an additional bo3 in there
 
blank said:
As a former RoAPL champion (pichus swag) - Gens 1-5, all BO1 except RBY, 2 slots each for 10 slots total. I like the idea of a Classic BO5 as the default tiebreaker slot too.

10 slot formats are far superior in unofficial tournaments due to playerbase quality, but if the additional 2 slots are more interesting picks (like some Classic BO5 slots), then I think 12 can be justified. This isn’t to say I think there should be 2x Classic BO5 slots… seems like it would be insane to draft 2 of those lol.
Click to expand...
Agree pretty much completely with Blank's post, although I'm always in favor of gens deciding whether they are bo3 or not and don't really subscribe to bo10/12 propaganda. As much as I like ORAS and fairy gens I think the spirit of ROAPL is 1-5. Maybe TB could be 3v3 bo5?
 
My proposal is to keep the format the exact same, and make dpp ou bo3.

In terms of incorporation a bo5 slot, let’s do it in the playoff tiebreaker.

Each team picks a tier and the third is bo5. That way we get bo5 when it matters the most as opposed to burn out from playing bo5 on a weekly basis.

For the tier that gets negated, each player lists their preferences before the opponent is known. The lowest ranked tier between both players is dropped. If there is another tie, the higher ranked team wins and there 6th placed tier is dropped.
 
blank said:
Have OUPL cover Gens 6-9. Can do 2 slots each with the remaining 2 being some mix of Masters BO3, STour BO3, additional SV slots, etc.
Click to expand...
This requires OU mods to completely redefine what OUPL is without consulting the playerbase, last two OUPL's had a single oras slot and no oras at all, even the bo3 slot was stour and not masters. OUPL shouldn't be forced to change to drop oras from this tour, just drop oras from this tour without adding it to a diff tour if people feel strongly about dropping it.

anyways, masters bo3 doesn't belong because ss and sm aren't roapl gens unless roapl is expanded to all oldgens and its added alongside classic bo5, for a bo3 slot including oras it makes more sense to do 4-6 and then have a 1-3 bo3, otherwise make all slots a single gen whether bo3 or bo1 to avoid odd slots or including sm and ss. Support making non-rby gens 1 bo1 1 bo3 if theres support for each individual gen, or alternatively allowing tiers that arent rby to gentleman bo3 and having rby as bo3 by default.
 
blank said:
I don’t know why this was ever undone.
Click to expand...
No one cares but me but when the decision was made to add ORAS (2023), it was largely due to 1) us wanting to offer more chances to play ORAS because this was at a point where Masters was not finalized and there wasn't really word from the TDs on where ORAS would fall in the official circuit and 2) there hadn't been an OUPL in three years so there was no complimentary OUPL format because the tour didn't exist and it happened to be revived in the same year as ORAS was added to RoAPL.

Anyway, not to speak for Vertigo, but my personal reasons for wanting to host a bo3 RoAPL is as a "test drive" of sorts for people who want bo3 in SPL, as it has been brought up that there's an unwillingness to make such a leap in the site's premier(e?) tournament without trialing elsewhere and I think RoAPL is a good place to see how that works out at least for classic gens if people aren't fond of adding fairygens because of OUPL (though I echo mason's sentiments about this tour lacking significant parts of RoA). I'd prefer all slots bo3 for this purpose but we can defer to the communities themselves as far as that goes or do one bo1 one bo3 as a midground. Naturally we'd be running a post-tour survey and all that shit afterwards to see how people found it.
 
Bin ORAS, it’s got masters now. 2 slots each Gens 1-5.

Give each tiers player base the choice of bo3. I can’t speak for any other tiers besides DPP. But it’s pretty much unanimous that we want bo3.

No real opinion on the tiebreaker slot. Although I like the suggestion of a classic bo5.
 
I don't have any strong opinions on anything other than making DPP Bo3, just wanted to voice my support for that. I think there's been a clear show of preference for it among the player base and now feels like the right time to make this change. That's all! Looking forward to the tournament.
 
i would like to voice support for the removal of oras from the tournament, now that it has masters and the Masters League, and OUPL has been hosted again and such
gens 1-5 2x slots apiece is great and competitive
gens 1-8 is also competitive, 8 slots is unviable though. 10 slots for the tournament with 2 additional slots(classic/masters, flex slots, etc) seems perfectly valid as well.
having all slots be bo3 seems like something that needs to happen in the name of the enormous debate plaguing smogtours of bo3 vs bo1 in official tournaments, competitivity, time investment etc. would support.
tiebreak being classic bo5 + each side picks a tier is super hype
edit - mixed bo3 having one slot bo3 and one slot bo1 sounds fantastic s/o MeEsSm
 
Last edited:
Could split 2x per gen one slot bo3 one not

Idt bo3 GSC is particularly desired, RBY and dpp are obvious net benefits, adv and bw more nebulous, a test drive with the above slot format could fit the needs
 
Just wanted to chime in on this,

Agree with the removal of ORAS this year seeing as it has gained places elsewhere (and for reasons outlined in Maia's post above).

The tiebreaker format has always been very confusing and questionably balanced and it definitely should be changed. Classic Bo5 + 2 picks each seems like the most sensible and balanced compromise.

If the direction of the hosts is to expand Bo3 to other tiers, please consider allowing teams to have 3 managers as its already a lot of work for 2 managers for a 10 slot tour.
 
Last edited:
- Big fan of Leru's proposal of binning ORAS and adding 2 classic slots. This also gives us a very competitive option for tiebreaker as has been suggested above. Classic Bo3 works too P1 P2 B2 B1 so if two Bo5 slots is too much one can be Bo3.

- At least one DPP slot should be Bo3. It's working in DPPPL and it's getting very strong players to sign up specifically for that slot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top