-
Snag some vintage SPL team logo merch over at our Teespring store before January 12th!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Announcement RUWC 6 - Format Discussion
- Thread starter TheFranklin
- Start date
- Status
Very confused what this is based on, given you have players like myself, GoldCat and Guille who have started and been successful in this tier in RUPL for multiple years now and greatly enjoy it.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the tier itself, 2x crits suck but that's literally every tier pre gen 6, you can use a wide variety of mons and team styles (eg the teams guille uses are completely different in style to mine and both have worked), i think most of the negative perception comes from people who don't actually play the tier or struggled in a brief foray into it.
ADV and DPP being more popular i would put partially down to shiny new toy syndrome, both in that a new tier is exciting to play and when a tier is new and less established there's a lot of appeal in playing it because you can be a driving force in the tier, opportunity to be a major contributor to resources, the tier is less 'solved' so there's more new sets you can create, the fact you aren't competing with people who've been playing it for 5+ years etc (i would like to see adv included in ruwc but any talk of removing an existing old gen is silly)
Since we are using RUWC as one of RU’s “custom avatar” prize tournaments this year unlike 2023, signups will definitely increase, bringing in some tour players that played in RUPL for example. This is a good thing, each region’s team will have more people who want to play and help out, meaning I can’t imagine we will struggle to support the existing old gens that already have plenty of resources, as well as add an ADV slot.
We shouldn’t start talking about getting rid of established old gens until there’s a very good reason to. I’d also venture a guess that 4 SV slots would be fairly easy to support for most regions as everyone is already building for 3 slots, and the metagame seems to have settled down nicely for the time being and is on 3 month shift cycles. Using good, already established teams from this past RUPL and RUGL will help make building for SV slots easier in RUWC.
I don’t know if this is on the table as of yet, but a format of 4 SV, all current RU oldgens, and an ADV slot wouldn’t be much extra work in my eyes given how many signups I imagine we will have. Would love to know if people think differently.
We shouldn’t start talking about getting rid of established old gens until there’s a very good reason to. I’d also venture a guess that 4 SV slots would be fairly easy to support for most regions as everyone is already building for 3 slots, and the metagame seems to have settled down nicely for the time being and is on 3 month shift cycles. Using good, already established teams from this past RUPL and RUGL will help make building for SV slots easier in RUWC.
I don’t know if this is on the table as of yet, but a format of 4 SV, all current RU oldgens, and an ADV slot wouldn’t be much extra work in my eyes given how many signups I imagine we will have. Would love to know if people think differently.
Very much agree with ninjadog post. As he rightly argues, I also think the negative perception comes from players with little experience in the tier, who have viralised the fact that it's a tier where luck takes precedence over metagaming. But, the RNG is the same for all gens prior to the sixth, as he rightly comments.
If it were an unbalanced and unhealthy tier, my playstyle would be unfeasible. As some of you know, I tend to go for fat structures and my teams have proven to be viable, getting good results.
I think the tier has not been explored as much as it should be yet (as it has been demonstrated with the new structures I have been using), there are hardly any builders and in many occasions teams are reused, that affects the rejection of the tier.
In short, it makes no sense to remove the tier from the format and I call on you to explore it, because it is worth it!
I just want to clarify that I am not arguing that BW should be cut, just that ADV shouldn't. ADV is fun, beloved and easy to get into even if a team doesn't have any established players. For now I am in favor of including it as much as possible, and if it turns out disastrous in the WC format then we can have this conversation again next year.
To continue on this BW/ADV discussion, I'm gonna remind everyone that BW RU is an official metagame (and the first RU one btw) contrary to ADV RU which got added recently. Even if BW is not that much liked for most players, there is many people who have been playing this tier for many years now, especially for RUPL, as ninjadog and Guille posted up there for example. There is absolutly NO WAY we cut BW RU of the RUWC for an ADV RU slot, unless we go for a full CG format, otherwise that's a nonsense. I agree a lot with ninjadog post, ADV and DPP are pretty new and everything that's new is pretty attractive, but don't forget what has been working for years now.
In my first post, I was neutral about this format discussion, being doubtful about the ability to slot a decent player in ADV for each team, and even if I see the keen interest about ADV RU since RUGL, RUWC is an "official" tournament (even with a CA as the prize now) contrary to RUGL, I'm not sure it is the right place for a metagame that is that recent. And I'm personally not a fan of current-oldgen mixed tournaments where oldgens have more slots than current gen. In my opinion, we should stick to A format. Or if we got much more signups and ADV is praised, I might go for 5SV 5OG, but that depends on signups size which we can't predict.
In my first post, I was neutral about this format discussion, being doubtful about the ability to slot a decent player in ADV for each team, and even if I see the keen interest about ADV RU since RUGL, RUWC is an "official" tournament (even with a CA as the prize now) contrary to RUGL, I'm not sure it is the right place for a metagame that is that recent. And I'm personally not a fan of current-oldgen mixed tournaments where oldgens have more slots than current gen. In my opinion, we should stick to A format. Or if we got much more signups and ADV is praised, I might go for 5SV 5OG, but that depends on signups size which we can't predict.
If we are including any oldgens, then I think there is little reason to not include ADV. It has gotten near unanimously positive reviews, is an extremely competitive and well balanced metagame, and has more resources that are up to date constantly than some of the other oldgens. Based on participation in ADV RU tours, including RUGL, I don’t think fielding an ADV player is really much of a problem at all for any squad.
The only reason to not include ADV is if you wanted a CG focused tour, but at that point you’d likely cut the other oldgens too except for maybe SS and SM. I can’t think of any negative reason to keep it out other than CG focus, which doesn’t seem to be the case for either option. So just include ADV imo.
The only reason to not include ADV is if you wanted a CG focused tour, but at that point you’d likely cut the other oldgens too except for maybe SS and SM. I can’t think of any negative reason to keep it out other than CG focus, which doesn’t seem to be the case for either option. So just include ADV imo.
The main purpose of making it a full CG tour would - and has to - be developing the meta, digging deeper in the options, possibilities and whatnot that SV has to offer. If we all agree on this, let's be honest: we don't need it.
First of all because our old gens have a very few showcase opportunities, be them the Classic, 1x slot in RUPL (and now RUGL) and a very niche spot in whatever old gens PLs going on every year so, naturally, I think we always need to keep these gens playable in team tournaments whatsoever. Secondly, just take a look at this year's tournament schedule. Adding onto it that our PLs have 3 to 4 SV slots, we literally have 8 SV focused solo tournaments throughout the year (if you're counting circuit playoffs, removing it would make it 7, same thing) that always last at least 2-3 months. Moving away everything we do on the forums to pull new stuff out the dirt, I'm not sure all that isn't sufficient to seek meta development here.
Now, THIS is where things get interesting. I'm assuming the main reason as to why some people didn't want ADV in there was that we would eventually have a third team tournament in a row where old gens represent more games than the CG does. If the thing is that we want a balance between CG and old gens, then I TOTALLY agree with this 5-5 process. I may dislike the above mentioned CA suggestion very much, realistically it's just the safest path to take if we wanna stick to 10 slots cuz we will get themeven though huh well it's just TWO more slots like do we really need a prize to hit it... sorry was just being annoyingly elitist again.
Regarding ADV, I've seen several people wondering if this tier was maybe just too new so we would consider adding it. Understandable, but still, do not forget that this tier is close to a year old. I think it's been existing for long enough to get built, stabilized, there are even regular updates on the Discord with the samples, compendiums, they even did a suspect test not so long ago... anyways, my point is it's been a very living tier ever since its creation almost 1 year ago, I don't think it's just being discussed here only because RUGL gamers had fun playing 3 games a month. Also, considering how loved ADV is as a generation in general, I think it'd be a terrible idea to prevent ourselves from potentially attracting either new players or purely and simply ADV mainers. To me, SEA is a great example of why it's a good idea to include ADV.
Tl;dr let's go either for 8 slots: 3x SV/SS/SM/ORAS/BW/ADV or 10 slots: 5x SV/SS/SM/ORAS/BW/ADV but keep old gens and ADV no matter what.
God almighty, I'm writing too much
First of all because our old gens have a very few showcase opportunities, be them the Classic, 1x slot in RUPL (and now RUGL) and a very niche spot in whatever old gens PLs going on every year so, naturally, I think we always need to keep these gens playable in team tournaments whatsoever. Secondly, just take a look at this year's tournament schedule. Adding onto it that our PLs have 3 to 4 SV slots, we literally have 8 SV focused solo tournaments throughout the year (if you're counting circuit playoffs, removing it would make it 7, same thing) that always last at least 2-3 months. Moving away everything we do on the forums to pull new stuff out the dirt, I'm not sure all that isn't sufficient to seek meta development here.
Now, THIS is where things get interesting. I'm assuming the main reason as to why some people didn't want ADV in there was that we would eventually have a third team tournament in a row where old gens represent more games than the CG does. If the thing is that we want a balance between CG and old gens, then I TOTALLY agree with this 5-5 process. I may dislike the above mentioned CA suggestion very much, realistically it's just the safest path to take if we wanna stick to 10 slots cuz we will get them
Regarding ADV, I've seen several people wondering if this tier was maybe just too new so we would consider adding it. Understandable, but still, do not forget that this tier is close to a year old. I think it's been existing for long enough to get built, stabilized, there are even regular updates on the Discord with the samples, compendiums, they even did a suspect test not so long ago... anyways, my point is it's been a very living tier ever since its creation almost 1 year ago, I don't think it's just being discussed here only because RUGL gamers had fun playing 3 games a month. Also, considering how loved ADV is as a generation in general, I think it'd be a terrible idea to prevent ourselves from potentially attracting either new players or purely and simply ADV mainers. To me, SEA is a great example of why it's a good idea to include ADV.
Tl;dr let's go either for 8 slots: 3x SV/SS/SM/ORAS/BW/ADV or 10 slots: 5x SV/SS/SM/ORAS/BW/ADV but keep old gens and ADV no matter what.
God almighty, I'm writing too much
Sorry to bother and to post in this thread, but currently there is no thread open for discussion.
It has come to my attention, as potential Spain manager, that host HaxxSel is going to play in this tournament. While this is understandable due to the difficulty of finding suitable and experienced hosts for this kind of tours, it is not ideal that the host plays in the tournament. At the end of the day, we all as players or managers are biased towards our own team and this is not something you want in a host.
As such, I would like to ask to add another host (maybe it's already been regarded) or to consult doubtful act/substitution decisions with a TD.
Thank you.
Pinging feen, TheFranklin and Rarelyme as mods of the forum.
It has come to my attention, as potential Spain manager, that host HaxxSel is going to play in this tournament. While this is understandable due to the difficulty of finding suitable and experienced hosts for this kind of tours, it is not ideal that the host plays in the tournament. At the end of the day, we all as players or managers are biased towards our own team and this is not something you want in a host.
As such, I would like to ask to add another host (maybe it's already been regarded) or to consult doubtful act/substitution decisions with a TD.
Thank you.
Pinging feen, TheFranklin and Rarelyme as mods of the forum.
You raise a good point. This is already in the works, more on this soon.
Sorry to bother and to post in this thread, but currently there is no thread open for discussion.
I am extremely disappointed that MrAldo was not consulted on how to resolve the 4-way tiebreak scenario. I believe the current decision, which was spearheaded by "TDs" (who knows), is extremely poor and low hype in comparison to what MrAldo would have come up with. I encourage the hosts to consult MrAldo for all future host based decisions.
I am extremely disappointed that MrAldo was not consulted on how to resolve the 4-way tiebreak scenario. I believe the current decision, which was spearheaded by "TDs" (who knows), is extremely poor and low hype in comparison to what MrAldo would have come up with. I encourage the hosts to consult MrAldo for all future host based decisions.
in a round robin scenario you mathematically always elim at least 1 team when you have 4 teams, free the initial format instead please, if a 2nd week is needed there have been plenty of 3 way tb's on this site, half the possible permutations of making this a round robin would resolve all of this in 1 round WHY ARE THERE 2
Last edited:
I’m sorry but a two week tiebreaker is going to kill this tour. Please reconsider to use tack’s format above or simply make it no johns with a thursday deadline for round 1 and a sunday deadline for round 2. There is no way this tour is going to be held up for two weeks—it simply cannot happen.
This is nothing against the tour hosts, but a 2 week break followed by a top 8 poffs format is bound to create unreasonable amounts of downtime when considering the possibility for tiebreaks or other shenanigans. Please reconsider just taking the point leader (aka Canada) or Tack's proposal
You know, I dont know if I am supposed to be like amused of getting tagged everytime anything controversial happens to this tour, Id appreciate if you dont tag me for any jokes related to this tournament, the host made a decision, may as well try to respect it.
I do like Tack idea to handle this scenario tbqh, a 4-way tiebreak is expected but if we wanna keep any momentum this needs to be done as soon as possible, I think the main intentions of making the format the way it was is to have more games, but again good intentions are a road to hell clearly. Lets think this through, cannot have a situational pleasing mentality on this, tough decisions need to be made at times.
Lets see, in the meantime let me be cause there is very little I can do, trying to support my team and anything. See ya around!
I do like Tack idea to handle this scenario tbqh, a 4-way tiebreak is expected but if we wanna keep any momentum this needs to be done as soon as possible, I think the main intentions of making the format the way it was is to have more games, but again good intentions are a road to hell clearly. Lets think this through, cannot have a situational pleasing mentality on this, tough decisions need to be made at times.
Lets see, in the meantime let me be cause there is very little I can do, trying to support my team and anything. See ya around!
- Status