Metagame 1v1 Metagame Discussion

[ggopw]

oh boy,
let me start by saying this first when I saw the maces post I thought it was a joke or something like that.I couldn't believe that this was actually happening, like at all.For that reason, I decided to wait for a little more time to calm me and my thoughts down before I post here.

So let's start with something literally everyone addressed and ill try to give my own opinion on

The way this whole thing was handled:

Now I don't know whose idea this was but all I know it wasn't a good one. Telling the room you have an announcement right before it becoming reality and saying nothing before bar maybe doing some hints like making a new rank and moving kyurem black to s+ all of the sudden,and other stuff I won't get in to as I don't have proof that they are actually 100% true so I don't want to falsy accuse anyone even tho I'm positive on them. As many said the post was insulting to the whole community no matter which side u were on because u could feel how others felt that had different opinions on the suspect.Now something I want to point out is that community is very divided but that's not the end of the world and I have an opinion that this is due the nature of the tier itself, but I also feel that doing this won't help and could only divide the community even further.I am expecting a lot of players to be disgusted as some already I saw are and that makes them not motivated to play the tier or in the worst case quit.I honestly think one of the biggest issues is the pure fuck you for the people that actually put in the time and thought (as they should) that their vote will matter unfortunately I'm one of them.Let me tell u guys my case (ill do broader oppinions on each suspect latter this is just a short version)First of all i voted no ban on jirachi and voted ban on zygarade-complete other suspects i wasnt around since i was on my break from this terrible game called pokemon(jk I dont hate it now as I did before,but its still not a good game lol)and the suspects that I wasnt around aka kyurem and the end of the deo-d suspect (which doesnt matter here)on kyurem I would at that point honestly lead more towards no ban and now im not sure would i try to vote as I feel I dont have a strong oppinion on it but if I was forced I would vote no ban ig.
This was also the biggest fuck you to people that actually enjoy and play the tier regularly and are at least decent.As that I feel betrayed by the council on something I never could expect actually happening.Yes these votes are heavily not something I would like to happen as u can see but i would feel the same way if they were opposite as I said earlier (shown by people that complained even tho they got something they wanted) And I am under the assumption that users that got the bad end of this thing happening don't even want to try to post as they feel even more disappointed and turned off by this.

Now with that rant over I want to hit some other points too

On the suspects :

let's go
huh, this thing makes me so angry and I get where the council is coming from, I really do but I don't see this "solution" in any way shape or form better than doing anything different or leaving it to be the same actually.

Let's start with the low outcome of players that voted
First of all, in my opinion (what dom said as well) this is plenty amount of voters especially for the tier like this and I have seen much lower outcomes (all tho harder suspects to be frank but that doesn't matter here).

The second thing is time. I hate this as an argument why wouldn't u sacrifice time if it helps the tier develop by making the suspects longer(but harder for example) or doing something like suspects at all as I saw deg complain that nothing happened, well why should it have to happen. If that is the outcome it is only fair to respect it and move on (as I did with the zygarde-c) some people (crybabies) didn't act like that when they saw Jirachi not getting banned (don't get me wrong I was sad as u would that something u thought should get banned didn't go your way but I quickly moved on and realised it was fair and it doesn't have to go my way).So long story short time should never be an issue especially when the suspects are very important and its the middle of the generation(idk if I am right on this but its definitely, not the end).Also as everyone staited the suspects were still relatively fresh.

Next up and I think finally we have my favorite: the votes were done in a stupid way
I hate this one extra because I was on more than deg and some other staff during the last two suspects and I talked to a lot of people in private and checked the room ever so often. I do agree there were users that did the good old /pick (which is fucking retarded and disrespectful don't get me wrong) but they were definitely in the big minority also.
I saw some bitching from other users like glyx and others (who did btw the same thing).Ofc I am talking about the classic he/she told me to vote this so I did. Now first of all again this is a minority don't get this wrong and second of all these weren't only simple cases that follow *A: hey vote ban on this B: Sure friend. But they were in my experience as I did this. Talking to people for half an hour at least and trying to see their reasons for voting what they voted and trying to convince to change it by valid and presented arguments and I'm super happy that it worked out and I'm happy also not everyone is stuck up and not open-minded like some are. Now with that stuff out of the way i want to finsih and say that even if it was a substacial amount of users that did that stupid thing I talked about (which isnt the case [at least im certant it isnt] and I am talking only ofc the suspects I was in idk about kyurem one but I think it was the same thing if not better than now), anyway if it was the case it still should be a full freedom of a player to choose how they decide to vote it's their vote at the end of the day for fucks sake.

Also, this is the case when deg says go post on forums.
Why are we forced to do so why i am asking you people have they reasons they dont want to post for exapmple (they think they are not enough knowleged on the subject, they dont want to waste huge amount of time getting their thoughts together and making the post look good and valid, they are busy, they dont care about the forums, they cant put into words what they think, they dont know the english language well enough etc... i can go on) ton of reasons as u can see and it boils down to the freedom which the player should have and it has in other tiers. That's why the suspect process was invented and is widely used bc it destroys those barriers with the simple playing of the game, being good enough to vote(depending on how strict) and a simple yes or no.
And this new system with the posts being the main source of voting is in my strong opinion not the right way to go and I am p sure a lot a lot of players think the same. Something I want to say I did that other could too is talking to council members on how you feel the current situation is it's much easier and more friendly to the thread than shitposting here but again it's not better than the actual very standard voting system is. Huh finally done with this

Now on to moving forward and some impacts of this (other stuff too):
First, we can see is a huge backlash that is happening, Now one more reason I want to add this was bad (it's not that important as others but does matter) is making this post right before PL.This can have an effect on players not wanting to play and as I said not being motivated not to mention the huge shake to the tier with these two bans (much more kb ofc) the tier cant stabilize itself in time. The "best" council post if I would have to say was the TIs when he was very clear and direct unlike others who were beating around the bush,also even tho I don't agree with the good part of the degs last post I do feel its good what he did and tried to tackle a lot, a lot of points.And big s/o to durza with breaking the ice as in the first post.

Now, moving forward for me,
One thing is for sure I won't play this nearly as much as I did before no doubt even when I come back unless something huge changes/goes back to what it was. I am quitting, for now, I don't even want to click that search button anymore and not to think about something like next month officials (i might finish this one since I already put in some work and its little left).However I will sign up for the pl MAINLY because its a tour and I love tours on smogon especially team tours, but I would be COMPLETELY fine (maybe even happier) if I don't get picked up/picked up for very little as I won't put as much time as I nearly would if this thing didn't happen.

As the ending note, I don't want to add anything to what I already said I think its enough for now at least. I just want to say I wouldn't judge one bit the council if they reverse the decision as everybody makes mistakes and this was an obvious one as we can see


e: I won't add my reasons for my votes bc it doesn't matter at all what do I say now lol. I'm just wasting my time here more than I should. However ill add more stuff if I forgot anything.And I won't respond to dumb and objectively false replys, might not respond at all actually since i said it doesnt matter at this point. This post is more of me talking and not trying to argue with a wall


P.S: I am by nature a very lazy person especially when it comes to writing and English is my second language as u can see, also this is by far my longest post on smogon and I was here since oras so that can tell how much this means to me and how much I care about it.


If you at least try to read the post that would mean much to me. thanks and pce for now <3

 

[Ren]

Alright I'm all for providing constructive feedback but can we please do so in a way that doesn't constitute as harassment or whatever? Not going to name names but some of this behavior is outright bullying and it doesn't help get your point across, it does the opposite and it actually hurts some of the people on the opposing side. Yes, the council may have made a decision that you disagree with - That doesn't justify you being passive aggressive, telling them to kill themselves, saying fuck you or whatever. I'm not a mod or whatever but I still think this needs to be said since nobody's listening as it impacts what I said too and makes more people have their posts overshadowed by the potshots taken on this thread. If you want to show them that their post was disrespectful, try showing them respect instead of being disrespectful back? That gets us nowhere, after all...

Thanks!! (mods delete this post if you want but i just wanted to say this)

 

[SaturnZelda]

Hey, so I'm gonna make a post about the things that have been happening here, but feel free to completely disregard my opinion, as I have never actually played 1v1. I'm just going to propose some things from what I've read, and possibly give some ideas for the metagame going forward.

For one, I've seen that one of the biggest problems that everyone has with this is the fact that the council made their decision to reverse the results of suspects based on somewhere around a 50% majority. Now, yes, that does not fall under the 60% majority usually needed to ban a Pokemon. What I propose is that the council should make a sole decision if it's obvious that the community is split on whether to ban it or not. Again, I know that most of the council and quite a bit of the community believes that the Zyg-C suspect was not handled correctly in the forums or room. The 50%-59% council vote (with discussion in forums from the community, as I know there are some players more experienced than the council), could help sway it one way or another, with the community being able to give feedback as well.

Also, speaking of some players being more experienced than the council, I'm suggesting that for further suspects, members of the community who have been shown to have a knowledge of the meta and been actively working towards discussion and other things in the suspect test be allowed to vote on the suspect along with other members of the council. Yes, that could just be a few members, but then your "council vote" is still valid, just with other members of the community being able to help with their opinion, which people have recognized to know the meta as a whole and know the Pokemon in said meta.

I'm sorry if any of you take this badly, but that's just a few ideas of my own. I wish you all luck in figuring this out, both as a community and as a council, and now I take my leave.

 

[Quantum Tesseract]

Nothing like a nice joke post to liven up a heated discussio-
shit, it's by DEG and it's actually serious.

1) Old Suspects had a low income of voters; this is somewhat true and false. As an OM we are cursed with an amount of votes lower than other tiers and with us aiming for harder reqs we didn't get the number we wanted and don't tell me otherwise in this thread or somewhere else. I see people laughing at this point that 20+ voters is good for 1v1 but I wonder who kept PMing me and highlighting me telling that the reqs are hard and the number is so little. If you want to complain at least stay consistent. Do not disapprove that point now while all you did before was telling us that the number of votes are so low. Anyways, taking the elite of the 1v1 community by making the reqs hard didn't really work out, since that's not really the "elite***" due to people having a lot of time between their hands getting reqs. I'm not saying everyone is bad, but I'm saying not everyone that gets reqs is an elite player. This reduces even more the amount of players that are elites which isn't what we wanted, needed or are looking for. Everyone can ready a couple post on the thread (lol, there's none; ill get to this soon) during suspects and have a lot of free time and vote like this without even being an avid player, somewhere who cares about the metagame or anything else.

Additionally, the 60% voting was one of the best options we had since 50% isn't that representing of the community in most cases but the fact that we got little votes, and not a lot of elites players needed it was deemed flawed. 60% works better on a large amount of players but with reqs being hard and only people with a lot of time and some elites getting them backfired on us, on the numbers. We didn't completely override the suspect tests due to two different reasons.


a) Most suspects were months old, the Kyurem-Black suspect test was run through October, while the Jirachi suspect test was run through December. While this might not be ideal to run around another decision the numbers that were put in account were ideal. Kyurem-Black had a 51% pro-ban percentage and got a close pro-suspect percentage during pre-suspects which put it in range of a ban, now there's a reason why it didn't get banned and I'll say that in point 2. Meanwhile Jirachi evaded the ban with a 59% pro-ban in the last suspect and during the pre-suspect it also got a 55%~ pro-suspect which means that the general opinion of the room moved toward the bans but the sample of the community used wasn't as big to allow these numbers to be truly expressed.

b) People still complained in the room after the results, and that isn't a person or two but a whole lot of people which showed the general annoyance of the community about the suspect results. In a way it wasn't a direct override of old suspects, nor render them useless. It was a way to fix what was broken with the help of specialists. It was a way to move the metagame forward due to people not knowing why, or how to vote (this will also be detailed, in second point). In a way we didn't override the suspect tests but gave them a push, we didn't waste time and re-make another suspect test that would probably end either with a ban or in the 59%~ range then let the cycle restart again.

You post like major amounts of time elapsed, but it was 2 months for jirachi and 4 for Kyurem-B. For comparison, OU and Monotype's retests had most of a year between them; I personally feel these were also a bit closer than ideal, but this should be the minimum standard we adhere to for resuspecting. For council votes? Just flat out don't do it. The only time in recent memory (and possibly ever) that this happened was last generation is DOU, and that was slapped down hard. This isn't a tradition or accepted, and with good reason. Not only are you breaking a promise to all your players, you're also telling them that their time has no value, their opinion is worthless, and that you think their so stupid they won't realize this. Forget the kick in the dick that was Macemaster's post, this is full out assault.

Next, you descend into statistical stupidity. A 50% pro ban vote isn't "a majority wants a ban but its just a little short," It's indistinguishable from random noise. What you actually learned is that despite the thoughts of individual members, your community doesn't think Kyurem-Black is banworthy, because just as many people like it in the tier as don't; this is reflected in the suspect result. We don't choose 60% over 50% for fun, we choose it to weed out this random noise and require an actual consensus that a Pokemon is broken in order to have a ban.

People will complain in the room about any suspect result. Either they are a majority, but didn't care enough or weren't skilled enough to vote, in which case who cares what their opinion is, or they aren't a majority and you shouldn't use them as an excuse to push your agenda.

Anyways, taking the elite of the 1v1 community by making the reqs hard didn't really work out, since that's not really the "elite***" due to people having a lot of time between their hands getting reqs. I'm not saying everyone is bad, but I'm saying not everyone that gets reqs is an elite player. This reduces even more the amount of players that are elites which isn't what we wanted, needed or are looking for.

***Elite; is a player that fully knows and understand the 1v1 metagame. Plays 1v1 not only for the fun but for the competitive aspect and tournaments it brings.

What I learned today: 1v1's tour scene, as tiny as it is, is the only part of the tier that's worth anything to you. You can try to play motte and bailey in discord thanks to live chat, but it's quite clear that in your eyes the entirety of our community that doesn't participate in these events - all the people on ladder, the people with busy schedules, the people who just don't know about 1v1 boards - have nothing of value to say. There's no other reason to add the second qualifier.

Even leaving aside the sheer arbitrariness of the distinction, it's also elitist as hell, and your definition of elite 1v1 players doesn't even include your council. What the hell?

2) A number of voters viewed the suspect tests in a completely flawed angle. There's a lot of voters that either voted because their favorite Pokemon lose to that specific Pokemon, because all of their teams have that Pokemon and were to lazy to re-build, they loved using that Pokemon, were too scared to vote ban or because they thought another Pokemon was more banworthy. Now I'm not saying ALL votes were like that but don't try to prove me wrong that A LOT of the votes were based on that. I even read that in the room in some occasions. Voting by using these as reasons is a flawed concept and should be addressed now before tomorrow. Voting such way does nothing but harm the metagame, doesn't let it move forward and just let it become stale or pushed it backward. There's two points that I want to comment on and show you what went wrong.

a) People were too scared to vote ban. This is mostly during the Kyurem-Black suspect test and in a minor way during the pre-suspect regarding Mega Gyarados. Yes, some people were just scared to vote ban on these Pokemon. Why? Because they thought a lot of threats would resurgence if these Pokemon ought to be banned. This was one big flaw that the voters fell in. They just started to overthinking to put it in simple words; "Sturdy Pokemon would be broken", "Mega Metagross would be insane" and more. We do not care about the future metagame, we do not base our votes on theories for that reason. A theory is a theory for a reason, we don't really know if they would be broken or not and if they would be we can still ban them. People being scared didn't let 1v1 develop into something they held into the fact that "Kyurem-Black is a glue to the metagame and without it would fall apart", but they didn't realise that Kyurem-Black was a poisonous glue (Speaking for the pro-ban side, I have another opinion on why it shouldn't have been banned so I'm not contradicting myself) that held the whole metagame together because it was truly overcentralizing. Also a Pokemon with that much power over the metagame is just not healthy for it to stay and that's where people failed to realized that. Adding that mentality with the fact that the number of voters were low shows us why it only reached 50% and nothing more.

b) They thought "Why would we ban this when something stronger is still allowed". This is where two opinions just collided together and confused the player. This was mostly during the Zygarde-C suspect test so I'll use that as example. Who told you that Kyurem-Black was broken or stronger than Zygarde-C, it was you, your previous opinion. It wasn't proved, it wasn't agreed upon. Users really did mix two of their opinions on two different Pokemon in just one suspect and like that decided that this is Zygarde-C is weaker than Kyurem-Black and voted no ban on Zygarde-C just for that reason and it got 58% which really proves alongside the low number of votes that the concept is flawed from its roots. For future reference you shouldn't compare two Pokemon together, you take each case alone and vote and later on if you think this Pokemon is also broken you post about it, this is how you build a healthy metagame and a healthy discussion.

I don't even know where to start with this, but I'm going to do my best.
First off, you don't actually refute any of these points, and indeed say some of them are right. Why, then, are these holders not allowed to have an opinion?
Second of all, you make points and then give irrelevant support, expecting that having a wall of text after a claim will make people ignore how dumb it is. How int he world does Zygarde-c getting 58% of votes because people had different opinions on it that they did on Kyurem-B even suggest that the suspect process is flawed, much less prove it. How does you hearing someone say that Sturdy would be broken after a Kyurem-B ban mean that that was the logic that the voters used?
Thirdly, you then bypass your last issue in some places, as instead of supporting a claim with itrrelevant details you fail to support it at all. What makes Kyurem-B objectively unhealthy to the point that "Also a Pokemon with that much power over the metagame is just not healthy for it to stay and that's where people failed to realized that." but you, deg, still feel it isn't broken?

There's more reasons as of why we were forced to take this decision and I guess Glyx and Yung Dramps already put out this point but I'll say again to justify our reason. And unlike Quantum Tesseract, GL Volkner, and DurzaOffTopic portrayed it we took the community as whole majority, as a whole entity, we did listen to the community but the community didn't listen to us. This is where it gets interesting and shows where the community went wrong and not only the council.

Nice shade, I guess? This is pretty clearly false. If you had listened to the community, we wouldn't be here, having a conversation about you disregarding community suspects. Also, you're definitely batting a 100 here. What in the world made you think that "The community is wrong" was the hill you just had to die on? You aren't even making your disdain subtle, its just flat out insult after insult with at best a tacked on "But we still listen to you" at the end.

a) During previous suspect tests; see Kyurem-Black, Jirachi and Zygarde-Complete I went around the room, posted in the OP, and told people in PMs to please post on the thread and we got nothing. We got LITTLE to no posts in a time where the whole focus should be put IN the thread so you can show your opinion and did the community do that, no. The community didn't bother posting their opinion, didn't bother arguing on the thread and only got reqs and voted what they think is right. Now tell me, how can you reach a compromise, a solution and even give other players that have no idea what to vote, how can you make people that were on the other side of the line to come to your side? Simple, you can't. During a suspect tests there's two elements that should work together to get the results;

1) Community posting about their opinion, what they think is correct, why they think that Pokemon is broken, why they think it isn't so a discussion can be started, so people can start arguments, talk, whatever just to make the point clear to outsiders and to other community. But instead of doing so, we either got stupid one liners or other discussions, to the point where they even started to discuss Zekrom and Giratina-O in the middle of the Zygarde-C suspect, how do you expect a good decision to be made in the end if that happened, what community on Smogon does this? None. I personally had to announce on the 1v1 discord that all discussions about Zekrom and co should be stopped and they should post about Zygarde-C and to my surprise the discussion of Zekrom got more posts than the suspect itself in the end. Like yea, I cannot understand how a community as a whole can work together to eliminate a threat from the metagame if they work like this, you just can't. This was one of the biggest mistake that 1v1 fell in. This is where the community failed to show us that they care, this is where they were wrong and I see no one bringing this up here. The council did listen to the couple of posts that were on the thread but how can they know the rest? Do they just guess or beg everyone in PMs to tell them their opinion, this is just ridiculous.

2) Actually get the requirements and vote.

b) I, personally as a 1/5th of the council posted on different occasions that we're voting on a slate. I posted it on the thread here and also initiated discussion in that post. I also initiated discussionhere about z-moves so the council know what to do, and we listened, we didn't rashly quick ban or anything else. So all these stupid posts saying that the council doesn't or will not listen to the community are nothing but lies. I also personally posted in the 1v1 room about the council voting;

taken from 18th of February 2018

taken from 16th of February 2018

These are only two occasions where I posted in the room as a declare other than just hinting it while discussing in the room and in PMs. This is what everyone failed to say here that the council does care and I warned you guys and this wasn't a complete surprise nor us deleting the community from general opinion.

A) You didn't require them to post. If posting is goign to be a requirement for supect tests, sure, by all means add that. but don't retroactively make it neccesary and use it as an excuse for your bullshit.
B) You talk about "post your opinion" and "get requirements and voting" being important, but who on your council actually did that? Some of you did post in the trhead, yes, btu not all of you were streling examples of the posts you want, and don't get me started on council voting turnout. For those suspects you had issue on? Jirachi, for instance, would have been banned if council cared enough to vote in the suspect, and then we wouldn't be here, but news flash, you didn't.
C) On your posting of "Initiating discussion": Neither one of the posts you made talk about overturning suspects. Neither the posts nor the roomlogs mention sleep or Jirachi, and in at least one of these occasions you didn't even explain what was on the slate even after being asked. As far as showing that you "Let people know ahead of time," these examples fail at the most basic level and serve better to illuminate the opposite point.

Removing suspect tests for the time being isn't a negative thing but can be a positive aspect covering what we lacked in previous suspects. We lacked discussion, we lacked posts and opinions. This is how we're going to get them. We removed you the bury of getting requirements so you can post freely about what you think is broken or problematic in the metagame. Don't tell me this is going to put people that aren't english speakers in a disadvantage. Even if you use the most broken form of English your point will get across so don't worry and we know the difference between memes and people that really can't make amazing posts. We thank you for understanding us and know that are always working for the good of the metagame and nothing else and will be working on improving our voting system and we will get back to you.

I also heard that this was taken outside the 1v1 community by some users I won't say what it is but just know that we work together as a 1v1 community and do not need an interference or people that are outside of the 1v1 community to understand us wrong since you really just explained it in your own words and made us look bad without putting others in context. Do not do that and never do that again you who posted it and others that planed to since I will be also responding in other ways. Thank you.

Removing suspect tests is a negative thing, actually. Calling your community complete morons before going off to make a circlejerk and ignoring your community is, in fact, the opposite of getting posts and opinions from your community.

Also, for the record, it's not that your posts look bad when taken out of context. It's that your posts look bad in general, because they are bad.

 

[Yung Dramps]

So about that Kyurem-Black ban...

a hero will rise​

Drampa (M) @ Choice Specs
Ability: Sap Sipper
EVs: 216 SpA / 176 SpD / 116 Spe
Modest Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Hyper Beam
- Hyper Voice
- Fire Blast
- Ice Beam

Things this set beats that Meloetta doesn't consistently beat:
-Tapu Koko (216+ SpA Choice Specs Drampa Hyper Beam vs. +1 0 HP / 4 SpD Tapu Koko: 342-403 (121.7 - 143.4%) -- guaranteed OHKO)(Prediction required VS sub)
-Certain Zygarde sets
-Mega Metagross (except if it's super duper Spdef)
-Mega Mawile
-Mega Charizard Y
-Genesect (252 SpA Choice Specs Genesect Ice Beam vs. 0 HP / 176 SpD Drampa: 250-296 (84.1 - 99.6%) -- guaranteed 2HKO)
-Jumpluff and Whimsicott
-Mega Scizor

figured this was worth noting now that its biggest counter is gone and that fairium koko is dead

no personal bias was involved in the making of this post

 

[edudittA]

I'm not trying to be a sycophant here, just trying to read the premise the council is on about this council voting concept.....

Nothing like a nice joke post to liven up a heated discussio-
shit, it's by DEG and it's actually serious.

I think the seriousness of the post is of no consequence here; if, even as a joking post, he's able to clear things up, won't you accept the goings-on?

You post like major amounts of time elapsed, but it was 2 months for jirachi and 4 for Kyurem-B. For comparison, OU and Monotype's retests had most of a year between them; I personally feel these were also a bit closer than ideal, but this should be the minimum standard we adhere to for resuspecting. For council votes? Just flat out don't do it. The only time in recent memory (and possibly ever) that this happened was last generation is DOU, and that was slapped down hard. This isn't a tradition or accepted, and with good reason. Not only are you breaking a promise to all your players, you're also telling them that their time has no value, their opinion is worthless, and that you think their so stupid they won't realize this. Forget the kick in the dick that was Macemaster's post, this is full out assault.

I think you have viewed this from the wrong perspective; would you rather a player base make decisions which does not better the meta better in a competitive sense, or would you want the meta to get better whatever it takes? Here, I think, instead of letting people directly take a decision which may or may not make the tier competitively better, it is better to let a council do the decision-making process, with the community deciding what to go under the hammer and if the decision made by the council looks to be uncompetitive, the community again can step forward to convince the council otherwise.

Next, you descend into statistical stupidity. A 50% pro ban vote isn't "a majority wants a ban but its just a little short," It's indistinguishable from random noise. What you actually learned is that despite the thoughts of individual members, your community doesn't think Kyurem-Black is banworthy, because just as many people like it in the tier as don't; this is reflected in the suspect result. We don't choose 60% over 50% for fun, we choose it to weed out this random noise and require an actual consensus that a Pokemon is broken in order to have a ban.

Prolly, true; I actually agree with this part. But again, this comes back to the previous part of my post. Would you rather people make a decision that might end up on the wrong end of the coin(again here, I mean in a competitive sense) ,or a council who have administrative experience do it?

People will complain in the room about any suspect result. Either they are a majority, but didn't care enough or weren't skilled enough to vote, in which case who cares what their opinion is, or they aren't a majority and you shouldn't use them as an excuse to push your agenda.

Nothing to add here, this is a perfectly valid point, and the only part of your post I don't see flaws.

What I learned today: 1v1's tour scene, as tiny as it is, is the only part of the tier that's worth anything to you. You can try to play motte and bailey in discord thanks to live chat, but it's quite clear that in your eyes the entirety of our community that doesn't participate in these events - all the people on ladder, the people with busy schedules, the people who just don't know about 1v1 boards - have nothing of value to say. There's no other reason to add the second qualifier.

Even leaving aside the sheer arbitrariness of the distinction, it's also elitist as hell, and your definition of elite 1v1 players doesn't even include your council. What the hell?

The council members serve the purpose of not being great players, but being great policy makers. Again, I'm not questioning the credibility of the council, but just saying that while they may not be frequent ladderers, they are still there in the room, on the tournament scene, a major part of all the 1v1 projects going on, and so, they have the best interests of 1v1 in a holistic sense and not the narrow-minded tours-only scene you seem to suggest.

Nice shade, I guess? This is pretty clearly false. If you had listened to the community, we wouldn't be here, having a conversation about you disregarding community suspects. Also, you're definitely batting a 100 here. What in the world made you think that "The community is wrong" was the hill you just had to die on? You aren't even making your disdain subtle, its just flat out insult after insult with at best a tacked on "But we still listen to you" at the end.

The council is not here to force their decisions down the community's proverbial throats; they just want to get input from the community, decide whether we are clear in our stand for/against something, and if they decide that we are not, take a call.

Removing suspect tests is a negative thing, actually. Calling your community complete morons before going off to make a circlejerk and ignoring your community is, in fact, the opposite of getting posts and opinions from your community.

Also, for the record, it's not that your posts look bad when taken out of context. It's that your posts look bad in general, because they are bad.

Removing sustest is actually a bad thing IMO too. I think having suspects, and going for council votes if the decision is within ~2% range of reversal of decision would be a better call, but The Dark Alakazam already suggested that, so....

 

[The Official Glyx]

Nothing like a nice joke post to liven up a heated discussio-
shit, it's by DEG and it's actually serious.

Nothing like an unnecessary jab to make your post even less valid. This is the kind of shit that is just blatantly inflammatory and unnecessary. That's the problem with almost all of these god awful posts, everything you say is so obviously emotional and useless. Friendly reminder that this is a serious metagame and not some soap opera.

You post like major amounts of time elapsed, but it was 2 months for jirachi and 4 for Kyurem-B. For comparison, OU and Monotype's retests had most of a year between them; I personally feel these were also a bit closer than ideal, but this should be the minimum standard we adhere to for resuspecting. For council votes? Just flat out don't do it. The only time in recent memory (and possibly ever) that this happened was last generation is DOU, and that was slapped down hard. This isn't a tradition or accepted, and with good reason. Not only are you breaking a promise to all your players, you're also telling them that their time has no value, their opinion is worthless, and that you think their so stupid they won't realize this. Forget the kick in the dick that was Macemaster's post, this is full out assault.

First of all, since when have we ever needed to adhere to the main tiers and whatever shit they do? Whenever we use anything pertaining to 6v6 to justify any kind of decision/suggestion in 1v1, it's almost always drowned out by "Oh, 1v1 is very obviously different from 6v6, therefore 6v6 decisions don't matter in the context of 1v1", so what makes your defense such a special case that it gets to be the one exception? You feel that that's how it should work? I hate to burst your bubble, but that's not how it works. 1v1 is still an OM, so we are by no means obliged to adhere to the subjective "traditions" that occur in the main tiers. It would be a different case if we were proactively trying to become an official metagame, but the community at large has made it very clear that we are nowhere near ready to even think about becoming official, so right now, let's just focus on stabilizing the metagame in any and all ways we can.

Second, I'm sorry that that's how you chose to interpret the decision? Never did anyone ever say that people's time wasn't worth something. In fact, the new system encourages people to contribute more, or even at all, because I hate to burst your bubble yet again, but simply just playing the metagame isn't actually contributing anything. It at least shows that you're actively playing, but just playing for a long time doesn't automatically validate everything you say; look no further than infamous user Ebon Stray Cat, whose been part of the 1v1 scene on various alts since 2014, and with that said, I must ask: What makes playing a metagame for two weeks until you get a certain rating proof of having valid experience?

Third, everyone got what they wanted, though? People hated Jirachi with a burning passion, and it was only kept from being banned by almost entirely the negative presences that hold the metagame back from making progress towards better health. Zygarde, while it had a majority ban vote, had literally no opposition posted in the thread towards it, besides partys' quality one liner saying Zygod should be banned, sound too good to be true? Look it up yourself, then. Kyurem-Black was the only exception here, since the community was always in a case of being perfectly split between wanting to keep it and wanting to ban it, as shown by the suspect test and many, MANY polls. Naturally, it would only make sense that the leadership act as the tiebreaking votes here since lord knows we couldn't be grownups for once and settle things ourselves, so they did just that, now get over yourselves.

People will complain in the room about any suspect result.

Or any decision, for that matter...

Either they are a majority, but didn't care enough or weren't skilled enough to vote, in which case who cares what their opinion is, or they aren't a majority and you shouldn't use them as an excuse to push your agenda.

Golly gee, this sure does sound familiar... The exact problem is that these are the kind of people who are able to get reqs. Yes, raising reqs would've been the better alternative, but that doesn't justify completely undoing the entire decision. If the defense has any kind of point to make in all this posting, it is THIS.

What I learned today: 1v1's tour scene, as tiny as it is, is the only part of the tier that's worth anything to you. You can try to play motte and bailey in discord thanks to live chat, but it's quite clear that in your eyes the entirety of our community that doesn't participate in these events - all the people on ladder, the people with busy schedules, the people who just don't know about 1v1 boards - have nothing of value to say. There's no other reason to add the second qualifier.

Huh, I didn't realize you changed your name to DEG... oh wait, you didn't. Don't speak for him then, because we can do the exact same with how much of a baby you've been, throwing such a tantrum over things not going your way. You're free to interpret what he means by his words, but please, keep it respectful, lest you receive the exact kind of malice that you yourself have been spewing out.

First off, you don't actually refute any of these points, and indeed say some of them are right. Why, then, are these holders not allowed to have an opinion?

Oh, I dunno... perhaps for the exact reasons we've been saying over and over?

Legitimate Reasons

• X mon beats all my teams! Better ban it!
• X mon loses to all my teams! Better not ban it!
• That partys over guy seems pretty confident about Jirachi not being broken... I guess I'll agree with him!
• Huh... Zekrom really doesn't seem to be much better than Kyurem-Black... Better unban it!
• We randomly picked: ban X

It may be your opinion that these are legitimate reasons people could use for voting on suspect tests, but the leadership has made it pretty damn clear that they believe otherwise, and the main difference between you and them is that they are the leaders, so get over yourself.

Second of all, you make points and then give irrelevant support, expecting that having a wall of text after a claim will make people ignore how dumb it is. How int he world does Zygarde-c getting 58% of votes because people had different opinions on it that they did on Kyurem-B even suggest that the suspect process is flawed, much less prove it.

He never suggests that the process itself is flawed, only that the users and their reasoning for voting what they did are. This, again, goes back to the notion of having increased reqs for suspect tests, a topic that is still plenty open for discussion, and would be much more appreciated than this angry pile of vomit you call a post.

How does you hearing someone say that Sturdy would be broken after a Kyurem-B ban mean that that was the logic that the voters used?

This in particular, in addition to other similar statements, ties to DEG suggesting that people were overhypothesizing potential outcomes of suspect tests and using that educated guess as their reasoning, and that basing your reasoning on that is a bad thing. Feel free to debate about this as you will.

Thirdly, you then bypass your last issue in some places, as instead of supporting a claim with itrrelevant details you fail to support it at all. What makes Kyurem-B objectively unhealthy to the point that "Also a Pokemon with that much power over the metagame is just not healthy for it to stay and that's where people failed to realized that." but you, deg, still feel it isn't broken?

Yeah, he never really came back to answer this one, as far as I can tell-

Nice shade, I guess? This is pretty clearly false. If you had listened to the community, we wouldn't be here, having a conversation about you disregarding community suspects. Also, you're definitely batting a 100 here. What in the world made you think that "The community is wrong" was the hill you just had to die on? You aren't even making your disdain subtle, its just flat out insult after insult with at best a tacked on "But we still listen to you" at the end.

M8, if we listened to the hot garbage we call the 1v1 community, we'd have unbanned Deoxys-N, Zekrom, Shaymin-Sky and more- It's very clear that the leadership had to put their foot down and purge the 1v1 community of all the shit contained within it, hence why making quality posts for changes to happen is a requirement now, and if you think the leadership isn't trying hard to do the objective best they can for 1v1, then that's just a problem with you and your trust issues, not them.

A) You didn't require them to post. If posting is goign to be a requirement for supect tests, sure, by all means add that. but don't retroactively make it neccesary and use it as an excuse for your bullshit.

"*Please only talk about Zygarde-C and nothing else. "
"Polite discussion is highly encouraged"
He literally had to make a post in the middle of the Kyurem-Black suspect to tell people to discuss, since literally only one person expressed any kind of sentiment towards wanting to ban/keep Kyurem until that point.
There's a point where people really have to admit that they were just being difficult and going against the leadership, and that point is now.

B) You talk about "post your opinion" and "get requirements and voting" being important, but who on your council actually did that? Some of you did post in the trhead, yes, btu not all of you were streling examples of the posts you want, and don't get me started on council voting turnout. For those suspects you had issue on? Jirachi, for instance, would have been banned if council cared enough to vote in the suspect, and then we wouldn't be here, but news flash, you didn't.

I can't defend this one. I'm sure they had their reasons for not participating, but I'll let them talk for themselves instead of theorizing.

C) On your posting of "Initiating discussion": Neither one of the posts you made talk about overturning suspects. Neither the posts nor the roomlogs mention sleep or Jirachi, and in at least one of these occasions you didn't even explain what was on the slate even after being asked. As far as showing that you "Let people know ahead of time," these examples fail at the most basic level and serve better to illuminate the opposite point.

I can't defend this one either. I've always been annoyed at how DEG just drops these decisions on us without warning, and any kind of warning that he does give is typically vague and unhelpful.

Removing suspect tests is a negative thing, actually. Calling your community complete morons before going off to make a circlejerk and ignoring your community is, in fact, the opposite of getting posts and opinions from your community.

A negative thing to you, a positive thing to the leadership and multiple other members of the community. This move is exactly what we've been needing in order to weed out the commentary of those who would seek to better the metagame as a whole, as opposed to those who would rather see it turn to chaos and would rather sit around complaining about decisions they don't like because it makes them have to do more work.

Also, for the record, it's not that your posts look bad when taken out of context. It's that your posts look bad in general, because they are bad.

I suppose that's something you have in common, then.

The sooner the 1v1 community can stop acting so childish, the sooner we can start being taken seriously.

 

[The Immortal]

As the ending note, I don't want to add anything to what I already said I think its enough for now at least. I just want to say I wouldn't judge one bit the council if they reverse the decision as everybody makes mistakes and this was an obvious one as we can see

Did the suspect process work? Would you say 1v1 was balanced? If your answer is no then it was not a mistake. The truth is zero people would have said 1v1 is balanced but when the top threats were suspect tested, they all ended up as DNB. Simply put, the suspect process was not working for 1v1. It was definitely a tough decision to move to a council based voting system and to hold a revote but it had to be done for the betterment of the 1v1 metagame. I’m not saying your opinion doesn’t matter or you don’t know what’s best, your opinion matters more than ever now. The few people that were voting not to make the metagame better but for their own reasons were able to prevent a ban result. You said people can vote any way they want for whatever reason they want; while this is technically true, how does that improve 1v1?

This tier has the potential to go far and if the council actually begins to communicate, I believe it will.

I’m here and I’ve communicated to the best of my ability what the intentions of the council are. The ball is in the community’s court, so to speak. You can create discussion about what to suspect next to further balance the 1v1 metagame or you can continue dissecting people’s posts. But if it’s the latter, don’t be shocked when the council drops a suspect out of nowhere. Before my words are misinterpreted, I’m saying you guys have the power to point us in the next direction to go. But if you fail to do so then we’ll be forced to choose a direction ourselves.

 

[DEG]

Heyo, once again I apologize if I hurt anyone with my post. There's lot of answers on the thread but I don't want to reply here anymore. All this nonsense attacking and calling out is useless and won't bring nothing. I invite everyone that is annoyed by the discussion to create a groupchat with all other people annoyed and the council so we can all put a hand together and fix the issue. We should act calmly and smartly so we can reach a compromise, this thread won't help us reach anything. The future of 1v1 depends on us, the community, and we should all work together to decide it. From now on this thread will serve only for metagame discussions and no more jabs, please take everything privately to PM. I'm not silencing the people but being a drama thread where everyone is just laughing and reading for fun is stupid and thid won't resolve the problem. Thank you for your feedback and I'm waiting for that private chat so we can fix everything up.

E; if you want ill make the chat just PM me to be a part of it.

 

[Garou]

I feel like just ripping into the council with every person basically saying the same thing is not helping anyone, least of all making the council change their mind about these quick bans, like it might not be my place to say this but even if the arguments have valid points reiterating them over and over just with different phrasing is not furthering the metagame or your arguement collectively.

 

[Knuckstrike]

Let me start off by saying I agree with the council banning Jirachi/Kyurem and don't think it's a terrible idea to have a council step in if there's clearly something wrong with the way suspects are being done. What's conflicting with the community is the way the decisions are being made, and the lack of involvement.

Traditionally 1v1 has been a surprisingly high-skilled metagame. Unlike some metas where any decent player should get reqs with some time investment, 1v1 requires meta knowledge and actively being able to run different teams depending on the state of the ladder. This is fine as a choice, and more of an observation on reqs rather than an opinion on something.

Thing is, 1v1 is an OM and not a balanced metagame with a large council and a large gathering. I think the council should think about what direction they want the meta to go into: a meta that is to be enjoyed by a large following of decent players that doesn't align 100% with the ideas of a competitive metagame by the best players, or a meta that a small group of people is developing with minimal interaction with the community that is more competitive in tournaments for those select few.
From how it's going the council seems to pick the second option, which is fine, but I disagree with the posts from them in the thread about trying to create a sense of community and more discussion, with the community supposedly having to fix the state of the meta.

Smogon metas have always operated under an epistocratic way of voting; it is the job of the council to determine how large the group of knowledgable people is that gets to make the decisions. By removing suspect tests we're now really just playing a custom meta that the council members choose for us, which rightfully upsets the group of sub-top players that liked playing on the community-based ladder they thought they had an effect on. I think this will create less discussion more than anything and will alienate more players. On the other hand, the council system might speed up the creation of a more professional metagame with a higher chance to be played in tournaments.
You've lost me and other players at a higher level because of a group of people having quite a large ego in 1v1 and coming off rather aggressive.

Of course this single decision doesn't immediately create all this and won't cause people to quit 1v1 tomorrow. I just liked to give a viewpoint on what multiple council decisions might cause on the long run. I hope your council discussion also included discussion on who you think are more important: the few tournament players or the larger community. Either way I'm fine with it and will continue to play 1v1 on a non-serious level, not participating in discussions.

 

[aphrion]

A little late to the party, but I just wanted to throw in my 2¢: the decision of the 1v1 council was the right choice for the absolute worst reasons. It is absolutely a huge middle finger to voters because it really does say that the council doesn't care about your voice, and you wasted your time for nothing. Sure, we're our own meta and we do our own thing, but the reason people are pointing out examples of other metas' using their power more moderately is for a good reason - these are big decisions with huge repercussions, and frankly you've broken people's trust really badly with the utter crapfest that was your press release no matter how you apologize about it. This is a snafu on the order of Trump, and you have a long road to public recovery from this decision.

That being said, voters are idiots and the council was right to ignore them. Discussion on the forums had no nuance if they were even on topic, and while I've never been good enough to get reqs the people who did were almost ready to ban nearly every suspected mon. Additionally, now that the council's will has been enacted I'm seeing a very different metagame with much more inventiveness occurring - removing Kyurem-Black and Jirachi (and apparently Tapu Lele at the moment) really promotes diversity in reducing overcentralization and frustrating tactics. (Hopefully we can get a Z-move ban going like this too...) I know not everyone wants to post on the forums, and that an opinion is not required to cast a vote in a suspect test, but given that the community basically refused to take suspect tests seriously and be intelligent about their choices, I'm not terribly surprised that we lost that privilege.

Finally, since it's not a trade secret anymore here's my mixed KyuB set, which hopefully helps demonstrate why KyuB should have gotten that ban in the first place:

KyuB

Kyurem-Black @ Choice Scarf
Ability: Teravolt
EVs: 252 Atk / 252 SpA / 4 Spe
Naughty Nature
- Outrage
- Iron Head
- Ice Beam
- Earth Power

(Why couldn't we have just made Jirachi unable to hold choice scarf though?)

 

[Felucia]

(Why couldn't we have just made Jirachi unable to hold choice scarf though?)

Because we don't like complex bans

 

[Kentari]

Congratulations to Osra for winning February’s monthly championship! TheShadowClaw placed 2nd and Hijasu placed 3rd. Well done!

March’s schedule:

The times are now 1:00 pm and 10:00 pm because of Daylight Savings Time in America.

 

[The Immortal]

Speaking of tournaments, sign-ups for the first ever 1v1 Seasonal are live!

https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/1v1-spring-seasonal-signups.3629584/

 

[Yung Dramps]

Now that the whole council vote hoopla has died down and the meta has stabilized a bit, what do y'all think of the kyub-less meta?

I'm personally having fun. While stuff like dnite and sturdies like golem have certainly gotten a whole lot better, they're still counterable and don't constrain teambuilding. The lack of kyub means that extremely jank, unnecessarily bulky EV spreads are no longer required to stand up to it. This frees up room for Pokemon like Golem and Necrozma, who no longer have to ruin their spreads to take on Kyub efficiently.

I might make a post later on what I consider to be rising stars in the new metagame.

 

[Felucia]

Avalugg @ Fightinium Z
Ability: Sturdy
EVs: 252 HP / 152 Atk / 104 Def
Adamant Nature
- Avalanche
- Superpower
- Curse
- Mirror Coat

KyuB is gone, dnite gets in my way so it's party time!
item is just a filler tbh, makes gyarados a guaranteed victory with Curse -> Curse -> Avalanche -> Zmove which is cool. But I'm sure it wins either way

 

[Ginger Princess]

hi. I'll make this short and sweet

So, I want to discuss how the official tournaments in the 1v1 room play out. Currently, we have the format as Single Elimination for every variation of 1v1 official scheduled. This type of format would be perfectly acceptable in a normal 6v6 format, but in 1v1, where predicting which Pokemon to send in is essentially everything, bad luck can decide the outcome of a match in one turn, people can accidentally bring teams with one Pokemon that completely counters your entire team, and where, by the time you determine the mindset/skill level of your opponent, it's already too late, I believe that a Double Elimination Format would be much more appropriate to implement in the foreseeable future.

With Double Elimination, people get to understand the thought processes of a specific players, they get a second chance if eliminated due to uncontrollable hax, and they have the chance to switch around teams if they find out someone is using a mon that completely counters their team. This will not give the initial losers the advantage, however: in a match where two opponents fight each other for a second time, the winner will naturally be able to prepare their own team based on the events of the first match. 1v1 is naturally too chaotic and all-or-nothing to have a single battle decide whether or not you have a chance to carry on to finals.

Changing to Double Elimination could weaken the power of lure teams, or teams that are designed to give off the impression that they are counterable by Pokemon "x", when in actuality the team has one or more Pokemon designed specifically to beat Pokemon "x". In single elimination, these teams are extremely effective, as a player cannot really on prior experiences to know what surprises a team carries. However, for better or for worse, I do not foresee Double Elimination to cripple players who relied on tricky lure teams to secure tournament wins; just switch teams if you fight someone for the second time. Ez.

In any case, I believe changing our official tournaments from Single Elimination format to Double Elimination format offers no hindrances to any party, except the particularly lucky and cteamers, and in general has no other downside, except perhaps the extra time commitment. I hope we can be reasonable and make the shift as soon as possible; the only reason I could see for keeping Single Format officials is because of "tradition", which is a terrible excuse to keep anything around.

 

[The Official Glyx]

hi. I'll make this short and sweet

So, I want to discuss how the official tournaments in the 1v1 room play out. Currently, we have the format as Single Elimination for every variation of 1v1 official scheduled. This type of format would be perfectly acceptable in a normal 6v6 format, but in 1v1, where predicting which Pokemon to send in is essentially everything, bad luck can decide the outcome of a match in one turn, people can accidentally bring teams with one Pokemon that completely counters your entire team, and where, by the time you determine the mindset/skill level of your opponent, it's already too late, I believe that a Double Elimination Format would be much more appropriate to implement in the foreseeable future.

With Double Elimination, people get to understand the thought processes of a specific players, they get a second chance if eliminated due to uncontrollable hax, and they have the chance to switch around teams if they find out someone is using a mon that completely counters their team. This will not give the initial losers the advantage, however: in a match where two opponents fight each other for a second time, the winner will naturally be able to prepare their own team based on the events of the first match. 1v1 is naturally too chaotic and all-or-nothing to have a single battle decide whether or not you have a chance to carry on to finals.

Changing to Double Elimination could weaken the power of lure teams, or teams that are designed to give off the impression that they are counterable by Pokemon "x", when in actuality the team has one or more Pokemon designed specifically to beat Pokemon "x". In single elimination, these teams are extremely effective, as a player cannot really on prior experiences to know what surprises a team carries. However, for better or for worse, I do not foresee Double Elimination to cripple players who relied on tricky lure teams to secure tournament wins; just switch teams if you fight someone for the second time. Ez.

In any case, I believe changing our official tournaments from Single Elimination format to Double Elimination format offers no hindrances to any party, except the particularly lucky and cteamers, and in general has no other downside, except perhaps the extra time commitment. I hope we can be reasonable and make the shift as soon as possible; the only reason I could see for keeping Single Format officials is because of "tradition", which is a terrible excuse to keep anything around.

Agree

One of the strongest cases we've been trying to make as a metagame is that we can mitigate the RNG-intensive nature of the metagame by having a greater number of matches. It's the same reason 1v1 was always Double Elimination when being a weekly Official Tournament in the Other Metagames room.

The main differentiating factor as I see it, however, is choosing between whether we want to cater to skill, or cater to everyone, in regards to the scheduled Official Tournaments we have, to which I would suppose is up to the council/leadership to decide.

 

[The Official Glyx]

Putting this in a post, rather than editing it into the previous one because I think it's important enough-

Regarding making Official Tournaments into double elimination, or anything other than single elimination, we'd have to do one of these options:

• Get Teremiare or anyone else who can edit Scrappie to make it so that the bot can correctly process double elimination tournaments

OR​

• Change to a new system where everything is done verbally and we instead count tour wins, rather than using a leaderboard (all of which can be done via bot)

Do these sound like better ideas than the system we have currently? Is there another way of doing things that I hadn't thought of? Any thoughts, alternative ideas, or other kinds of contributions to the idea would be much appreciated.

 

[RunWithTheScizors]

Hi everyone, this is a quick post about something recently utilized in the meta.

Z-Detect

Z detect allows the user to protect itself and to add in, 1 evasion boost. Evasion moves were banned several months ago and this could get problematic, since it can cause very easy PP stalling. In particular, this one gimmick turns Deoxys-S into a RNG meme like Jirachi but is more passive.

The set

Deoxys-Speed @ Fightinium Z
Ability: Pressure
EVs: 248 HP / 8 SpD / 252 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Detect
- Substitute
- Recover
- Night Shade

Deoxys-S in this case is at 504 speed, outspeeding most choice scarf users and even jolly Charizard after a dragon dance. Combine it with multiple detects, substitute, and Pressure, and this can beat most choice mons in around 8-12 turns. Night Shade does decent damage and bypasses Deoxys' need to run attacking EVs.

I brought this up because evasion moves were banned back in 2017 and the fact that this could get out of hand. It's still luck, don't forget, but it's absolutely uncompetitive and it should be considered for a possible quick ban.

 

[aphrion]

Putting this in a post, rather than editing it into the previous one because I think it's important enough-

Regarding making Official Tournaments into double elimination, or anything other than single elimination, we'd have to do one of these options:

• Get Teremiare or anyone else who can edit Scrappie to make it so that the bot can correctly process double elimination tournaments

OR​

• Change to a new system where everything is done verbally and we instead count tour wins, rather than using a leaderboard (all of which can be done via bot)

Do these sound like better ideas than the system we have currently? Is there another way of doing things that I hadn't thought of? Any thoughts, alternative ideas, or other kinds of contributions to the idea would be much appreciated.

I would love to see Round Robin as the standard format for 1v1 tourneys. I think that it gives a much more fair impression of skill in any given tournament than even double elimination, let alone dingle* elimination and is much more fun for all tournament players, win or lose. It also helps dilute the threat of lure teams and the like, just as double elimination does. I also think that it'll help bring new players in - instead of always wondering if each battle is your last in the tourney and complaining about hax, you get to blitz battles like crazy and just have fun. Obviously, time is a factor that needs to be considered, but I think longer tourneys are absolutely worth it if they're more fun.

*It's supposed to be "single", but when I saw the typo it was too funny to fix.

 

[Mubs]

I Know That the suspecting and keeping the Tier in place is a Generalized topic that is Almost always stated here but let us remind ourselves that that isn't the complete purpose of the 1v1 Metagame as a whole. Its here for fun and I don't just speak for myself that 1v1 is one of those metagames that you just want to go on, play some music and Play some games. I know that the suspects, quick bans, and complex bans are huge, so I will explain my thoughts briefly


Kyu-B-One Of my favorite mons very versatile and fills a lot of roles in Team building will be sad to see it go.

Jirachi: 4 words; Luck, Slightly Uncompetitive, Annoying

Have Fun Batting!


Special thanks to Elo Bandit (Love your Vids), The Dark Alakazam, UnleashOurPassion, and DEG For encouraging me to play this metagame, helping me with team building, and making me love it. :)

 

[Joker 1v1]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was planning on doing all Hidden Powers, might do the rest, just depends on how well this is perceived, I guess.
(This only works if Greninja is LvL 99, since LvL 100 Greninja is too strong)

Hidden Power Fighting Greninja

Greninja @ Assault Vest
Ability: Protean
Level: 99
EVs: 240 HP / 16 SpA / 40 SpD / 212 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Hidden Power [Fighting]

Lives a mirror coat/Lives a Specs Zap Cannon 252 modest/Lives z-zap cannon 252 modest/Out speeds even after Electroweb

16 SpA Greninja Hidden Power Fighting vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Magnezone: 144-170 (51.2 - 60.4%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252+ SpA Magnezone Gigavolt Havoc (190 BP) vs. 240 HP / 40 SpD Assault Vest Greninja: 288-340 (84.4 - 99.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO​

 

[Yhwach]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was planning on doing all Hidden Powers, might do the rest, just depends on how well this is perceived, I guess.
(This only works if Greninja is LvL 99, since LvL 100 Greninja is too strong)

Hidden Power Fighting Greninja

Greninja @ Assault Vest
Ability: Protean
Level: 99
EVs: 240 HP / 16 SpA / 40 SpD / 212 Spe
Timid Nature
IVs: 0 Atk
- Hidden Power [Fighting]

Lives a mirror coat/Lives a Specs Zap Cannon 252 modest/Lives z-zap cannon 252 modest/Out speeds even after Electroweb

16 SpA Greninja Hidden Power Fighting vs. 0 HP / 4 SpD Magnezone: 144-170 (51.2 - 60.4%) -- guaranteed 2HKO
252+ SpA Magnezone Gigavolt Havoc (190 BP) vs. 240 HP / 40 SpD Assault Vest Greninja: 288-340 (84.4 - 99.7%) -- guaranteed 2HKO​

I feel like the cost of running assault vest on greninja and giving up a moveslot is not worth it to lure in magnezone. Also couldn't you just run HP ground for much better affect, since you don't have to give up an item slot for a worse item (assault vest being worse than specs on gren) and doesn't leave you susceptible to a crit since you're immune. Idk just seems like a waste, and no special attack EVs either it's a waste of a Pokemon when it's like that.