Tournament NUPL XI Format Discussion

[Ren-chon]

Hi, everybody! hi doctor nick

It's time for the yearly NUPL format discussion thread, where we can all bash our least favorite NU tiers with the excuse of making NUPL better (in all seriousness, please don't do that). This year, you guys opinions will be specially important for us because we got quite a couple "issues" to handle, both old and new::

• A whole new gen, making it even harder to sort out tiers in our traditional 8 slots format;
• The rise in popularity of RBY NU and, to an extent, GSC NU, which have been proving to be solid contenders for a slot in this tournament thanks to the awesome efforts of their respective communities; and
• The day old debate of bringing back Bo3 which, paired with issue number 1, would put an even bigger strain in our format.

With all that said, as per usual, I will present the locked in* tiers and bring up the discussion topics proper after and what we may have planned for this years edition.

SV NU
SV NU
SS NU
SM NU
ORAS NU
BW NU
DPP NU
ADV NU

With a new tier being added by default in SV and both "new" and returning ones in GSC, RBY and Bo3 wanting a spot, 8 tiers might just not cut it anymore. And that's not even mentioning the possibility of adding more SV NU slots. With that in mind, it's crucial that we give emphasis on debating if we will stick to the traditional 8 tiers format or expand to a 10 tiers one, with a possibility of adding 2 new tiers if we go with the latter.

If we decide to move on with 8 spots, the above locked in tiers would by default be the official format for this tournament*. If we go with 10, the ones the moderation team have in mind currently are as follow:

• GSC NU
• RBY NU
• Best of 3 (SV, SS, SM)
• More SV slots

We're also open to suggestions on what tiers could potentially make the cut as well, such as BDSP NU. However, we personally believe these options have the best balance between an active community, people willing to play it without sacrificing the pool of other tiers, and have been present in other tournaments like circuit or past NUPLs/NUSDs making them a safer bet. Also, in regards to RBY NU, keep in note that RBY NU can be added to NUPL independent of GSC NU inclusion, with the justification that neither were part of our traditional tournament circuit until last year and have developed independently by two vastly different communities. Both tiers can be treated as separate ones, and the inclusion or exclusion of either won't affect the other whatsoever.

I'm quite sure this thread has the potential to be quite more heated than past ones, specially given the amount of topics we have at hand to debate and make a stand on; however, let's keep things civil here. Saying you dislike a certain tier is fine, but trying to openly mock it and people who support it will result in your post being deleted and possibly a warn.

*

We won't necessarily prohibit discussion on these tiers, specially given the possibility of a 8 slots NUPL which would mean the removal of one of them if the community supports another in lieu of it. However, those tiers have been a main stay of our tournament scene for years now (that is, current gen NU and old gens from ADV up) and any changes to them would require an OVERWHELMING SUPPORT from the community and strong arguments to justify doing so. Keep in mind this only applies to an 8 tiers format due to issues mentioned in this post.

 

[BeeOrSomething]

Personally, I'm all for the inclusion of RBY and GSC NU. I'm a little biased considering I main the latter, but regardless, I think there's basically no reason to NOT include them. As said already, RBY and GSC NU have been steadily rising in popularity, as seen in ALTPL, NUSD, and (for gsc nu) the upcoming GSC Slam, and more, with people being very supportive of their inclusion. RBY NU has never been in NUPL, and GSC NU hasn't been in NUPL since the Raichu metagame (which was agreed upon to be completely insufferable by literally everyone). GSC NU has gone through a LOT of change since the first NUPL, primarily the banning of Raichu and the waters but also it's own course of trends through the 3+ years since. As for both, why not give them a shot? There's basically no reason to not include them asides from managers having to find 2 more people to pick (which I don't think is that much of a hassle, no?) Each week still has an even number of games, so it won't change very much. Meanwhile, it will open up the tour to an entire two additional communities of people, encouraging more discovery of these great metagames and general interaction with the NU community, which in my opinion is a good thing. Of course, there's also always the option to go with 12 slots, which I fully support. However, in regards to 10 slots, SV NU also already gets PLENTY of representation considering it's current gen and thus there are constant tournaments for it including SCL, so personally I think it's fine to cut out a slot to include both GSC and RBY. But if it did come down to only choosing 1 of GSC/RBY and having 3 SV, I would choose GSC NU to be included. Obviously I am a bit biased since I don't play SV NU at all and as I already said I main GSC NU, but these are my genuine thoughts. Also 8 slots is completely and utterly unviable.

TL;DR let RBY and GSC NU in NUPL

 

[MrSoup]

One of the biggest arguments against opening more spots in PLs is a decrease in game quality from having to spread out more players across the tiers. In this case, however, thats not likely be the situation if we were to expand to ten slots with GSC and RBY. Both of these metas have very dedicated playerbases that do not play (for the most part) the other tiers. Moreover, both of these tiers have exploded in popularity and are perhaps the most stable low tier of their respective gens in terms of both players and tiering. Both have new VRs and sample teams pushed within the last month or so (GSC samples coming soon), and are already included in several tours throughout the year.

Expand to ten and add GSC and RBY, they’re great metas! If someone brings up the quality argument I WILL list full rosters for each gen that wouldn’t overlap other tiers.

 

[Denial]

Im all for inclusion but having only 2 SV Slots sounds terrible ngl. Imo gsc and another sv is the right move.

 

[Oathkeeper]

As a certain returning manager, I say the format should come down to:

3 SV / SS / SM / ORAS / BW / DPP

or

2 SV / SS / SM / ORAS / BW / DPP / ADV

Not going to lie, I do love GSC NU and would like it to be in this tour, but as Ren-chon has said, it's a new gen and the current gen could use some more development. This is why I left out a GSC slot and the Bo3 slot. While the Bo3 slot would be entertaining for games to watch and/or play, I feel like it's more of a luxury than a requirement. With this in mind, the first format seems good, but I feel the second format is the right mix of old gens + SV development. I would be happy either way, which is why I can't 100% decide on them. Hence why I say it should come to down to one of these formats.

 

[Estarossa]

agree completely with luna, as much as i would like to see a world for inclusion for both rby and gsc, this is the first tour of the new generation and its pretty unviable to actually be running less than 3 current gen slots in it, having an appropriate number of slots is more important than ever in the early parts of a gen for metagame development really.

on the 10 vs 8 front gsc and rby shouldnt have too much overlap with other slots in general so would definitely say 10 slots and just do one of gsc / rby with triple sv, (personal preference to gsc ofc but to be fair to rby people they should definitely be considered too)

 

[Finnick Odair]

the format i'd argue for is sv / sv / ss / sm / oras / bw / dpp / adv / gsc / bo3

bo3 still gives you a third sv game 100% and bo3 generally is the most competitive and hype slot of the tour. this is the best 10 slot format imo, it still emphasizes current gen with 3 guaranteed sv games per matchup while also keeping gsc in the tour

as for 8 slots, i agree with oath you'd have to axe adv and replace it with either another sv slot or bo3 as only 2 sv games per matchup is memey especially since its the first nu team tour of the generation

 

[Stories]

RBY has a super active and motivated playerbase and I would love to see it included this time around, which may come as a shock to most people given my history with teaming with RBY players.. I haven't seen much discussion about axing DPP, despite it having a microscopic playerbase in which many of the best players simply do not enjoy the format anymore, DPP should be axed before ADV. GSC is still very young, has a small playerbase and very little development or tiering action done to it. bo3 format feels very uninclusive to me and mandates so much more prep, I'm not a fan of it at all but I understand why some people are. Current gen has to be 3 slots I don't think that's debatable, so ideally we would have

2x SV
1 BO3
1 SS
1 SM
1 ORAS
1 BW
1 ADV
1 RBY
and 1 filler slot for DPP or GSC, making 10 slots.

edit: I like Ryan's suggestion of having 2 SV slots and 1 bo3 slot, which still makes for 3 current gen while opening up another slot and having bo3

 

[Sabelette]

RBY NU is a must include, holding a few cancer players against the tier sucks and as long as we aren’t splitting the gens RBY deserves an include. It’s a competitive tier with clear differentiation between how good players and bad players play, the skill expression is higher than ever after the Whirl ban, we are actively improving the tier constantly, and we have a stable and active community plus lots of new people getting into it with every tour. At this point it’s definitely one of the most active and enjoyable NU tiers, and all the players who caused managers headaches two years ago don’t even play the tier anymore. I see a lot of non RBY players say the tier is all RNG and yet none of these people show up when I tell them to 1v1 me and prove it, and every competent RBY NU player agrees the tier is in a pretty good place right now. ALTPL proved this, as repeatedly top RBY players made comebacks even given overwhelmingly terrible RNG through nothing more than excellent play

GSC NU is also a good time and deserves the slot, I only played it in one teamtour but it’s thoroughly enjoyable and has motivated players + a lot of the RBYers are getting into it too. Cutting RBY and GSC just for being old and cause later gen players don’t like them sucks especially when there’s other NU tiers with very little activity that people don’t even enjoy just sitting stagnant. Include everything IMO, but especially do not cut RBY or GSC. They have their own player bases so I have no clue how they would worsen the tournament, it’s not like they’re taking starters away from other tiers or vice versa.

SV should have 3 slots so honestly add every gen, do 3 SV slots, then do a BO3 or something. You’ll figure it out, my main point is that cutting RBY or GSC sucks.

 

[zS]

completely liking and supporting sensei's format for 10 slots, and while this might be difficult to achieve depending on signups, I think having 2x SV + 1 bo3 is the way to go either way. that way you get the most entertaining and competitive format in bo3 and 3 guaranteed SV games

 

[juoean]

idk much about gens outside of rby gsc lgpe but some thoughts on this

~ focusing on the number of slots in the abstract seems very arbitrary, outside of preferring it to be an even number. if the issue is about manager capacity, then couldnt you just increase the number of managers per team which would overall decrease their workload if eg theres 4 managers to make sure 12 games get played instead of 3 managers to make sure 10 get played. if the issue is about having enough players per team, that isnt really dependent on the total number of slots, it is dependent on the number of potential players for each gen, and where there might be overlap across gens. rby and gsc have afaik close to zero overlap with new gen playerbases. i dont know anything abt adv dpp etc playerbases but there cant be a presumption that cutting a gen would automatically make it easier for teams to fill out. and obviously, in terms of a draft if theres 2 more slots then u can increase the minimum number of players required to draft per team etc to factor that in.
if you are going to make a claim that cutting a gen is somehow necessary or helpful for the administration of a tournament, i think this needs actual evidence. or, it could be evaluated after signups, when the evidence is very clear as to whether every gen has sufficient signups for the slot(s) allocated to it and how playerbases do or dont overlap across gens.

~ i dont like the tradition arguments at all, obviously a gen that say did not have an nu two years ago, was not in nusd two years ago lol. or "traditionally having x number of slots" like as if the number of slots isnt a function of the number of gens that there are? would there be 8 slots if there was only one generation, obviously not lol. the default should be an increase of one slot every time a new gen comes out, except then theres the odd even thing but there should be an increase of two slots for every two gens that come out and then figure out what to alternate in terms of the odd evens [or could just accept having an odd number of slots, i dont think its really a big issue personally but i think a lot of people think even is far better so im assuming thats not really on the table for now].

if people want 3x of the new gen and a best of three slot, then plus 8 slots for the old gens = twelve slots seems like itd be the clear thing to do. or if people didnt want the bo3 or something, then youd have to either figure out a different twelfth slot, or eliminate one of the eight old gens, but certainly the former should be preferable?

also if people like rediscussing it every year thats fine but i feel like also just having the default be something like, 3x new gen, 1x for each old gen, and then say a bo3 slot whenever the current gen is an odd number to get it to a total even number of slots (since ppl seem to be saying that a bo3 slot is like a cool but optional thing to add, idk im j going off of that.) and then as far as capacity of managers go figure that out from there, if say u need more managers or split in half (i dont rly see what splitting in half changes tbh, u still need the playerbases and all the games still have to be played its just like on two sets of forum threads, team-discords etc instead of one lol, but if ppl preferred splitting thats fine too).

 

[Luck O' the Irish]

1 year ago, today:

 

[Lily]

SV should be the focus, anything lower than 3 SV should not be entertained. IMO these are the only viable formats:

SV
SV
SV
SV / Bo3 if you really want but Bo3 is pretty awful to deal with
SS
SM
ORAS
BW
DPP
ADV
GSC
RBY

The Inclusion Format™. Most of the arguments against this don't hold up. "It'll lead to lower quality games" - no it won't, your GSC NU player was not going to be playing anything else anyway. "12 slots is too much" - completely meaningless statement on its own, needs to be backed up with something. The gens are being very actively played, respectfully a lot more than BW, DPP and ADV, it's fine to give them a shot. I don't intend to play either so I don't care that much but I'd like to hear what the reasoning is for denying them since it hasn't really been shown here at all.

---

If, for some reason, stubbornness should get in the way and 12 slots is completely off the table...

SV
SV
SV
SS
SM
ORAS
BW
DPP
ADV
GSC

Cutting RBY sucks but this is the cleanest format if you're doing 10 slots. 3 SV honestly isn't great either since as others above me mentioned, SV NU really could use some development, especially with Grand Slam on the horizon, so I'm not in favour of this option much, but it exists.

8 slots should be entirely off the table it's absolutely awful; 2 SV is just horrific. If you're going to do 8 slots you'd have to cut ADV and that seems even worse. So imo just go with the first option here and see how 12 slots goes ty

 

[Nat]

very quick thoughts:

-3 sv should be the priority. im a little reluctant to see 2sv+bo3. nonetheless having 3 slots that are at least playing sv shouldn't be debated, idk.

-would prefer to see 10 slots over 12/8. it's the sweetspot for filling up a roster without feeling silly. to some i'll sound like an elitist goober but i don't rlly think 96 starting slots in nupl is a good idea for a variety of reasons, mostly for adequate playing ability.

-no large opinion against rby/gsc inclusion. i think sv bo1 slots should again be undeniably prioritized but if there's enough push to make them work along side this, very cool.

 

[Rabia]

cut dpp before adv ever gets considered; it's ass and the playerbase bar one brazillian with a dream agrees. yea it looks weird to include gen3 but not gen4, but from a playability perspective it makes more sense than axing adv but keeping a gen that hardly anyone wants to play

 

[Pokeslice]

Anything without 3 SV slots shouldn’t be realistically considered for the first tour of the year. After that, I have no preferences, unless SS becomes a Plume suspect slot :)

(please rabia I need it)

 

[vivalospride]

cut dpp before adv ever gets considered; it's ass and the playerbase bar one brazillian with a dream agrees. yea it looks weird to include gen3 but not gen4, but from a playability perspective it makes more sense than axing adv but keeping a gen that hardly anyone wants to play

jail

 

[shiloh]

SV NU
SV NU
SV NU
SS NU
SM NU
ORAS NU
BW NU
DPP NU
ADV NU
Bo3 (SV SS SM)

• 10s the ideal number of slots and tiers to prep for imo. idt there needs to be a ton of evidence as to why, but 10 has just worked well and is an easy number to manage, especially in a tour like this.
• Keep DPP in the tour, its been in NUPL since the start and skipping it now when the hate for the tier is pretty recent (i hadnt heard of anyone truly hating the tier / thinking there are issues with it before a few months ago). I personally like the tier, though I havent seriously played it in a couple NUPLs. If there are issues w/ the tier we can put out a survey after the tour / make a pr thread & maybe run a dpp suspect slot in nu snake to see how a metagame would look w/ some changes.
• Bo3 slot can be GSC or RBY, I just have always been a big fan of Bo3 in NUPL and think it adds a lot to the competitiveness of the tour since you usually see the best games of the week there.
• 3 SV is fine even if there are questions abt playerbase rn, tour players easily fill that out + its a great way to get new ppl involved at the start of the gen to build up a playerbase. Also great for meta development, as slam will be happening as well soon and potentially home dropping as well.

 

[nicole7735]

Just want to add that RBY NU has found its feet since the Poliwihirl ban as evidenced by a successful ALTPL. It has a very active and expanding playerbase, and opinion of the tier is high. As Sabelette mentioned, there is a lot of room for skill expression and the better players consistently won in ALTPL. We've also just conducted a VR here. Now is a great time to add RBY to NUPL, hope you can sort it out with 12 slots as Lily suggested.

 

[Rabia]

NU moderation team is deciding to go with the following format:

SV NU
SV NU
SV NU
SS NU
SM NU
ORAS NU
BW NU
DPP NU
ADV NU
Bo3 (SV SS SM)

We deliberated a ton on whether to expand NUPL to 12 slots but ultimately decided against it for now. This is not us saying "we don't care to involve GSC and RBY in our tours going forward", quite the opposite actually. We plan on accommodating them in later team tours, but we decided it'd be best to get the most SV representation possible so that the new generation can get the exposure it warrants.

Manager signups will be up soonTM, as will the other threads. Thank you for your patience, everyone.