Jump to content

December 2021-Movement Discussion Thread


Munya

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Munya said:

If it were a new season there would be some changes though if anyone is interested in that info I can post it.

Yes please, that would be great.

 

And I may not be up-to-date with this, but has the Tier Council made a vote on P-Z?

(I remember there was a discussion thread but haven't kept track of it)

Edited by Imperial
Link to comment

Don't think anybodies talked too much about it and i haven't pressed them very hard on it yet, stil have some thanksgiving stuff to do today. I did leave a message asking what they are thinking about it before I head out though.   The problem with doing anything with it this month though is that we are heading into the last month of a season which could leave us with some pretty wild movements in January if we went with a ban on anything right now, I don't even know if we can ban this quick after another I would have to check whatever I wrote in the rules.

 

What would have happened in a new season, if I didn't miss anything:  These are not actual changes, just what would have been.

Spoiler

Up to OU:

Torkoal and Aerodactyl

 

Down to UU:

Heracross

 

Up to UU:

Blaziken, Typhlosion, Toxicroak

 

Down to NU:

Electrode, Gligar,Rhyperior


Aerodactyl also made the cutoff for NU but because it would have been above OUs cutoff it would have instead moved to OU


 

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Munya said:

Don't think anybodies talked too much about it and i haven't pressed them very hard on it yet, stil have some thanksgiving stuff to do today. I did leave a message asking what they are thinking about it before I head out though.   The problem with doing anything with it this month though is that we are heading into the last month of a season which could leave us with some pretty wild movements in January if we went with a ban on anything right now, I don't even know if we can ban this quick after another I would have to check whatever I wrote in the rules.

 

What would have happened in a new season, if I didn't miss anything:  These are not actual changes, just what would have been.

  Hide contents

Up to OU:

Torkoal and Aerodactyl

 

Down to UU:

Heracross

 

Up to UU:

Blaziken, Typhlosion, Toxicroak

 

Down to NU:

Electrode, Gligar,Rhyperior


Aerodactyl also made the cutoff for NU but because it would have been above OUs cutoff it would have instead moved to OU

 

I think these would be good changes:

  • I believe the NU meta will shake up a fair amount if Blaziken moves up, with usage from Slowbro definitely decreasing
  • Gligar would be an interesting one as a very bulky physical wall
  • Rhyperior - This should definitely be quick banned, it's been proven to be too strong in the tier and the meta hasn't significantly changed since it was last in NU
Edited by Imperial
Link to comment
On 11/27/2021 at 12:01 PM, Munya said:

Rhyperior

This would still be in the BL from NU so wouldn't be considered for going down I hope.

At least it would be brainless to go against the whole community and drop it when plenty of valid arguments were made against it in the past for NU

Hyped for next season tier changes tho ? 

Edited by TohnR
Link to comment

I agree with the comments which were mentioned here - would it be possible to change how Pokemon move up and down the tiers?

As the above mentioned, the introduction of Randoms has made matchmaking for UU and NU incredibly hard to play unless you're in certain timezones - it's far more easy to spam random Pokemon and I'm sure people may use this to their advantage to get rid of particular mon from NU (e.g. Blaziken) which aren't viable in UU (mixed is fine to an extent, but not the physical one for sure).

 

I agree with considering Tournament usages, as a lot more of the competitive playerbase have been entering those lately, compared to waiting in the matchmaking queue in the hope of a game.

 

I assume that the usage % isn't able to be changed, but options would be nice to consider going forwards.

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, Imperial said:


As the above mentioned, the introduction of Randoms has made matchmaking for UU and NU incredibly hard to play unless you're in certain timezones - it's far more easy to spam random Pokemon and I'm sure people may use this to their advantage to get rid of particular mon from NU (e.g. Blaziken) which aren't viable in UU (mixed is fine to an extent, but not the physical one for sure).

 

 

You are wrong, the physical set of blaziken is totally viable in UU, his double stab hits the entire level except for tentacruel, which is of low use, while he can pivot with u-turn which other fighting types of the level cannot, cb can function as a wall break, and in the absence of fights since scrafty is mediocre and heracross left UU it turns out not to be a bad option, not to mention that, unlike medicham this has to respond to spiritomb, I am not surprised that it goes up to UU, but I agree that it should correct the system of raising and lowering levels with the current problem of the ranks

Link to comment

Now that they mention about changing the mechanics of raising and lowering the tier, I think it is a good idea to lower or raise pokes depending on the average of use in the 3 months, I said it because some can raise or lower the use in the Final month as happened with ambipom, which had a use of 3/4% and in the final month it rose to 5%, and it stayed in uu like 1 year, I feel that it would be the best, I say if they have 3 months to lower the correct thing It would be to see the total use in those 3 months, for example if x mon had 3 4 and 5% in the 3 months on average it would have 4% and it would imply a decrease although in the last month it has enough use

Link to comment

About Hax itens nerf, now, what is the following Measures? The nerf will be removed, still the same situation or will be banned again?? If possible, can tell?


My suggestion is only remove the Nerf, but add a Single-Op Clasule, that allows only one OP item per team. Can test this feature in Randoms, and add to OU to next season, if work normally
(If want to rework King's rock from next season, can make this:
Multi-hit condition: If the user uses a Multi-hit move, the flinch chance drops to 7,5-8%(At best scenary, the chance of flinch would drop to 32.29-34.10%. Compared to 41% before, it would improve (Relevant Multi-hit with 5 hits)) per hit. Can still allow the item to use in OU, releasing him to OP item Clasule, and making clasule active/limited(Talked about above.).

But, to don't make unbalanced, and make walls goes more Safety:

Reduces Eviolite Buff from 1,5x to 1,4x
Reduces Toxic/Thunder Wave Accuracy to 85)

Edited by caioxlive13
Link to comment
5 hours ago, caioxlive13 said:

About Hax itens nerf, now, what is the following Measures? The nerf will be removed, still the same situation or will be banned again?? If possible, can tell?


My suggestion is only remove the Nerf, but add a Single-Op Clasule, that allows only one OP item per team. Can test this feature in Randoms, and add to OU to next season, if work normally
(If want to rework King's rock from next season, can make this:
Multi-hit condition: If the user uses a Multi-hit move, the flinch chance drops to 7,5-8%(At best scenary, the chance of flinch would drop to 32.29-34.10%. Compared to 41% before, it would improve (Relevant Multi-hit with 5 hits)) per hit. Can still allow the item to use in OU, releasing him to OP item Clasule, and making clasule active/limited(Talked about above.).

But, to don't make unbalanced, and make walls goes more Safety:

Reduces Eviolite Buff from 1,5x to 1,4x
Reduces Toxic/Thunder Wave Accuracy to 85)

I would like to say that you have made excellent points and I hope the staff take your excellent suggestion into consideration from years of your experience and glory.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, caioxlive13 said:

About Hax itens nerf, now, what is the following Measures? The nerf will be removed, still the same situation or will be banned again?? If possible, can tell?


My suggestion is only remove the Nerf, but add a Single-Op Clasule, that allows only one OP item per team. Can test this feature in Randoms, and add to OU to next season, if work normally
(If want to rework King's rock from next season, can make this:
Multi-hit condition: If the user uses a Multi-hit move, the flinch chance drops to 7,5-8%(At best scenary, the chance of flinch would drop to 32.29-34.10%. Compared to 41% before, it would improve (Relevant Multi-hit with 5 hits)) per hit. Can still allow the item to use in OU, releasing him to OP item Clasule, and making clasule active/limited(Talked about above.).

But, to don't make unbalanced, and make walls goes more Safety:

Reduces Eviolite Buff from 1,5x to 1,4x
Reduces Toxic/Thunder Wave Accuracy to 85)

If you wish to talk about hax items please do so in the thread for it, they were not mentioned in any way in this thread nor has anybody stated what will happen or might happen to them. staff or otherwise.  This is out of the scope of monthly tiering updates.

Link to comment

Can we get Infos of the placement ladder / tournament of the TC member that are supposed to play the game instead of being dead? While I did not follow all ladders and tournament games this season I can't remember seeing stelian, lunarck bluebreath or Tyrone. I got kicked in the ass from double j several times and seen matches from the others. Just because it was stated 1 or 2 months ago that tc has to play the game. 

Edited by CaptnBaklava
Sorry for the text format, will edit when I'm not on mobile
Link to comment

Last month they all reported their matches and met the quota except one person whos vote didn't matter anyway at the time, this month they have not all gotten back to me yet but a few people have met the quota and the ones that haven't I am not going to punish during the holiday season when things are naturally busy for people.  They will not get a vote on things though, and this has been disclosed to them.  I will not be publicly disclosing ranks or how much people competed beyond the requirement, which is currently at least 1 match per day of the month, they don't all have to be on the same day. If any of them wishes to disclose more than that, they are free to.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, caioxlive13 said:

About Hax itens nerf, now, what is the following Measures? The nerf will be removed, still the same situation or will be banned again?? If possible, can tell?


My suggestion is only remove the Nerf, but add a Single-Op Clasule, that allows only one OP item per team. Can test this feature in Randoms, and add to OU to next season, if work normally
(If want to rework King's rock from next season, can make this:
Multi-hit condition: If the user uses a Multi-hit move, the flinch chance drops to 7,5-8%(At best scenary, the chance of flinch would drop to 32.29-34.10%. Compared to 41% before, it would improve (Relevant Multi-hit with 5 hits)) per hit. Can still allow the item to use in OU, releasing him to OP item Clasule, and making clasule active/limited(Talked about above.).

But, to don't make unbalanced, and make walls goes more Safety:

Reduces Eviolite Buff from 1,5x to 1,4x
Reduces Toxic/Thunder Wave Accuracy to 85)

i heard there is competition called psl where you can pay to get your own metagame might consider donating some money to ban Eviolite and toxic 

Link to comment
On 11/28/2021 at 5:35 PM, Munya said:

I'm not doing anything that requires manual data entry.  Those days are gone, not doing it again.

I understand how frustrating it would be, but could we not come up with a system where context matters? From the current usage there's going to be really meta, well rated Pokemon from NU going up to UU because there's some fad teams being used on ranked. And with a small pool of players all you need is 2-5 people who play a lot to start using said team / pokemon and boom. It goes up, this is not healthy at all.. I feel there has to be a better way to handle this (I also understand usage has went up / down for things to move up but I am still not sure if it's enough)

 

NU and UU have been erratic for a long time, if you look at the stats of how many matches have been played in ranked:

                              

NU's drop in games (per month):


 

Spoiler

image.png.7a436f5d4db8de781c5a057c3406881e.png

 

image.png.691f9d0057821a5aa0708148f53e068f.png

 

image.png.dd5890b8265a43d26dbb9e763c77be33.png

 

image.png.cc06a661a30baf92ff52e2c602230342.png

 

UU's drop in games  (per month):

Spoiler

image.png.99d15a2c8a5c529dbf266b4bab1d029a.png

image.png.9cda8494a2fd29e6599ef48a67135031.png

image.png.8b058323f3ad2b4b91bac10f04324ac7.png

image.png.10a2b6cbe1b2e7e895abbfd88ec349d4.png

*ignore the first number it's irrelevant

 

It's been a horrible downwards trajectory.. I feel relying on usage from a pool of players this small is a big mistake, and something needs to change.

 

I am curious to hear anyone elses thoughts.

Edited by Lvkee
Link to comment

The 3 months cycle movement system is quite bad imo, even though it was a great improvement when it was first implemented. The objective was to make sure pokemon would stop yoyoing from one tier to another. Every month, this is hardly possible now, but every 3 months, yoyoing should be expected. Within a year, Aerodactyl has been yoyoing from NU to OU to UU. As of today, Aerodactyl has enough usage in OU for moving up and also has not enough usage in UU for moving down. So, the yoyoing is far from over. Many pokemon are in the same situation and will arbitrarily move up or down based on the cut-off point of the 3rd month of each cycle.

 

I believe the following 2 systems would be much better and allow lower tier metagames to develop and evolve naturally without constantly meaningless disruptions:

 

Option 1

4.36% remains the cut-off point. A pokemon moves up only when it is above the cut-off point 2/3 months in a row. A pokemon moves down only when it is below the cut-off point 2/3 months in a row. By doing this, we should expect less yoyoing and more importantly the movements should be less arbitrary; unusual rise or decreased in usage in the third month of a cycle would not lead automatically to a pokemon changing tier.

 

Option 2

Different cut-off points for moving up and moving down. If a pokemon's usage is constantly around the cut-off point, it is expected that it will be changing tier constantly and by doing so will be very disruptive. Imo, it would be better if a pokemon moves down only when it goes below - let's say - 3% and moves up only when it goes above - let's say - 5%.

 

These options can be combined and require no manual entry, so very little effort to implement. These have been suggested mutliple times already and have usually been disregarded because of the fear that adding movements restrictions will lead to stale metagames. I believe this reason is unfounded because:

  1. this has never been tested and therefore arguing that will inevitably lead to stale metagames in speculative at best;
  2. these options can be adjusted to make it easier for movements to happen (for option 1, if 3 months in a row is too restrictive, it can be changed to 2 month in a row) (for option 2, if 3% and 5% is too restrictive, those can be changed for 3.5% and 4.5%)

There has been movements crisis in NU specifically for at least 2 years now. The TC can't be expected to tier anything in NU if the metagame changes constantly and broken stuff keeps getting arbitrarily added and removed to the tier before anything can get banned.

 

edit:

 

I understand that the 3 months cycle is ideal for the seasonal system that we have in game right now. Here is how option 1 and 2 could be combined to support the seasonal system just like the 3 months cycle did.

Every 3 months, a pokemon moves up if its usage is above 4.5%. Every 3 months, a pokemon moves down if its usage is below 3.5%. If a pokemon is 2 months in a row below 4%, it moves down. If a pokemon is 2 months in a row above 4% in moves up.

 

Spoiler

January (Start of the season)

  • A Pokemon moves up if its usage was above 4% in December and January.
  • A Pokemon moves down if its usage was below 4% in December and January. 

February

  • A Pokemon moves up if its usage was above 4% in January and February.
  • A Pokemon moves down if its usage was below 4% in January and February. 

March (End of the season)

  • A Pokemon moves up if its usage was above 4% in February and March.
  • A Pokemon moves down if its usage was below 4% in February and March.
  • A Pokemon moves down if its usage was below 3.5% in March.
  • A pokemon moves up if its usage was above 4.5% in March.
Edited by gbwead
Link to comment

I think the issue isn't the system but the community. People just don't want to play so they don't.

Well you could argue the game doesn't give them a reason to play the ladder at all, since it gives useless rewards for late game people, since the exclusive vanities are already acquired by the ladder regulars after 1 whole year, since placing wherever on the ladder is meaningless since not rewarded by the game, etc ... 

But all in all, if the hundreds of people that sign up to UU & NU tournaments did play a ladder game every other day, we wouldn't be where we are with 5 whole days of inactivity before the first game of UU was played this month. Where you can queue for 6h and not find a single game on a daily basis, etc

The comp community has a large enough pool of players to have active UU & NU ladders, it just doesn't want to, in my opinion. 

Link to comment
  • Munya unpinned and unfeatured this topic
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.