On 10.10.2017 at 7:53 AM, DarylDixon said:

tell that to kiz ez

 

@Kizhaz what are u doing nab :v

Ah, following steps of best game masters already, I see potential here

Your Indian song of the week @KaynineXL

 

 

HBD @NikhilR !!!!!!

35 minutes ago, Takens said:

HBD @NikhilR !!!!!!

Someone misinformed you man, it's not my b'day.

happy birthday @NikhilR and @londark

hi friends 

@KaynineXL

 

This song also sort of teaches you how to dance. The translation goes like "one, two, three, four get on the dance floor, booty shake shake, spread your shoulders and then stick out your chest."

The update sounds more and more of a clusterfuck for the comp scene. First of all they're going to introduce parts of the extended meta over time, meaning hidden abilities and several legends won't be available until the next overall update. Second, they're reintroducing strength based tiering with a counsel that's majority doesn't really understand BW. And third, we don't know breeding mechanics or if there are any changes coming with the "transition" of our current mons to the updated system. 

 

My HYPE was growing, but now my spidey senses are tingling. 

1 hour ago, DoubleJ said:

Second, they're reintroducing strength based tiering with a counsel that's majority doesn't really understand BW

Not really. We just made temporary tier lists for the time being. Also we've redone them pretty much entirely with some usage predictions in mind. We aren't by any means making some kind of shift over to strength based tiering. 

16 minutes ago, Rigamorty said:

Not really. We just made temporary tier lists for the time being. Also we've redone them pretty much entirely with some usage predictions in mind. We aren't by any means making some kind of shift over to strength based tiering. 

How is it not in definition "strength-based tiering" though? Your TC team is essentially creating an artificial PokeMMO tierlist dictated by presumed usage. That usage is determined by what? If assumed "strength" of a Pokemon is not taken as a factor in this formula, then on what grounds are you folks basing your creativity? Usage stats from BW should not be used when we are going to lack key components of that meta, such as Dream World Abilities (Hidden Abilities) and many pokemon which simply won't be implemented. In addition, we still have upper gen mechanics, learned moves, and stats which further alter the foundation of BW. 

 

In all reality, we should simply wipe the tiers and start from scratch, letting OU form organically and systematically creating the lower tiers.

 

In other terms "trust the process". It's worked in the past and because of it we have a very unique competitive scene that is attractive to players. 

13 minutes ago, DoubleJ said:

How is it not in definition "strength-based tiering" though? Your TC team is essentially creating an artificial PokeMMO tierlist dictated by presumed usage. That usage is determined by what? If assumed "strength" of a Pokemon is not taken as a factor in this formula, then on what grounds are you folks basing your creativity? Usage stats from BW should not be used when we are going to lack key components of that meta, such as Dream World Abilities (Hidden Abilities) and many pokemon which simply won't be implemented. In addition, we still have upper gen mechanics, learned moves, and stats which further alter the foundation of BW. 

 

In all reality, we should simply wipe the tiers and start from scratch, letting OU form organically and systematically creating the lower tiers.

 

In other terms "trust the process". It's worked in the past and because of it we have a very unique competitive scene that is attractive to players. 

We are going back to usage as soon as we can. This is only so a UU and NU tier can still exist sorta. It's not like the OU tier isn't going to develop the way it should, because we're not doing anything that changes how OU will be played. UU and NU will still develop organically based on how OU actually turns out, these tiers are just existing as placeholders. 

 

My whole point is we aren't adopting this as the new way to do tiering. It's just temporary. We aren't changing the way we will have tiers, we're just doing this to still have SOME kind of UU or NU after the update. 

Edited October 25, 20177 yr by Rigamorty

8 minutes ago, Rigamorty said:

We are going back to usage as soon as we can. This is only so a UU and NU tier can still exist sorta. It's not like the OU tier isn't going to develop the way it should, because we're not doing anything that changes how OU will be played. UU and NU will still develop organically based on how OU actually turns out, these tiers are just existing as placeholders. 

 

My whole point is we aren't adopting this as the new way to do tiering. It's just temporary. We aren't changing the way we will have tiers, we're just doing this to still have SOME kind of UU or NU after the update. 

In argument, there really isn't any necessity to have a UU and NU tier at the beginning of this update. With the matchmaking system and the plethora of official events coming our way, usage based tiering won't take long to form these lower tiers. 

 

In addition, it can easily be assumed that these "make-shift" tiers are going to influence actual usage later on, skewing how the tiers would have naturally developed. If your TC team says Kabutops is OU, Kabutops will likely see usage that it might not otherwise had, or for another example Alakazam is placed in UU, it might not garner the usage it could potentially get in OU otherwise. 

 

Our listed tiers have a big influence on the game, especially considering the mechanics related to breeding and creating teams. We can't simply spawn our competitive Pokemon and because of this the players will likely cling to these "temporary" tier lists closer and longer than they should. 

 

It's undue influence when we have a system that works, despite demanding patience. 

2 hours ago, DoubleJ said:

In addition, it can easily be assumed that these "make-shift" tiers are going to influence actual usage later on, skewing how the tiers would have naturally developed. If your TC team says Kabutops is OU, Kabutops will likely see usage that it might not otherwise had, or for another example Alakazam is placed in UU, it might not garner the usage it could potentially get in OU otherwise. 

There was always going to be a bit of movement in usage in the first couple months. We are are looking at a metagame no one has ever played before, we have had similar ones for people who have played gen 5 before but even that will be different from what we will have on release. Even ordering effects from moving from gen 3 to gen 5 will be a factor. Its likely people will still try their normal gen3 mmo teams upon release.

 

Like we have said before, the idea of "make-shift" tiers was made above us. We will still have usage based tiering, the process will still work and we will end up with simmons in the end.

3 hours ago, DoubleJ said:

 

In addition, it can easily be assumed that these "make-shift" tiers are going to influence actual usage later on, skewing how the tiers would have naturally developed. If your TC team says Kabutops is OU, Kabutops will likely see usage that it might not otherwise had, or for another example Alakazam is placed in UU, it might not garner the usage it could potentially get in OU otherwise. 

 

Our listed tiers have a big influence on the game, especially considering the mechanics related to breeding and creating teams. We can't simply spawn our competitive Pokemon and because of this the players will likely cling to these "temporary" tier lists closer and longer than they should. 

 

It's undue influence when we have a system that works, despite demanding patience. 

Not trying to pile the entire TC on you at once but this all seems like a huge stretch. By this logic, no pokemon would ever rise in usage from lower tiers because people would be married to whatever the current tier lists are. In reality, the top players drive usage because they go far in tournaments (providing public teambuilds for lesser players) - and good players will certainly not build based solely on the lists.  Again though, this whole argument is pointless since this wasn't our decision. I didn't fight it though, because once the usage starts pouring in, we'll be right where we woulda been anyways

49 minutes ago, DaftCoolio said:

Like we have said before, the idea of "make-shift" tiers was made above us. We will still have usage based tiering, the process will still work and we will end up with simmons in the end.

Ben Simmons has potential, this system unfortunately has its glaring flaws. 

 

29 minutes ago, Gunthug said:

Not trying to pile the entire TC on you at once but this all seems like a huge stretch. By this logic, no pokemon would ever rise in usage from lower tiers because people would be married to whatever the current tier lists are. In reality, the top players drive usage because they go far in tournaments (providing public teambuilds for lesser players) - and good players will certainly not build based solely on the lists.  Again though, this whole argument is pointless since this wasn't our decision. I didn't fight it though, because once the usage starts pouring in, we'll be right where we woulda been anyways

As I'm sure you are aware, my belief isn't that players will rely completely on the lists but rather that the lists will inappropriately influence the formation of the tiers down the road, rather than let them develop naturally. I'm sure you can understand this, just as I wish you would have fought the decision to make up tiers based on... well nothing but very little insight into what coolio refers to as a "metagame that no one has ever played before". 

Just now, DoubleJ said:

Ben Simmons has potential, this system unfortunately has its glaring flaws. 

 

As I'm sure you are aware, my belief isn't that players will rely completely on the lists but rather that the lists will inappropriately influence the formation of the tiers down the road, rather than let them develop naturally. I'm sure you can understand this, just as I wish you would have fought the decision to make up tiers based on... well nothing but very little insight into what coolio refers to as a "metagame that no one has ever played before". 

You're just speculating. I could easily make the argument that these lists will actually benefit the formation of usage based tiers by cutting out the guesswork involved with a new metagame. Imagine having no guidance and wasting valuable resources breeding something that turns out to be wildly ineffective - not only does that set you back, but it's also reflected in usage and sets the whole tier back

 

What we're doing is putting sleep strips on the sides of the road towards usage based tiers, tbh

21 minutes ago, Gunthug said:

You're just speculating. I could easily make the argument that these lists will actually benefit the formation of usage based tiers by cutting out the guesswork involved with a new metagame. Imagine having no guidance and wasting valuable resources breeding something that turns out to be wildly ineffective - not only does that set you back, but it's also reflected in usage and sets the whole tier back

 

What we're doing is putting sleep strips on the sides of the road towards usage based tiers, tbh

It certainly is speculation, but it's also a criticism of a plan that was previously shunned by... well like everyone. "Making up tiers" brings me back to 2012 and 2013, where a select group of players got to pick and choose what goes where. We ultimately found a better, unbiased system in usage based tiering which has been the basis of our competitive scene for years. Why stray away from that when we have an opportunity to let the tiers form on their own and be 100% unique?

 

It just doesn't make sense to force a UU and NU tier into existence, when the game is already going to garner interest with new mechanics and an entirely new map. The game has survived losing the lower tiers in the past and this will likely carry over for this update as well. 

 

 

EDIT:  What we're doing is putting sleep strips on the sides of the road towards usage based tiers, tbh

A better analogy might be something like this, "you can eat whatever you want, but in the meantime you can only eat what I've put on the table"

 

Edited October 25, 20177 yr by DoubleJ

2 minutes ago, DoubleJ said:

It certainly is speculation, but it's also a criticism of a plan that was previously shunned by... well like everyone. "Making up tiers" brings me back to 2012 and 2013, where a select group of players got to pick and choose what goes where. We ultimately found a better, unbiased system in usage based tiering which has been the basis of our competitive scene for years. Why stray away from that when we have an opportunity to let the tiers form on their own and be 100% unique?

 

It just doesn't make sense to force a UU and NU tier into existence, when the game is already going to garner interest with new mechanics and an entirely new map. The game has survived losing the lower tiers in the past and this will likely carry over for this update as well. 

I agree with you for the most part (especially the part about the tier list having an influence on what get used), but we were thinking of a slower paced usage base tiering system which would mean we would have no UU for 3 months and no NU for 6 months. That's an enormous amount of time before UU and NU players can start competing. Having temporary UU and NU tiers is far from ideal and pretty meh, but it's imo an okayish compromise considering what the alternative is.  NU players won't be breeding "blindly" for 6 months this way.

16 minutes ago, DoubleJ said:

 

 

EDIT:  What we're doing is putting sleep strips on the sides of the road towards usage based tiers, tbh

A better analogy might be something like this, "you can eat whatever you want, but in the meantime you can only eat what I've put on the table"

 

Not a very good analogy at all, unless you can explain how "tc's lists might potentially influence usage" turned into "you can ONLY eat what I've put on the table." It's a solid strawman though, wouldn't go near it if I was a crow

3 minutes ago, gbwead said:

I agree with you for the most part (especially the part about the tier list having an influence on what get used), but we were thinking of a slower paced usage base tiering system which would mean we would have no UU for 3 months and no NU for 6 months. That's an enormous amount of time before UU and NU players can start competing. Having temporary UU and NU tiers is far from ideal and pretty meh, but it's imo an okayish compromise considering what the alternative is.  NU players won't be breeding "blindly" for 6 months this way.

Ultimately it's a difficult decision to make, but also interesting to know the process would presumably take longer than the tier reset when we had the physical/special split. With matchmaking added to garner usage, I would assume the process would be shorter. 

 

Moving forward, the real question is how long does your team wait to update the tiers based on usage. Is it still 3 to 6 months as stated above, or a shorter time frame? 

1 minute ago, Gunthug said:

Not a very good analogy at all, unless you can explain how "tc's lists might potentially influence usage" turned into "you can ONLY eat what I've put on the table." It's a solid strawman though, wouldn't go near it if I was a crow

The longer a person is stuck eating the same variety of foods, the less likely they are to choose something else. They simply become comfortable with what's in front of them and are less likely to put in the work to find something different.

 

Done.  

I saw gbwead and jj posting and expected a drama

 

 

not disappointed

12 hours ago, RysPicz said:

I saw gbwead and jj posting and expected a drama

 

 

not disappointed

we need that tier council meme pls

6 hours ago, Takens said:

we need that tier council meme pls

 

 

#quality