[Discussion] Critical Hits

[DoubleJ]

And this is why we have discussion threads like this. Without discussion better options for working around a problem that some people experience may never arise. I for one would be very excited about future Round Robin tournaments with say 8-16 competitors. The competition would be insane and the results would be great. 

 

So please, use discussion as it's meant to and don't bash an opinion simply because you don't agree with it. Too many of us have become hostile, spitting vitriol with any post we make just to point a finger and say "ha". Take a moment and try to work out a solution that benefits everyone. 

 

Be right back, posting in Event Suggestions.

Edited April 11, 2015 by DoubleJ

[Gunthug]

And this is why we have discussion threads like this. Without discussion better options for working around a problem that some people experience may never arise. I for one would be very excited about future Round Robin tournaments with say 8-16 competitors. The competition would be insane and the results would be great.

So please, use discussion as it's meant to and don't bash an opinion simply because you don't agree with it. Too many of us have become hostile, spitting vitriol with any post we make just to point a finger and say "ha". Take a moment and try to work out a solution that benefits everyone.

Be right back, posting in Event Suggestions.

On the flip side, we shouldn't be abusing our very temporary (key word here) ability to create unlimited discussion threads about whatever pops into your mind. Discussion threads in comp alley are specifically for discussing proposed changes to the meta, and it seems like you went into this thread with very little expectation of changing the meta. I'm all for productive discussion, but there's a time and place for everything

[DoubleJ]

On the flip side, we shouldn't be abusing our very temporary (key word here) ability to create unlimited discussion threads about whatever pops into your mind. Discussion threads in comp alley are specifically for discussing proposed changes to the meta, and it seems like you went into this thread with very little expectation of changing the meta. I'm all for productive discussion, but there's a time and place for everything

 

Whatever gets you off mate. I think I touched on limiting threads in Comp Alley last month and designing a method of regulating them. This just furthers the nonsense, but nevertheless Discussion threads do help newer players and interested players with ideas for team building, whether you like the uguu'ness of the actual discussion or not. 

[Robofiend]

On the flip side, we shouldn't be abusing our very temporary (key word here) ability to create unlimited discussion threads about whatever pops into your mind. Discussion threads in comp alley are specifically for discussing proposed changes to the meta, and it seems like you went into this thread with very little expectation of changing the meta. I'm all for productive discussion, but there's a time and place for everything

 

I don't necessarily agree, in the past I've seen threads that are more about getting a community consensus than actually pushing hard for a change. I think it's nice to see an OP who's humble enough to have a bunch of people poop on their idea and NOT argue about it for pages and pages, despite widespread opposition. In the past good discussions have come from threads that weren't necessarily about bans (most recent batch of UU threads, my old Salamence thread, Senile's Drago/Salamence/Tyranitar thread of olde). As long as the thread isn't trash *cough Dbond thread cough* I don't mind seeing it around.

[Gunthug]

I don't necessarily agree, in the past I've seen threads that are more about getting a community consensus than actually pushing hard for a change. I think it's nice to see an OP who's humble enough to have a bunch of people poop on their idea and NOT argue about it for pages and pages, despite widespread opposition. In the past good discussions have come from threads that weren't necessarily about bans (most recent batch of UU threads, my old Salamence thread, Senile's Drago/Salamence/Tyranitar thread of olde). As long as the thread isn't trash *cough Dbond thread cough* I don't mind seeing it around.

Er, your examples of discussion threads that weren't pushing for bans are all quite suspect (lel). I've acknowledged already that directly after a metagame is created, there is a heightened need for discussion. Thus, the influx of UU discussion threads right after UU was created was to be expected - though I wouldn't argue that it was all that helpful. I mean, Tyrone just had to lock about 5 or 6 of them in an attempt to focus people's discussion on the 2 or 3 that actually mattered (for now). Then, you cite a mence thread, and a thread about Dnite/Mence/Ttar....each of which is banned. I dk if the threads weren't made with the INTENT to get those things banned, but the point is that lively discussion took place about pokemon that were certainly banworthy. At the time of the creation of senile's thread (apologies but I don't remember yours specifically), those three pokemon were dominant forces in the metagame - it was certainly a worthy endeavor to discuss their impact and whether it was too much.

 

Funny that you mention the dbond thread as trash, because at least the relief sought in that thread was something the tier council could actually grant - meanwhile, you can't exactly ban crits without changing the core mechanics of the game. I just think if there was a limit to the amount of active discussion threads, we'd see much more thought go into the creation of a discussion thread, much more thought go into discussing the actual threats, and a quicker evolving metagame. At this point, I think it's a necessity, and I'm confident a system will be in place soon

[Robofiend]

Funny that you mention the dbond thread as trash, because at least the relief sought in that thread was something the tier council could actually grant - meanwhile, you can't exactly ban crits without changing the core mechanics of the game. I just think if there was a limit to the amount of active discussion threads, we'd see much more thought go into the creation of a discussion thread, much more thought go into discussing the actual threats, and a quicker evolving metagame. At this point, I think it's a necessity, and I'm confident a system will be in place soon

 

I wouldn't argue with a thread limit for each tier either, I'm just pointing out that in the past we've had threads that weren't strongly worded "PLS BAN" requests have been helpful for helping the metagame along. The Azumarill thread, for instance, could help any newer/less experienced player find checks to Azu  (Vileplume, Exeggutor or Slowking) when they may not have realized it in the first point. At any rate, I'm almost always in favor of having threads- discussion is good as long as it's on topic and timely. Crit mechanics might seem like a no-brainer right now (particularly in Comp Alley - we can't change the mechanics) but a year ago players argued against the 2x crit and actually saw a change because of it. I will say that it'd be nice to have faster moderation on some of the more obviously bad/impossible/anti-TC-policy threads.

 

Also yeah, this is a good example of a thread that should end.

[Gunthug]

I wouldn't argue with a thread limit for each tier either, I'm just pointing out that in the past we've had threads that weren't strongly worded "PLS BAN" requests have been helpful for helping the metagame along. The Azumarill thread, for instance, could help any newer/less experienced player find checks to Azu  (Vileplume, Exeggutor or Slowking) when they may not have realized it in the first point. At any rate, I'm almost always in favor of having threads- discussion is good as long as it's on topic and timely. Crit mechanics might seem like a no-brainer right now (particularly in Comp Alley - we can't change the mechanics) but a year ago players argued against the 2x crit and actually saw a change because of it. I will say that it'd be nice to have faster moderation on some of the more obviously bad/impossible/anti-TC-policy threads.

 

Also yeah, this is a good example of a thread that should end.

I've actually been thinking about this since your response earlier, and I think you've got a great point - there needs to be a place to discuss the metagame without detracting focus from the massive metagame threats that deserve our focused attention. I think a great place for this, and where this kind of discussion usually takes place for other pokemon competitive communities, is a tier's viability thread - Over the last couple of weeks, I've learned an enormous amount about ORAS OU just from reading a little of the viability thread every day. Sadly, we don't have a super dedicated viability thread, though I know that's not think's fault (I believe he's the one who created it? Don't remember, might have been senile).

 

I think if we shifted some of these freeform tier discussions, for lack of a better phrase, to the viability thread, they would be immensely more productive and more conducive to helping out our comp community with interesting sets and strategies.

[Gilvy]

If you ban the critical hits, then you'll ask for banning confusion, parahax, any offensive move with stat effect.

I agree RNG can mess a game where you couldn't normally lose, but I don't want to ban any randomness on this game.

[DoubleJ]

If you ban the critical hits, then you'll ask for banning confusion, parahax, any offensive move with stat effect.

I agree RNG can mess a game where you couldn't normally lose, but I don't want to ban any randomness on this game.

 

Please read the OP before critiquing.

 

Nevertheless this can be locked and archived. 

[Tyrone]

Locked and moved to Archive