|
Post by WreckDra on May 7, 2020 22:17:09 GMT
(Excuse the title grammar; I only had so many characters to work with and I used ALL OF THEM)
I was a fan of the "New Frontiers" format Pokemon Perfect was using for awhile and I think it would be useful for helping to explore this tradebacks format that this forum is trying to promote. RBY OU tradebacks does not have a ladder on showdown anywhere, so perhaps this would be the next best thing. All I need from you people is for you to let me know whether or not you would be interested in this very low stakes tournament that isn't actually a tournament.
I am willing to tweak and refine the format to help out this users of this forum best, but I would be starting with this until I have feedback:
- Each week, I will assign each player a new opponent with emphasis on trying to prevent duplicate matchups from the previous week. (Very subject to change based on feedback) - Each matchup is expected to play at least 3 games and provide replays from them for tier research purposes (I have lots of questions that I need to answer on the replay side of things... This will likely change) - There will be week long sign up period initially - Any user may opt into the player pool in the weeks following their "in" post - Any user may opt out of the player pool for the following weeks. Users who opt out must still do their best to get their games done for the current week.
If you want to play, I will give you someone to play against. This thread is for discussing the viability of this format here and what I can change to make it more viable.
|
|
|
Post by Disaster Area on May 7, 2020 22:20:30 GMT
RBY OU tradebacks does not have a ladder on showdown anywhere, so perhaps this would be the next best thing. We could have a ladder at least on a side server at some point... Enigami and I may discuss this further if enough people are interested! That being said, enabling it for ladder on the pokemonperfect.psim.us server is very easy to do.
|
|
|
Post by Enigami on May 8, 2020 15:40:40 GMT
I've renamed OU Tradebacks to 1U on the Pokemon Perfect server at pokemonperfect.psim.us/, and enabled the ladder for it.
|
|
|
Post by WreckDra on May 16, 2020 21:15:51 GMT
Cool, it's good to have a ladder for the future. I still think this does have some viability in spite of there being a ladder, but not until I see more activity on the site. I will put this on hold for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
Post by Disaster Area on May 18, 2020 18:37:01 GMT
Cool, it's good to have a ladder for the future. I still think this does have some viability in spite of there being a ladder, but not until I see more activity on the site. I will put this on hold for the foreseeable future. We will want to have this just to ensure people are playing some games - it can be hard to find games on a ladder that's not on PS main.
|
|
|
Post by Ortheore on May 20, 2020 10:54:34 GMT
I love the New Frontiers format and I'm 100% in for it.
I think a potential issue is activity- we were mostly able to get by on PP because I think most of us were committed to pursuing the tiering project, rather than looking to compete, which is admittedly the whole point of the format
I discussed what I thought of activity in non-elim formats in this post, but I think we need to do something substantially different to make resolving activity easier and more objective- my preferred solution is requiring players to explicitly claim activity, lest they be DQ'd. That said, something that hard-line may not fit in with New Frontiers, since the format is generally fairly relaxed and doesn't depend on people being ultra-active- activity is only an issue if it becomes a recurring theme for a specific player.
Another is that a lot of people can pass over less competitive/prestigious tournaments that have little to no stakes. Iirc that we ran a reasonably successful 2U tournament on PP that was dubbed the 2U world champs or something (I think it was the one where GGFan exposed Tenta as a dominant threat), but when it came to tiering and New Frontiers we struggled. That said, I cbf checking.
|
|