Jump to content

redbluegreen

Members
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

740 profile views
  1. I've never really liked the revealing sets rule. From a spectators point of view it ruins the fun a bit since the rule is kind of vague it drastically reduces the amount you can say during the battle and since the hosts can only punish players who are participating in psl there are many ways around it. I really wish we could presume that everyone in psl has at least some degree of competency and is able to deduce common sense information by themself. But unfortunately every season we see plenty of evidence that's simply not the case
  2. Vermilion Villains vs Just Blaziken It Dubs: Rendi vs PinkWings Any amount up to 1m on Villains winning Any amount up to 1m on Rendi winning void if tie, void if sub/no contest
  3. Actually me and my partner are still in the lead for that one
  4. The point is there are countless ways to view activity. For example in PSL you can see countless players with low ladder ranks still doing well in their battles. It would be naïve to assume that their knowledge about the tier is insufficient just because they don't have 100 ladder games. Even if aren't actively playing ladder they talking about teambuilding and practicing battles against friends and team mates. I just think using the given criteria you could miss out on potentially good candidates just because they don't see a benefit to playing ladder. Lifestyle pointed out that he would be a good example and I think most people would agree with that and honestly there are lots of good examples of outliers like this in every single tier. I agree that current TC members should be active in some form, I just don't believe that amount of ladder games should be the deciding factor about activity. However I do like the idea of having separate TCs for each tier. And I would also be in favour of allowing more of the player base to vote. However I would prefer it to be an opt in system where reputable/knowledgeable players can write a short description of their accomplishments (which can include matchmaking) for the TC to then decide if they should be eligible or not. Instead of just amount of matchmaking games/win rate, I don't trust some guy who was given a pokepaste of a team to copy and spam for 100 games to have any influence over a tier and to not be biased.
  5. Not entirely sure how you would check these or that i agree this is relevant. I would view one deep tournament run or a handful of practice battles against a competent human far better for learning the meta than spamming 100 games of ladder, especially if they just spam the same teams for most of the battles. quality > quantity Agree with the premise of the post though
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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