Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think it's mostly because it probably has the lowest barrier to entry out of all archetypes and because the way it plays looks fairly straight forward it attracts a lot of the newer players. I think most of the easiest wins I've had so far have been vs rain teams. This probably makes rain a lot harder to gauge for me because while on paper it's a fairly strong team I have a really hard time ranking it highly. I agree with most of what imabe said. I think topmoth is still workable though and should remain tier 4. It struggles a lot in our meta with it's main spread move being resisted by both of the setup sweepers on the most common team (4x by kingdra, 2x by chomp) and is having a fairly hard time vs other teams since pretty much every TR team shuts it down with chandelure. But i still think that volca has some clearly defined strengths which shouldn't be overlooked completely, it just needs a lot of support and a more creative team build to really shine.
  2. Are you basing these tiers off of the strength of these teams in mm or the strength vs good players? Because while the tier 1 teams you listed have done well in matchmaking I'm not convinced they would see that level of success in psl for example. I'm also not convinced about rain being tier 1, although you have had a lot of success with it every other rain player I've seen/played against has looked like the more free win ever. Just curious what are you considering sand core to be? To me sand core is just a standard balance team with excadrill taking the place of a fast sweeper. Imo ttar balance will always be the most effective way to play balance due to it being the most splashable weather reset. I also think the dynamic speed changes only helped this archetype in counter weather matchups because ttar out of all the weather setters is such a strong pivot. I feel like with people moving away from double intimidates this archetype is about as strong as it's ever been and out of all the other archetypes listed above, it only has a bad matchup vs tailwind. I also think it's probably worth listing hard tr with no weather as tier 4, since it seems to be very popular on ladder. Although it seems most people using this are having a fairly hard time reaching it to the top of the leaderboard.
  3. I for the most part agree with the sentiment that allowing an elo reset is not the most healthy gameplay and that we should instead find a way to encourage people to play more high elo games and maybe make the queues a bit more lenient at the higher end. My main point is that the current system still encourages the smurf effect but in my mind it does it in an even more unhealthy way. I would much rather see the few good players be able to play the game even vs much lower elo opponents and get rewarded for being good (since right now it's the exact opposite) than the current system encouraging the top players to deliberately lose games & wintrade in order to keep finding matches & get easier win streaks. But I am maybe a bit biased here.
  4. The current system in no way discourages the 'smurf effect'. Due to requiring low elo to find matches faster & rewarding win streaks so heavily the current most effective way to farm out the rewards would be to Win streak for as long as possible, only stopping when you either lose or start to find matches slower and then proceeding to forfeit every battle you enter until your elo goes back down to 500 or lower and repeat the process. The only real incentive for being high elo is priority seating in tournaments but it is very easy for high elo players to grind back to a decent standing in a day or 2 to get their priority seating back. And if the player doesn't care about non tradable vanities and only cares about something that is useful and has monetary value, there is nothing stopping people from mindlessly win streaking and then dodging games in low elo to farm BP faster, while leaving their alt inactive in high ranks thus making the issue even worse for the remaining high elo players. Providing you go undefeated or close to undefeated which should be very feasible for a lot of high elo players, you start seeing an increase of queue times after just a couple of hours of gameplay. There should be far more incentives for people to want to have a high elo and actively play high elo games, the end of season tournament and priority seating only apply for a couple of days a month and encourage people to either farm on alts and leave their mains inactive or play in low elo on their main and only push rating a day or 2 before a tournament they want to play in occurs.
  5. Please not 26. Having 4 wasted EVs from using even IV values triggers the fuck out of me. Odd IVs are always far more fun to work with since for non 252/252 spreads since you have the option to invest into all 5 EVs, 100% agreed that they should be buffed since 25ivs are pretty much unusable and is far below what most people consider entry level ivs nowadays, but it should remain odd only IV values.
  6. How would that work with spectators? It seems way less fun if you don't even know who the players you are spectating are, you wouldn't even be able to watch your friends battles?
  7. (Players who are waiting for the next round are now paired together randomly.) If you are waiting for round 3, someone else is waiting for round 2 you therefor cannot be paired vs each other. So if you stay at a different tournament stage from someone you won't be matched vs them until the end? Still not sure how much that really changes, if the number is 50% then all you have to do is stay in the slower 50% to avoid the front runners.
  8. Since most of the tournaments have been cancelled and so I haven't been able to test it (also I don't really want to test ways to exploit the game). Can you explain how this isn't exploitable? For most of us the only information we have to go off is: Standard Tournament brackets will now be randomized between each round. (Players who are waiting for the next round are now paired together randomly.) If we are to take these words literally it sounds as though if you win your battle early you will likely be facing off against other players who have also finished their battle early. So for example if I wanted to avoid playing against you, I could ask a friend to spectate your battle and tell me how close the game looks to being over. If my friend was to reply "it's still 6v6" I could then try and close out my battle faster to try and avoid the possible window where I could be matched against you. Conversely if you are about to win I could deliberately extend my battle and run down the timer. This would then become even easier to abuse the later it gets in a tournament where there should be a larger discrepancy in which round everyone is still playing in since there may be a round 1 battle at the same time as a round 3-4. I really hope that I am wrong on this subject and that it is not as exploitable as it sounds, where you can almost chose your matches and can lead to match fixing, but as of right now most of us can only go off the words of the devs.
  9. Some players do. Most of the time it's in the form of new players who only play one team being preyed on by a hard counter team that is usually not very good vs the rest of the meta but since the newer player has more limited resources they're unlikely to be able to adapt to it. Which I agree isn't the most healthy gameplay. There are exceptionally few players who are able to make counter teams on the fly based on scouting/prior knowledge of their opponent while still not being too weak to the rest of the meta, but that is not to say that it is impossible. For example I think old school lyle did this pretty well way back in the day, although the meta back then was easier to build in than it is now. To me the whole argument boils down to ease of access for newer players to blindly spam their MM team in tournaments without getting cteamed & more experienced players who don't want to build more than one team vs a players ability to adapt and team build being tested & more innovation in the later rounds. In this regard I always lean towards the latter argument since, lets be honest, if a new player only has one team and has no resources, no friends, no team mates who can help them with new builds. The chances are they aren't getting far in the tournament anyway and if they somehow do manage to get far, they will ultimately get cteamed in the finals regardless.
  10. Which is exactly the reason why it is a skill. Most players just blindly counter team the last team their opponent ran and then get ran over by their opponent when they switch teams. There are very few players who can actually do this well especially in tournaments with just a 10 minute window to build a team on the fly. I personally never cteam in automated tournaments, not because "cteaming is lame" or anything like that, it's because I am simply not a good enough team builder to do it effectively. I try to use these cteaming principles in PSL where I have a lot more time to build and I have had a huge amount of success doing it, and when its gone wrong its been due to my oversight of something instead of the concept being flawed. I would love to be able to develop this skill more and use it in tournaments to become a much better player and team builder for it, but that looks as though that is no longer a possibility.
  11. I guess It wasn't clear from my post. But since I was specifically referring to later stages of a tournament in my post I was of course referring to better players who you likely have prior knowledge about and so was talking more about building around each players individual tendencies, as well as the common cores they/people in their team often run. Not about blindly hard counter teaming the last team that they ran. In PSL it is often fairly easy to predict a large amount of your opponents team, in tournaments where there is far less time to build and test between rounds people will default back to their tried and true more often than not leaving less room for unique strategies. The point I was trying to make is that although this new system helps new players with the transition from matchmaking to tournament play I think this actually hinders player growth in the later stages. In my opinion the ideal solution to this would be for tournaments to stay automated at the start and then switch back to a standard bracket at either the ro8 or ro16 depending on bracket size.
  12. Seeing how scouting and counter teaming are such contentious and polarising points within the community I want to make a thread for discussion about it as well as bringing to light some possible concerns. The Change being discussed: Standard Tournament brackets will now be randomized between each round. (Players who are waiting for the next round are now paired together randomly.) I'm in two minds about this change. I see some positives and some negatives to it. Starting with the positive; The way I see it. If I'm in 2nd round vs random69 I really don't want or care enough to scout him and try and counter build his dumb fuck team with dumb fuck sets and if I do counter team them I don't feel good about it and neither does the other player. This change makes entering tournaments and doing well in them much easier for entry level players coming straight from matchmaking since they will require far less teams and will likely just use their matchmaking team throughout. As well as making it much more relaxing and less stress intensive for the early rounds since you don't have to constantly worry about changing your team or countering every player you face. However, this change could be seen as problematic especially for later stages of tournaments, for a few key reasons: Imagine you are in semis and out of your 3 possible opponents you have a team which you believe will crush 2 of them but isn't as good vs the other, you would be crazy not to take a 2/3 guaranteed victory. But as every pokemon player knows 33% chance things happen all the freaking time which could really fuck people over, making team building in the later stages especially weird and likely more luck than skill dependant. Knowing how to adapt to opponents is a skill and with the current system it will not be taught to players unless they are able to make it to the very end. It is a huge part of learning to team build and is not something that should be removed completely. This basically comes down to general vs specific team building. While both are important I don't think it is good for everyone to just spam their MM team until later stages just for someone to get stomped in a very uncompetitive finals by someone who clearly has far more experience adapting to opponents than they do. Better/More prominent players are at a disadvantage. There's no way in knowing what everyone is running and so your resources are very limited. When watching a battle between your matches or talking to other players you are far more likely to check up on what the better players are running and are far more likely to build around that. As a lesser known player you are likely to go almost completely unscouted throughout most of the tournament giving yourself a large advantage. Separation of Tournaments and Matchmaking. This isn't really such a big deal but I feel like this kind of blurs the lines between MM and tournaments and makes participating in tournaments feel less unique. Now onto the potentially scary thing: (Players who are waiting for the next round are now paired together randomly.) Depending on how this is implemented this sounds like it could be exploitable. If people are paired together based on who is waiting for the same round as a player, you can use this in order to be more/less likely to be matched against specific people. If have been playing slower and your matches lasting longer than the people you consider to be the hardest competition, you are not going to be matched against for that round them since they would have been matches for that round during your previous battles. This essentially encourages players to play faster or slower depending on what players they want to dodge. If this works the way that it is implied it should be possible to go through almost the entire tournament while avoiding players you think are the biggest threats or your friends/teammates. I'm hoping I am wrong about this and there is a system in place to prevent this.
  13. After reading through the update a couple of times I gotta say there's a lot of things in there that were not previously mentioned and I wasn't expecting that are really cool. So many great QoL changes and general pvp related changes that are going to be so nice. Big props to the devs, positively surprised for the first time in a while even if we did have to wait for it.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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