redbluegreen

wrong thread

Starting in 10

imagine betting money on someone who doesn't even play

GasaiYunoSan vs Rendi in 10

I personally really hate having a larger playoff bracket. I feel like it completely devalues the regular season to the point where it becomes almost pointless. People can very easily coast regular season while revealing none of their strategies and still make playoffs and at that point what advantage do you really have to finish first? Sure you get to pick your opponent but you most likely had to reveal a lot in doing so while your opponents that you get to pick from didn't. I think a 6 team playoffs should be the maximum playoff bracket and if not go even smaller. If the issue is to keep people interested and competing towards the end of the season after they can't make playoffs the threat of relegation should be enough in most cases. Right now I see PSL playoffs to be an absolute joke, you can be a garbage team all season and still get in and then start tryharding and end up winning the entire thing. Even with the advantages we try to give the top teams from regular season, the first placed team almost never ends up being the actual champions. Two times I've ended up first in regular season, including being on the most dominant regular season team in psl history only to immediately lose in semis both times. It's got to the point where I actually tell my teams that I'm not even going to try until playoffs start and I imagine this is the case for many other players and I really hope this event doesn't turn out the same way. As previously mentioned using the viability rankings for doubles would be a huge mistake. Using subjective rankings is in no way a good replacement for usage based tiering especially when looking at UU vs NU picks. And considering how historically wrong a lot of the more prominent players are about the relative strength on different pokemon I think a free draft is the only real way to go for doubles. Also if a free draft more pokemon = more fun. Also this looks fun

I feel like every season we have some crazy things happen that are for the most part out of the teams control. We've had players or managers dropping out for little to no reason, earthquakes, coaching scandals, bugs, people signing up on multiple accounts, copious amounts of rng as well as many other things over the years. And the result is almost always "shit happens" and then we move on with the event. I understand we don't have the same hosts every season and so we can't expect the same standard of decisions but I really don't understand how people are ok to let all these other things slide but then give this team a second chance that they quite frankly don't deserve based on their historically abysmal performance all season and randomly decide to punish a team that worked hard to earn their spot. That being said no matter what team wins this they are getting knocked out first round of playoffs anyway, so do what you want I guess and continue this circus.

Nincadas finished 4 points behind and the alleged match fix only cost them 2 points. I don't see how in any world this is fair to the lunatones. Pretending that a team that failed to do anything all season and finished 8th would have magically been a good team and won these last two weeks seems entirely baseless

Gotta give them some credit. Even with their incredibly limited brain functionality they manage to remember the details to all 10 of their accounts. Actually impressed

ftfy

Anything in the rules about bugs or is it doomed?

HALOTT vs Rendi in 10

Rendi

GG

Pinkwings vs Rendi in 10

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

take

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

Actually me and my partner are still in the lead for that one

GG

arte vs rendi in 10

FreeSM

Superman won

Superman vs Rendi in 10

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.