Jump to content


Tier Council
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by gbwead

  1. Just now, redbluegreen said:

    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?

    Not if you have some degree of spectator delay. Sure that is less fun, but it would also help reduce coaching and that's not a bad trade off. As for watching your friends specifically, all they would have to do is tell you their player number.

  2. Just now, iJulian said:

    If your 3 teams are diverse they wont have similar weaknesses lmao thats the definition of "diverse". pick up a dictionary please becase thats the second word i've had to explain to you in as many pages.

    Oh no, you said the word "diverse". Alright, gg. Your teams perfectly complement each other in such a way there is no possible similar holes among those 3 teams... Such intellectual garbage, no dictionary can help you with that, sadly. There is no point in talking to you if you think 3 diverse teams will have absolutely no similar holes.


    6 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    This is an mmo and people playing this game are commited to that concept. You're the dilusional one and are very welcome to go to showdown instead if you want unlimited resources so badly.

    I didn't ask for unlimited resources. It's more than reasonable to ask for a competitive system that takes into account our mmo environment instead of just copying simulator competitive system that gives us big issues. 


    10 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    I was just using my own case as an example. You can win with limited resourses. 

    You can win with limited resources. Thanks for that. Really, without your example, I would have never thought this could be possible... Seriously, no one gives a shit. That example was pointless and didn't bring anything to the discussion.


    12 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    Ofcourse it is a slight disadventage but ffs this is an mmo. Go ahead try to join world of warcraft in 2020 and try competing with the people that have been playing for 20 years. Not having all champions in league of legends is also a disadventage in ranked and that doesnt mean riot should make them free. Games are based on resourses, simulators are not. Stop being delusional.

    On showdown, there are plenty of scout free tournaments too. So even on a simulator, people acknowledge scouting can be an issue. This issue is significantly worse in an mmo. MMO games have issues with creating competitive environment. People complain about this constantly. Does that mean we should throw in the towel? No. Does that mean we will have a perfectly competitive game? No. However, we should aim to make it as competitive as possible. That's a very reasonable thing to ask...




  3. Just now, iJulian said:

    The current system feels like a "Win 5 consecutive rounds of matchmaking at 5pm GMT+0 to win 500rp and qualify for an actual 2 round (semis, finals) tournament for 500 extra rp and a comp" kind of event rather than you know, an actual tournament.

    If I get to spectate decent duels instead of 2 monkeys failing at counterbuilding each other, I'm quite happy with this tournament format.

  4. 25 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    “Huge competitive cost” all you really need is 2 or 3 well built, diverse teams.

    No. If player A is as good as player B at counter teambuilding. Player A has unlimited resources (like a simulator) and Player B has 2 or 3 well built, diverse teams. Player A will have a unfair advantage. As diverse as those 2 or 3 well built teams are, these teams will have some similar holes. Player A with unlimited resources will be able to exploit these holes, Player B will not be able to do anything about it. If we could counter teambuild freely without restriction, no one would care about scouting, but that's not this game.


    25 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    If new players can’t meet those standards they should stay content with getting to round 3 or go back to matchmaking/grinding.



    25 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    Even then, the first shiny tournament I won I spammed a single team Doc lent me. I rarely play CCs but when I do I don’t bother playing more than 2 teams and I’ve won plenty. So yeah, it’s not impossible to win with limited resources. Allow me to quote yourself: “Get good”.

    No one gives a fuck.


    14 minutes ago, RLotus said:

    This is just not how the game works. When you are building you take into account the most prevalent threats in a metagame, but there are far too many and particular teamstyles are always going to have weaknesses. For example, your HO builds are usually going to be weak to rain and other speed boosters. Your balance builds are going to be weak to wallbreakers, bc you cant counter them all. Your stall builds are going to be weak to stallbreakers that you are unable to cover. 

    We said the same thing here. You should aim to manage the most prevalent threats, we agree. The playstyle match up doesn't change anything in that matter, so I don't know why bring it up.


    24 minutes ago, RLotus said:

    I see many people making the argument along the lines of "Counterteaming is bad, so good". There will still be bad matchups, except it will be random when you face it. It is the same problem that matchmaking has and why tournaments are held in higher regard than mm. It does not matter what team you use when you play matchmaking, you are going to run into bad matchups and theres nothing you can do, you can't prepare for everything. Some games will be lost to matchup. In tournaments, players have more control of the matchups they face. The better players can mitigate bad matchups by not bringing particular mons/playstyles vs particular players, and be more consistent than worse players. Why would we not want to control for this factor instead of making it random? 

    The fact that the bad match up will be random is more fair than being able to get a better match up by being better at grinding and asking friends for comps. I don't think that's the reason why tournaments are held in a higher regard than mm. Like I said earlier, in tournaments, you should play with your best teams. In matchmaking, you should train and test your teams. That's why people consider tournaments matches as more important. I have never heard anyone say: "Wow look at this amazing player winning the tournament, he is so good. He is so great at counter teambuilding." Lastly, the control for this factor comes at a cost and that's why it should not be controlled. 

  5. 2 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

    That's why there is the ladder though, which caters to players with limited resources.

    Every player has limited resources. It doesn't matter if you're able to spot holes in your opponent's teams, if you don't have the comps to exploit these holes. If don't see why new players should be penalized when entering tournaments, that's incredibly dumb imo.


    2 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

    Anything that promotes skillful play matters and should be encouraged.  It's why we have clauses like ohko or sleep because it detracts from skillful play.

    There is a lot of thing that require skill that should not be encouraged. You can't just ignore the context like that. Not everything is a meaningful skill.


    2 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

    The very fact that this is a resource-based game means that if players are choosing to play this over pokemon showdown, then they are accepting that they are or will be at a disadvantage compared to players who don't have the same amount of time to invest into this game.  How is it unfair that someone who has invested more time into this game to acquire more resources will be more advantaged over the person who has invested lesser amount of time into acquiring resources?
    As a competitive player, I don't go into my games praying or hoping that my opponent does not have the ability to change their teams.

    It's not a very competitive environment if you promote time/grind over skill. This game will never be perfect, but that doesn't mean we should just throw the towel and say fuck it, if you play more, you will win more. If you play better, you should win more.


    2 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

    There is no "absolute" when it comes to a player's best teams.  It is relative because it is dependent on the opponent you're facing.  


    Not necessarily true.  I have played and beaten players who probably have more resources than me.  Having resources is an advantage, but it is in no way conclusive on the outcome of a game.

    I'm not sure what's your point here. You paraphrased what you quoted me on, no?


    2 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

    Yes, because counter teambuilding can be a skill, and so the person who is better at it should be able to win.  I don't know why it's a bad thing. 

    It's a bad thing because counter teambuilding may take skill, but it comes at a huge uncompetitive cost. On showdown, if you want to counterbuild your opponents in 10 mins, are you really going to actively teambuild a team in 10 mins. No, you will choose from the many many many teams you already made in order to counter your opponent. In MMO, you have to build a team because you don't have many many many teams prebuilt rdy to counter your opponent. You have to look through your resources and your friends resources to build a counter team and that is overall extremely uncompetitive. In a PSL setting where you have a full week to prepare, that's fine. But in a 10 mins window, that's just not the case and that is fundamentally wrong. I'm glad devs are trying to make this resource based game more accessible and competitive for everyone by doing their best at reducing the impact of counter teambuilding. I don't know what the end result will look like, but I hope for the best and if you care about make this game as competitive as possible, you should too.


    2 minutes ago, NikhilR said:

    If both players try to HO each other, the one who is better at HO should win.  If both players try to stall each other, the one who is better at stall should win. 

    Hmm, that is not really relevant to scouting/counter teambuilding in general. HO vs HO, doesn't mean players are on equal playing fields when it comes to match up. Same thing for stall.

  6. 10 minutes ago, Lvkee said:
    • You can fix tournaments with a group of friends / team
    • You can purposely dodge friends

    I don't know what the end result will look like. If that is the case, it will be a problem and the old system will be better.


    11 minutes ago, Lvkee said:
    • Meta games will be stale and boring, heavily centralized around balance and covering the most threats.

    Why? According to Julian people that run unorthodox stuff will benefit from no scouting. No matter your playstyle, your team should always cover most threats regardless of the tournament system.


    14 minutes ago, Lvkee said:

    Stall and HO become very hard to use

    Why? I didn't read everything in the thread, so if I missed the explanation on that one, please point me in the right direction.


    14 minutes ago, Lvkee said:

    This is a duplicate form of a system we already have in place (matchmaking)

    I disagree. In matchmaking, the reward system is different and that's a big difference. This means you gain/lose very little per duel, so matchmaking is the best platform to test out teams. In a tournament setting, the reward at the end is usually pretty big, so you should not be testing out teams here. You should bring your best teams every time.

  7. Counter teambuilding in a resource based game is simply not acceptable. It doesn't matter if it requires skill. It just unfair and shitty to pray on your opponent lack of resources. If both players bring their best teams, may the best player win. If both players try to counter build each other, the one with the most vast resources and the best at counter teambuilding should win. 

  8. Just now, iJulian said:

    Tournaments are a competitive environment where skill should be rewarded, saying “it’s lame” is for starters, an opinion, not even an argument. Uncompetitive, why? You don’t even bother expanding on your “arguments” and somehow expect to have a fruitful discussion. Hello?

    So, you deliberately choose to neglect the core of my argument that not everything that requires skill should be encouraged, and you expect to have a fruitful discussion. Hello?

  9. 2 minutes ago, Moi said:

    Like it was stated before, now ppl will just run one team they believe will cover the most, making tournaments way more monotone and boring.

    Why would tournaments be more monotone or boring because of that? You literally will not know what you are going to face...

  10. 5 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    I agree, but the thing is: right there lies the skill of counter building, anyone can randomly pick mons that beat your opponents previous team, however it takes skill to build something on the spot that beats your opponents previous teams (not just the one from the very previous round but also the other teams they might’ve used in earlier ones) while having your build not insta losing to other metagame cores.

    Ok, counter teambuilding is a skill. So what? It's also a skill to pick your nose publicly without people noticing. I don't care how difficult or how skillful counter team building is. It's lame, unfair to new players and shamely uncompetitive. 

  11. 7 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    You’re known for running unorthodox stuff so ofcourse you’d be against scouting lmao

    I have multiple teams, so scouting doesn't really affect my chances to win or lose. 


    4 minutes ago, iJulian said:

    , I’d try seeing it from a more neutral perspective.

    What perspective is that? The perspective of people that can't teambuild decent teams and need to counter their opponent to feel less insecure about their odds. Get good, instead of fishing for match up against players that may not have as much resources as you do.

  12. 7 minutes ago, mxdzzz said:

    Hi Kyu, I have found that my friends are more willing to stay in around 300~400, and farming pts by playing 12 battles per hr, and giving up the game in 5rounds. which is unfaire to others who took serious in PVP. Making the lack of motivation in PVP for the game. I would strongly suggest to change the pts reward per win by different Elo: 


    <450: 2

    450~580: 4

    580~650: 6

    >650: 8 


    (even you're in above Elo 650, you still have to win 125 battles, which I think it's a lot for players)


    Well, I just make up thoses numbers. I thought even in before the update, rare ppl play over 2000 battles in ranking (Although, by the time before update, the ranking is restricted by the time to open). But at least which we can motivate players to get high Elo.



    On top of that, I suspect there is a lot of win trading in low ladder. Recently, I saw some new PvP mystery box on the GTL. Considering none of the players from the 4 leaderboards have won enough matches to afford those, I think it's safe to assume these new PvP mystery box come from low ladder which is quite concerning imo.

  13. 2 minutes ago, pachima said:

    Thing is there are more tiers. In fact, we have currently 3 tiers and a format that requires 500 wins each one for each vanity. Even those friends with 25+ wins (And who nolifed the game) will struggle to get all 4 vanities in 3 months. 

    Also thank you Kyu for halving the requirements.

    Finally. with today's resources, having 2x31 4x25 is more of a wasteslot than anything. I won't ask for 6x31, but 4x28 is already way  much better. 

    Thank you.

    Are we sure these hats will never appear in the future? I was assuming there would be rotating from one tier to the other, so that following a year every tier would have the chance to earn one. If that isn't the case, I understand why halving the requirements is necessary, but if you have multiple chances to get these hats, season after season, it's no big deal if the requirements are high.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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