Jump to content

Lvkee

Members
  • Content Count

    421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    England
  • IGN
    Luke

Recent Profile Visitors

6916 profile views
  1. IGN: Luke Reason: need that 2peat. Other random stuff: Although I won last time I made mistakes, this time with more experience managing it's time to have a flawless run :)
  2. I agree with all. I feel the split of the money should be delegated to the two, and maybe should be arranged early on from all managers which opt in to it to prevent any clash of funds.
  3. Life vs gb argument part 50 ^ What I propose is an optional choice for managers to choose an Assistant Manager *Who would not be able to sign up as a player* this can be a friend who will help them with the vital decisions; lineups, auction etc etc. This usually would be delegated to the Captain, however captains could never really choose if they were going to be a captain or not. This way this gets rid of people being forced into an almost co-managerial position by becoming a captain and this way it can be willingly chosen to ensure everyone is satisfied and less effort can be spent helping the manager and more time focusing on games. Captains will still be able to comment and help the managers of course, but this will be a lot less relied on by the captain and more so for the manager & co-manager to do. If people don't want a co-manager they can simply opt out, arguably they will be putting themselves at a disadvantage but this is their own choice. I see the argument of "just get a friend to support u xddd" but this way the person who is helping will actually get a great deal of credit for helping and being apart of the brains of the PSL success a manager may have. I am unsure on how to work in a potential pay for the winning co manager, but I'm sure it could be raised some how. I believe a separate sign up for people who want to co-manage on the manager sign up thread would be optimal.
  4. shhh, don't sign up for NU unless you will play it 100 times again pls noob
  5. firstly, not even gonna even entertain this ^ lol. Can we get the logistics on the current tournament setup? Since the current one seems to be easy to hold up later on especially in these bigger tournaments. 4 people are now waiting 2h+ for a guy to catch up, holding 2 matches up instead of 1. Just curious on how this works.
  6. Right now I think the priority should be removing draco meteor on Hydreigon, TC trialed it to see how it would be and it is clearly way too oppressive. It is fine without draco meteor however, so this seems to be an easy fix. After this I think we should immediately shift our focus to Garchomp I feel like I don't need to say why as gb and many others have done extensive posts on why it is broken. I propose a test ban on it while monitoring the tier very closely. In particularly stall, as this change will benefit stall a lot. (As well as every style but stall in particular frees a slot as it no longer has to have 1 dedicated garchomp answer). I also am concerned about Gengar, but I don't think we should touch it until the first 2 are looked at as it could change the view on the Pokemon with less answers needed for the first 2. The proposed change on conk is very interesting, and I would not be against it.
  7. Why was this never replied to? And ignored like every other competitive thread... this is massively important to open a dialogue about so we can discuss why this is a very unhealthy rule to have in place, and yet there is no discussion; only agreement among the player base. Why does this unspoken rule exist?
  8. Ok this thread got giga derailed, can we hold back on the personal insults / team attacks and focus on the topic of the current state of tournaments.
  9. But you can survive without counter teaming? It isn't a necessity. Many players win tours without doing it, if people lack the resources that much that it is an issue and they can not rotate teams they should not be playing competitive and they should be grinding out more comps.
  10. People seem to have tunnel visioned on the whole counter teaming argument, but seem to not be talking about the rest of my points and also: You can fix tournaments with a group of friends / team You can purposely dodge friends Meta games will be stale and boring, heavily centralized around balance and covering the most threats. Stall and HO become very hard to use This is a duplicate form of a system we already have in place (matchmaking) Also, why do we have to have experienced this new system to acknowledge its flaws? Lmao I have to wait until the devs have dedicated a shit ton of time to a system I believe has many things wrong with it? What kind of a point is that.
  11. No, it makes tournaments completely random and enables people to spam the same boring build without being punished by the opponent who should be able to counter it. This is matchmaking part 2, if you want skill based play where your opponent can't counter or punish laziness due to lack of creativity then you should play matchmaking.
  12. For any that don't know, in the new update tournaments now have a fully randomized bracket. "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 unsure as to why this change was made, as the general consensus with the majority of the people who played tournaments was that the old system was fine. I assume this change was due to a vocal minority which spoke out about this issue: Which this had got 25 upvotes, and 14 likes. Among those 14 likes there is very little tournament success, so I am unsure why this suggestion was listened to.. As this was not an overwhelming opinion by the player base, but an opinion by a minority of players which refused to adapt to the system which tournaments had, and instead condemn it. If people hated this system and absolutely refused to adapt they could simply play matchmaking instead of trying to change a system which was well accepted and enjoyed by the community. This now feels like a glorified matchmaking, which has completely ripped out the core elements of tournaments which have been apart of PokeMMO for so long. There has always been 2 options for pvp, matchmaking for ladder and placement on the leader board. And tournaments for prizes and a long running experience facing players back to back; of which you could see who you were facing. Ultimately creating a completely different PVP experience, now with this new change there is no differentiation. Ladder and tournaments are now almost identical and they have a very similar experience. People who dislike laddering are ultimately screwed as the same format has been repackaged slightly and put into tournaments. People are going to argue that this change helps the newer players breaking into the scene, however I feel it does the complete opposite. If there is a strong player with a very good team that player is going to be able to spam that team every single round without any counter play from his opponent. This is going to create meta game defining teams to be spammed in tours and people are going to be able to do little to nothing other than match-up fish with a counter to these teams, or run very boring repetitive teams to ensure they can cover as many threats as possible through out the tournament. Where as previously the other player could prepare and ensure to pack an extra check / counter for a team which their opponent has spammed through out the tour. "(Players who are waiting for the next round are now paired together randomly.) " **Edited and amended this point after seeing how the system works If someone is stalling back in round 3 and you are in r5 waiting with the rest of the bracket you will have to wait for this person stalling to catch up while you sit there doing absolutely nothing. You can NOT progress and play your semi final until they catch you up. Overall I feel like this change only damages the integrity and competitiveness of tournaments which has been established for so long. I ask can the developers please re think this move as it can be detrimental for the environment of the game.
  13. I am overall really happy with this update, and I think it adds some long needed features which the community has been crying out for; however, to get the seasonal reward the current requirement is simply too hard for anyone who isn't willing to grind the game 24/7. Assuming you run HO every game this will take you around 10 mins per game. the average W/L of top 100 (looking at pre season) is 55%. This is a W/L ratio of 500 - 400 (900 games total) 900 x 10 = 9000 9000 minutes into hours = 150 hours. And this is assuming you run HO every single game. Now if you run balance you are looking at about double this time (which is the majority of the player-base) 900 x 20 = 18,000 18,000 minutes into hours = 300 hours 300h / 90d = 3.3h per day of ranked. *this is also excluding queue times If you run stall, don't even bother. Now each season lasts 90 days, this means you will have to play ranked 3.3h every single day for 90 days if you are an average top 100 player to meet this criteria for the vanity. This is too much. I think making the reward for top 50/100 or >500 points is a lot more reasonable for the player-base to achieve.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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