Search the Community

Another Brock In The Wall. Date and Time (can still be discussed, testing) Tuesdays and Sundays. 02:00 PM EST | 11:00 AM PST | 08:00 PM CET | 07:00 PM GMT | 08:00 PM GMT+1 | 06:00 AM AEDT | 05:00 AM AEST | 3:00 AM SGT Location Island Two - Game Center | Ch 6 [spoiler][/spoiler] Game-mode and weekly schedule UU 6v6 - No date yet. 1st Place BONUS Prize: T.b.d. Registration: CLOSED OU 6v6 - No date yet. 1st Place Bonus Prize: T.b.d Registration: CLOSED. Level 50 Tournament Mode (always) Singles or Doubles OU Tier | UU Tier | NU Tier Entry Fee: 5.000 PokeYen. REGISTRATION Opens whenever the tournament is shown as "OPEN" in the schedule. Reply to the thread with IGN (max 2 per forum account). If the list of participants is not full, anyone who shows up at the given time will be allowed to participate. Singing up in the forum only saves you a spot. To share? http://tinyurl.com/pfmavnu LIST OF BRACKETS Clauses 1HKO / Sleep/ Pristine / Species / Hax / Evasion / Self-KO / Bag / Wall / Time (custom) List of Clauses Log off / disconnect during the battle mean automatic disqualification (unless you have a client error, provide proof). If this happens during the first round of a battle, they can restart if the opponent agrees / both sends out the same starters. Wall Clause: You can pick up only 3 walls on 6v6 OU duels. Two when 4v4. One when 3v3 The list of wall pokemons: [spoiler]Blissey Chansey Claydol Clefable Dusclops Forretress Muk Shuckle Slowbro Slowking Snorlax Skarmory Steelix Swalot Umbreon Vaporeon Venusaur Weedle Weezing [/spoiler] Time Clause: [spoiler] If your battle goes on for longer than 40 minutes the match will be ended unless both participants AND the referee agree they can finish it within the next 10 minutes. If not, following methods will be used to decide the victor: No walls permitted. Match can be ended the moment "AFK timeout" button appears. If singles: 3v3 - Tier from the canceled battle (OU, UU, NU) If doubles: 4v4 - Tier from the canceled battle (OU, UU, NU) If the match can still not be settled; they decide the outcome with any fair method the host can come up with. For example a rock, paper, scissor match that will be done by whispering their choice to the host. If you experience an unfair host / referee, please contact VatsugZ with valid proof (i.e. unedited screenshots) [/spoiler] Banned Pokes, Moves and Items - Wobbuffet / Wynaut - Hyper Beam (move) on ANY Pokemon - The use of Curse (move) on Snorlax Prize: 1st | All the entry fees - 10 000 + a bonus (item / TM / pokemon) + Hall of Fame 2nd | 10 000 3rd | Geodude Referees / Hosts: VatsugZ, Florenia, Damill, Duskranger (if you want to sign up as a host, whisper VatsugZ in the game or message Vatsug here on the forum). We are open for donated prizes. HALL OF FAME: (press "Another Brock In The Wall" for bracket) [spoiler]Another Brock In The Wall #1 Winner: Raptori - PP UP + 40 000£ - 6v6 Singles OU [/spoiler]

The overarching theme of this suggestion is that we need better in-game tiering support - the way we will get this is through multiple features being implemented. Please do not lock this for 'multiple suggestions', the only way this suggestion works is if all of these are considered as a unit. I think we can safely acknowledge that there are several issues with the way tiering currently happens: Some people feel as though their voices don't matter in tiering discussions The way tiering decisions are made is somewhat obscure The people ultimately responsible for making the final decisions in tiering have not been selected by either the community or staff - they are largely self-appointed and self-regulating The tier lists are 'official' but aren't. As long as the staff refuses to recognize a list as the 'official' list then there will be disagreement Probably more that aren't coming to me off the top of my head Now a couple of points to address. I don't believe that everyone has the right to vote in a tiering decision - that would be moronic. In competitive games some people are objectively better than others, and people who are not at a certain level of skill should not be allowed to make deciding votes. While they can certainly voice their opinion/arguments, they do not have the qualifications to make the decision I personally agree with the vast majority of tiering decisions that have been made under the current system. This is not an attack at anyone who currently or has ever ran one of these lists. However I think it is important that the methods of choosing our tiering leaders, as well as the methods of the decision making process, are clearly understood by the competitive community. I don't care if everyone agrees with the decisions made, or if the decisions made are 'good' ones. I care that they were made for a specific reason, and that everyone is able to identify the reason So how do we address these issues? For the first one - we need to clearly define how people can give input on tiering decisions, what sort of input is acceptable, and who can give input. For the second one - we need to clearly define what makes a pokemon 'broken' or 'overpowered' in a certain meta, and we need to clearly define who judges these criteria. For the third one - we need to have a system where the competitive community is able to select their leaders. More on this in a bit. For the fourth one - it is fine and dandy that the staff won't make tiering decisions - in fact I think it is a great call by them. That being said I think they do need to be more involved with the decision making process. An official list(s) needs to be created, and official 'caretakers' of the list(s) need to be selected (see number 3). So how can we do this? In game support for suspect testing. This requires a couple of steps. 1. Deciding what to suspect test: [spoiler]Just like right now, members will suggest pokemon that should be moved from tier A to tier B for X reasons. Other members may post their arguments for or against, as we currently do. After X amount of time (would likely vary case by case) certain members (see problem 3) of the community, in conjunction with Competition Alley moderators, would decide if the suggested pokemon should be: quickbanned suspect tested left alone One of these individuals will post a thread explaining their decision, as well as what comes next. If something is deemed so incredibly OP that it must be quickbanned then they will give their justification, as well as the vote for/against the decision (ie if X number of people were for, and Y number were against). This thread should then be locked to avoid flaming/shitposting/crying/etc. If something is to be suspect tested a similar thread will be made outlining the characteristics of the pokemon that merit its suspect testing. This thread should also indicate the dates (probably a month, although it'll depend on how much community involvement there is) for which suspect testing can occur. This thread should remind players of the major points to consider: Was the object of the suspect testing (ie curselax) hard to counter? And if so, why? In order to counter it did you have to structure a majority of your team around it? IE, if the thing being suspected (ie curselax) were banned, would your team look substantially different (in moveset/EVs/IVs/Nature/pokemon choice)? Was this pokemon ubiquitous in the tier? Meaning do you see it everywhere? If you used this pokemon, why? While using it did you notice that this pokemon could consistently perform in the suspect manner? Did you notice that most people had a hard time countering and dealing with this pokemon? Did you notice that several pokemon were almost always used for (seemingly) the purpose of dealing with this pokemon? More that I haven't thought of. This thread should remain open in order for players to post their valid feedback (ie feedback that covers the points above). If something is not to be suspect tested, a different thread will be made explaining why, as well as the vote. This thread should be locked to avoid flaming/shitposting/crying/etc.[/spoiler] 2. The actual testing: [spoiler]Once something has been selected for suspect testing we should probably, you know, test it. In game ranked battles in the suspected tier will be reset so that everyone starts fresh. All battles conducted in the time frame of the suspect testing will be a competition for the right to be heard on the subject. All members who have a rank above XXX (I'd say top 20% or something, depending on how many people participated) earn the right to participate in the final vote. Other members may still give their valid feedback (see above) but will not be allowed to vote. All tournament battles in the suspected tier should count towards their ranking for suspect testing purposes. There should also be an explanation in game for suspect testing. The ranked battle interface should have a tooltip explaining what suspect testing is (perhaps linking to a thread on the forums explaining it all) as well as what is being suspect tested and for what reason.[/spoiler] 3. Voting: [spoiler]Once the suspect testing period has been completed, a new thread for this pokemon will be opened. For some time (I'd say 1 week) members will have their last chance to voice their valid arguments for or against the ban. At any point in this period members who have earned the right to vote may cast their vote, yes/no. They have the right to change this at any time. This could be in game or on the forums, I'm not sure which would be easier either logistically or programming wise. If at the end of the time period there is a tie, members of the tier council (see below) will discuss and vote among themselves, with their final verdict being announced within some amount of time (lets say 24 or 48 hours).[/spoiler] 4. The ban and aftermath: [spoiler] Once the ban has been decided it should come into effect immediately - CA moderators should have the in game ability to edit ban lists for various tiers. Afterwards rankings will have to be adjusted - I'm not positive on how. There are a few options: If the ban was successful, reset the ladder to reflect the new meta If the ban was successful, use the previous rankings and suspect test rankings to decide new rankings. Exact methods would have to be discussed. If the ban was unsuccessful, use some combination of the original rankings and suspect test rankings to determine new rankings. Exact methods would have to be discussed Of course, anything that has been banned may be suspect tested again - however there should be a time period of at least 1 month from its banishment before it can be brought up again[/spoiler] Other points: There should never be suspect testing in more than one tier at a time, and there should never be more than one thing suspected at a time There should always be a time period (say 1 month) after a ban before a new pokemon can be suspect tested - the meta should be allowed to settle first The ruling council should not be static - if someone becomes inactive or no longer meets certain qualifications they should be removed. Ruling Council: They should be selected from an elite tier of players - for arguments sake lets say the top 100 players. From there either a ranking tournament is held among those interested, with the top X (where X is odd) players becoming members of the council, or a vote amongst competitive players of a certain rank (lets say top 20%) for some odd number of council members. This selection should not be for life - I'd say every 6 months or more frequently as needed. There should also be some method by which the players or the council can remove members of the council if they are found to suck at tiering. Final comments: I don't care if you feel that most PokeMMO players are unqualified to make tiering decisions. In fact I agree that most probably have no idea what they are doing with that regard. However I feel that it is very important that the PokeMMO community makes its own tiering decisions, as shitty as they may be. If you do not participate in the PokeMMO competitive meta, you don't get to vote. Sorry Senile. "However I feel that it is very important that the PokeMMO community makes its own tiering decisions, as shitty as they may be." We make our own bed, so we can sleep in it. Please leave your feedback below EDIT: This would also be greatly helped by the creation of a 'Competitive Discussion' subforum in CA.

Competitive Battling is starting to become big here on PokeMMO, but, we still do not have an official ranking system. I'm here to suggest a complete ranking system which will be used for all players and maybe even in the future, teams. To implement this ranking system, I would need complete compliance with the staff in using this ranking system, as it involves the forums heavily. The good thing is that no work has to be done on the server itself, allowing for the coders to work on more important aspects of the game itself. So, I introduce to you.... "The PokeMMO Trainer's League" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Registration: To begin, all trainers who wish to battle competitively must be registered on the forums. This will allow the tracking of users' wins and losses much more efficiently. All trainers will begin in "F-Class". This is the lowest class in the ranking system seen here: There are two different ways to increase your ranking within the "Basic Classes", these are seen here: Win 3 consecutive battles against trainers of same class Win 1 battle against a higher ranked trainer To organize a ranked battle, trainer must use the following method(s): Posting a Notice on the "Competitive Alley" Sub-forum that you are looking for challengers Replying to another trainers posting Also, trainers who lose 3 consecutive battles will also rank down in class if they're higher than F-Class. All battles must be reported to the "Competitive Alley" sub-forum, for them to count as a victory for the trainer to Rank up. Also Video Recording or taking pictures of your battle is highly recommended so that any disputes or complaints can be argued with evidence. The implementation of video recordings and pictures also allows new trainers to see what battling in the league is like! Player's can only reach "C-class" based on wins alone. To be entered into the advanced classes of B, A, and Special-A, you must have participated in a total of 50 battles while you are currently in C-class. To advance from B>A>Special-A, players will have to use the following methods: Win five (5) consecutive battles against trainers of same class Win ten (10) consecutive battles against trainers of the class immediately below you Defeat a trainer who is ranked higher than you ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "PokeMMO Player's League Championship" There is a reason why trainers aspire to become at least "B-Class". Those who are, and ranked higher, are eligible to enter in the biggest tournament of the year, with Pokemon, and potentially money up for grabs. The tournament would be open to any and all who are "B-Class" and above. There will be rules/guidelines, but those would be detailed at a later time. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Having an official ranking system would be beneficial for the game, and the players as a whole. It would allow tournaments to run efficiently and smoothly, while creating a pro-active competitive scene with set-goals in mind. Any questions? Post here.