Jump to content
  • 17

Why not go back to the old tournament keys? (Not randomly)


Huargensy

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
15 hours ago, pachima said:

And trust me, most teambuildings in the past fished for this type of matchup and because of that, they were inherently bad.

When those OU/UU/NU finals become Monotypes finals...

Edited by gbwead
Link to comment
  • 0
2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:

You are reading way too far into what I am saying. PSL has no means of controlling scouting. That doesn't make it bad or any less exciting. 

You've been saying scout is lame and should be prevented. Then for you events like psl where its impossible to prevent scout aren't as good as playing ladder or current automated tournaments, right?

 

2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:

But scouting is still allowed, but it's harder to do. Which makes counter teaming more skill based.

What? How does it?

 

2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:

It absolutely does not. It means you know how to deal with that team specifically. That's literally all it means. There isn't creativity in counter teaming someone unless you do so with something completely off the wall, which nobody does in a tournament in the first place.

nobody does that? lol. If you can predict what your opp is gonna use it makes it easier to use less used mons or unconventional sets, that's my entire point...

 

2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:

No, it's to reduce the impact of scouting and emphasize skill over access to direct information. Instead of getting direct info on your next opponent you may have info on your next 5-6 possible opponents, which means building a robust team to deal with them and leaving very few gaps in coverage.

Unless those 6 opponents use something really similar there's no way you can have a good matchup against all of them lmao.

Do you even play competitive? its a genuine question

Link to comment
  • 0
12 hours ago, NikhilR said:

1 - This system rewards a player for being one-dimensional, aka being able to win only using one team or playstyle.  Being versatile is also a skill, and this kind of system actually hinders such a skill because a person would not want to change their team if they're constantly winning with it.  It's only when they start losing, perhaps due to counterteaming, will they realize, "Oh maybe team isn't good enough, or maybe one team alone won't cut it."

 

2 - People may consider that a person being able to win with one team alone as being skillful, but it can also be construed as the person being lucky because the lack of scouting prevents others from being to come up with the right teams or threats to break that team because this tournament system encourages people to resort to more balanced squads, which are safer because they are less risky.

 

3 - The other issue with the system is that it punishes players for having multiple well-rounded teams.  If I have 10 well-rounded teams, each built around a specific Pokemon, and if I know my opp is weak to that specific Pokemon, I can bring that team to the game.  I wouldn't be simply bringing a counterteam, but I would be bringing a wellrounded team that can beat my opponent.  That's a huge difference as this is more strategic as i) you are identifying a weakness in your opponent's team; and ii) you're bringing a good team that is capable of winning even if your opponent changes their teams, which a blind counterteam will often fail to do.  If I didn't know what style my opp is weak to, then out of my 10 well-rounded teams, random.org will decide which team I bring to the game.

 

 4 - In a tournament system like this, people are never going to resort to one-trick ponies.

1 - Being versatile is also a skill, but everyone in here is ignoring the fact players actually have to play well to win. It's not the single team that makes them win, its how they play it that does, otherwise everyone would get tournament wins easily, but they don't. Out of every player that uses the same playstyle, only a very few can actually advance through the rounds, because they are able to actually play it effectively, and that is also a skill. Besides, since no team is perfect, using the same team actually hinders your odds of winning, scouting or not, in the long term.

2 - The bold part makes me think you don't want to explain your points but rather throw out a sentence in the hopes the readers dont fully understand and nod along. (Its a joke btw)

3- System doesn't punish multiple well round teams at all? If you have more well round teams than the opponent does, then you have more odds of winning, and this is the exact opposite of a punishment. That last sentence of yours isn't also an issue of our current system because the exact same argument can be used in the older system. If you know exactly what your opp is weak to, random.org will also trigger the chances of them switching it and thus, making all this argument irrelevant.

4 - This is simply false, and I can actually confirm it for myself along with other people.

Bonus points, not directed to you in specific: The sole fact people claiming teams singlehandedly win games, not how they play it, proves to me how uncompetitive this community mentality has become. It's a fact that solid teambuilding is a skill, but honestly, there are more solid teambuilds with this system than with the old one, and don't get me started with examples cause I can provide a plethora of them. And sadly, its amazing how no one considers that a player has to actually play a team to win lol.

Edited by pachima
Link to comment
  • 0
7 hours ago, Moi said:

Unless those 6 opponents use something really similar there's no way you can have a good matchup against all of them lmao.

Do you even play competitive? its a genuine question

Why is it so relevant to have good matchups? You can't win if you have a bad matchup? You cant actually put skill into the game itself to win a game with bad matchup? Because sadly this is what everyone thinks, and as a result we have a very poor community mentality where everyone thinks copying teams >>>>, ignoring the fact they are completely clueless how to play said teams.

Yes, it's nice to have good matchups, but a solid team never has awful matchups (that are common) and that are 6-0d by literally everything, and thus allow their players to actually turn their odds in their favor by actually playing their game skillfully.

If you don't want to actually play your game, outplaying the enemy, but rather winning the game turn 1 on teampreview with a cool matchup, then this shouldn't be the game for you.

Edited by pachima
Link to comment
  • 0
1 minute ago, Quinn010 said:

how ? 

If you put effort in all your teams and your opponent doesn't then your teams are more solid than theirs, and thus giving you better odds.

Now if you ask: b-but what if they only have 1 solid team? And I reply: Then in the long term they are more prone to lose eventually.

If you don't believe go check how many tournament high round players actually reached there without switching teams, and how many reached there switching teams.

Also, just for the sake of it, go check how many players didnt switch teams in old system, cause I guarantee you the number is about the same.

Link to comment
  • 0
4 hours ago, pachima said:

Why is it so relevant to have good matchups? You can't win if you have a bad matchup? You cant actually put skill into the game itself to win a game with bad matchup? Because sadly this is what everyone thinks, and as a result we have a very poor community mentality where everyone thinks copying teams >>>>, ignoring the fact they are completely clueless how to play said teams.

Yes, it's nice to have good matchups, but a solid team never has awful matchups (that are common) and that are 6-0d by literally everything, and thus allow their players to actually turn their odds in their favor by actually playing their game skillfully.

If you don't want to actually play your game, outplaying the enemy, but rather winning the game turn 1 on teampreview with a cool matchup, then this shouldn't be the game for you.

 You have to play your best, no matter if you have a good or bad matchup, that "just get good" argument is irrelevant. I didn't mean that its completely necessary to have a perfect matchup to win but XelaKebert said that I can make a good counterteam team thinking in 6 different opp that cover most part of them, and thats just dumb.

 

I've already given my reasons why I don't like blind brackets so stop saying that I want it gone because I'm not good at playing.

Edited by Moi
Link to comment
  • 0

Okay so I have not read every response yet but Imo the way it is right now is the best as it combines scouting/building different teams and building a solid overall team. Usually you can use your solid go-to team up until Quarters, meaning from this point on you can actually scout people and build accordingly to their style. So Imo the skill of scouting is very much relevant but more so in the games that matter - the semis and finals.

The current system also enables people with less resources to do deeper runs because they only need one good team to go deep and if they don't get c-teamed in quarter, semis or even finals might even be able to win. Previously people who could just afford one team had no chance at going deep in any bracket, even if those players were highly skillful. And like pachi mentioned harcore fishing for matchup (not just building against their overall style) is just an awful concept in a competitive scene Imo.

Link to comment
  • 0
5 hours ago, pachima said:

 

Si no lo cree, compruebe cuántos jugadores de la ronda alta del torneo llegaron allí sin cambiar de equipo y cuántos llegaron allí cambiando de equipo.

Además, por el simple hecho de hacerlo, ve a ver cuántos jugadores no cambiaron de equipo en el sistema anterior, porque te garantizo que el número es aproximadamente el mismo.

brother, I have reached 3 official tour finals, spamming only 1 team and only changing 1 round and sarcastically that round changed because I knew who my rival was, there is the point of the scout (More over it is a bad system, they do it so that Everything is random, but there are moments when you know who your rival will be, meh) change because you know that your team is weak against the other, and precisely, the round that the team changes, my rival did it, why? For the same reason, realize that the scout is possible and something different should be worn, for that they are the 10 minutes before each round, with the ability you have to prepare a team that serves you more in that round, both have the possibility of changing For that reason it was used to breed pokes, to change between rounds previously, but now you only need to spam 6 and that's it? Then it goes from being a tournament to a normal rank only with prizes, and that makes it so boring that Zzzzz

Link to comment
  • 0
1 hour ago, CHUCKunso said:

Okay so I have not read every response yet but Imo the way it is right now is the best as it combines scouting/building different teams and building a solid overall team. Usually you can use your solid go-to team up until Quarters, meaning from this point on you can actually scout people and build accordingly to their style. So Imo the skill of scouting is very much relevant but more so in the games that matter - the semis and finals.

If scouting is a relevant skill then having it every round would make tournaments more interesting, no?

 

1 hour ago, CHUCKunso said:

The current system also enables people with less resources to do deeper runs because they only need one good team to go deep and if they don't get c-teamed in quarter, semis or even finals might even be able to win. 

True, but like Nik said, thats not really a competitive argument. Best solution would be having more metods of getting those resources imo.

 

1 hour ago, CHUCKunso said:

Previously people who could just afford one team had no chance at going deep in any bracket, even if those players were highly skillful. And like pachi mentioned harcore fishing for matchup (not just building against their overall style) is just an awful concept in a competitive scene Imo.

I agree hardcore fishing for matchup can be lame but I don't think we should have this system just because some people don't know how to exploit weaknesses and still having a decent team overall.  Besides, counterteaming isn't even necessary. You can have a few prebuilts teams and do fine.

 

And for the copying teams thing Pachima and Tohnr mentioned, yes, it has always been a thing ,but if scout was allowed in earlier rounds you''d be able to punish players who do it because they don't know much of a tier or aren't good teambuilders overall.

Edited by Moi
Link to comment
  • 0

 

1 hour ago, CHUCKunso said:

 

El sistema actual también permite a las personas con menos recursos hacer carreras más profundas porque solo necesitan un buen equipo para profundizar y, si no consiguen formar un equipo C en cuartos, las semifinales o incluso las finales podrían incluso ganar. Anteriormente, las personas que solo podían permitirse un equipo no tenían ninguna posibilidad de profundizar en ningún grupo, incluso si esos jugadores eran muy hábiles. Y como mencionó Pachi, la pesca de harcore para emparejamientos (no solo construir contra su estilo general) es simplemente un concepto horrible en una escena competitiva, Imo.

All of us here started with few resources, most of them in the times when tournaments were established keys, but did that stop us? We simply started to breed new Mons to help us in the following rounds, you are not going to encourage a new person to want to always play with the same team, if it would not be all rubbish, the previous keys were different, you lost against someone by Specific poke that fucks up your team, you saw the error and you went and created something to stop it, but now your team is only spam, you lose in a round and you say "Well to the other tour if I am lucky I will play * A team that is weak to the team that I go spamming in each round and thus I will go far * " Zzzzz spam a team and depend on whether you have a good match or not, nice rank

Link to comment
  • 0
29 minutes ago, Moi said:

If scouting is a relevant skill then having it every round would make tournaments more interesting, no?

Well I don't value it as a relevant skill because it's yet again something that enables players with more resources to do better (e.g. having a team scout for them, etc.) opposing to giving the better play an edge per se.

29 minutes ago, Moi said:

True, but like Nik said, thats not really a competitive argument. Best solution would be having more metods of getting those resources imo.

That's certainly a point, yet as my above mentioned point should make clear there is more to resources besides having the comps.

29 minutes ago, Moi said:

I agree hardcore fishing for matchup can be lame but I don't think we should have this system just because some people don't know how to exploit weaknesses and still having a decent team overall.  Besides, counterteaming isn't even necessary. You can have a few prebuilts teams and do fine.

My experience from before this change was that there were A LOT of people hardcore fishing for matchups. And while I do agree that prebuilds certainly help you theoretically to not be c-teamed you'd need 6-7 prebuild teams if you don't want to build inbetween the rounds. I have just witnessed a lot of frustration when it comes to getting c-teamed and not just from people who just have one team but also people who would be able to build from round to round.

And I would like to add one thing adressing a point I have read from Nik in this thread: I don't think having this format makes the meta any more stale but rather refines a proper meta and therefore enabling anti-meta builds, shifting the meta over time making it sorta cycle from meta + anti-meta -> anti-meta + anti-anti-meta and so on. So in my opinion there is also the skill fueled of reading the meta and building teams which can overcome it to go deep in tourneys if you will so.

 

Edit to adress this in one post:

2 minutes ago, Huargensy said:

All of us here started with few resources, most of them in the times when tournaments were established keys, but did that stop us? We simply started to breed new Mons to help us in the following rounds, you are not going to encourage a new person to want to always play with the same team, if it would not be all rubbish, the previous keys were different, you lost against someone by Specific poke that fucks up your team, you saw the error and you went and created something to stop it, but now your team is only spam, you lose in a round and you say "Well to the other tour if I am lucky I will play * A team that is weak to the team that I go spamming in each round and thus I will go far * " Zzzzz spam a team and depend on whether you have a good match or not, nice rank

This is a prime example where I could argue you just have a bad read on the meta if you rely on having good matchups over and over and not actively enabling them yourself with the build you are going into the tourney with. I know you all like c-teaming a lot but try building anti-meta teams if you feel like every team is the same and therefore you can't influence the matchup w/o scouting, there is certainly a skill involved in that as well.

Edited by CHUCKunso
Link to comment
  • 0
On 11/28/2020 at 5:39 PM, Moi said:

officials are boring af now

All I really care about lmao, feels way too similar to matchmaking. I don't care about anything else really if it's not fun. People spamming the same team every round is extremely boring. Yeah a few of you may swap teams, the majority don't. You instantly do yourself a disservice and put yourself at a disadvantage if you do so (except in Semi finals+) if you have a favourite team and it is very good in the meta why swap? For the sake of it? No one will be countering you 99.9% of the time. This tournament style is a very boring stale system with metagames which will stagnate until the next update. Completely ruined the personality and excitement of tournaments while enabling and rewarding people for being lazy and not being able to adapt to others.

 

Any further points are silly since neither side will back down on their views, I feel there has to be a compromise for this to a degree. I would love to see a general figure on what the competitive player-base prefers; from what I have heard it is the old system but I am willing to admit I may be biased.

Link to comment
  • 0
3 hours ago, Moi said:

1 -  I didn't mean that its completely necessary to have a perfect matchup to win but XelaKebert said that I can make a good counterteam team thinking in 6 different opp that cover most part of them, and thats just dumb.

 

2 -. I've already given my reasons why I don't like blind brackets so stop saying that I want it gone because I'm not good at playing.

1 - Do you realize how controversial this is? You are saying u don't need matchup to win, but then you outright imply you need to use a counterteam for whoever your opponent may be. If you want to counterteam the enemy, then you necessarily want to win via matchup, disregarding all skill put into the game. However, building a solid team around stuff that are good versus the few different opponents you may find, like nikhilr said, makes you able to beat all those enemies most of the time without relying on matchup alone.

2- No one is saying you are not good at playing. All I am saying, and this is not directed to anyone in particular, is that people who want to win via counterteams (and I've seen a lot of hard counterteams that are inherently bad) don't want to put effort into the actual game to win.

Link to comment
  • 0
16 minutes ago, CHUCKunso said:

 

Edite para abordar esto en una publicación:

Este es un excelente ejemplo en el que podría argumentar que simplemente tienes una mala lectura del meta si confías en tener buenos enfrentamientos una y otra vez y no los habilitas activamente tú mismo con la configuración con la que vas al torneo. Sé que a todos les gusta mucho el equipo C, pero intenten crear equipos anti-meta si sienten que todos los equipos son iguales y, por lo tanto, no pueden influir en el enfrentamiento sin exploración, ciertamente también hay una habilidad involucrada en eso. .

Antimeta? You can easily build something that is well balanced and has answers to the most used things in the meta, while you have something to not have such a bad match, if you mean using low tier things to count X pokemon, no I see nothing wrong with it, Mandibuzz, is the example of this, a good garchomp counter was needed, and its use rose a lot en ou because of that, so is that wrong? also that you use x mon in a round will not imply that it increases in use or damages the meta

Link to comment
  • 0
10 minutes ago, CHUCKunso said:

I'd like to play the ranked system you do where there are shiny and RP Rewards dude.

what is the differences from a tour game and ranked game ? in both gamemodes you click the search button you dont know who you face its complete random, and if you win more games you face better opponents thats what they both have in common idk whats the difference tbh.

 

Edited by Quinn010
Link to comment
  • 0
10 minutes ago, Lvkee said:

All I really care about lmao, feels way too similar to matchmaking. I don't care about anything else really if it's not fun. People spamming the same team every round is extremely boring. Yeah a few of you may swap teams, the majority don't. You instantly do yourself a disservice and put yourself at a disadvantage if you do so (except in Semi finals+) if you have a favourite team and it is very good in the meta why swap? For the sake of it? No one will be countering you 99.9% of the time. This tournament style is a very boring stale system with metagames which will stagnate until the next update. Completely ruined the personality and excitement of tournaments while enabling and rewarding people for being lazy and not being able to adapt to others.

 

Any further points are silly since neither side will back down on their views, I feel there has to be a compromise for this to a degree. I would love to see a general figure on what the competitive player-base prefers; from what I have heard it is the old system but I am willing to admit I may be biased.

 

7 minutes ago, Lvkee said:

The rewards are different but the game play is the same, it's very clear what he is saying stop being awkward about it lol.

Well I hardly disagree here, the prizes being different makes it feel different compared to MMing at least Imo. I rather enjoy close matches starting from even footing than a onesided sweep because I just got lucky or unlucky and this is especially relevant when the prizes are relevant as well. So I don't get how you can look at either w/o the other.

Link to comment
  • 0

People play tournaments because it's exciting to have many (good) players gathered and doing duels that can easily be watched, while growing some hype around each match being more and more entertaining because of the player's level or reputation. Stop pretending like it's the same as matchmaking. It's not an argument here. 

 

And maybe that's what the randomized did, regardless of c-build : removing the kind of hype you had to know which player you were gonna face, as a player or even as a spectator who would expect a big match. Part of c-building pleasure isn't skill required in itself but also the fact that you know a bit your opponent, you try to surprise him, you engage with him in a different manner that may be more attractive for some players that seek fun in fighting different people at full potential of actually beating them knowing their weaknesses. 

 

That's why I don't think it's relevant to try to argue what require skill, what doesn't. Most of what players say here are their feelings about how they prefer to compete and engage with other players in the competition. You can't really argue with feelings, but you can explain what changed, why you feel less satisfied now, or what you feel has improved. And that's something both sides have done. 

Edited by Poufilou
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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